There is really no best choice for Legacy really, it's a long term format unlike Standard which just rotates over and over. Archetypes in Legacy will probably have there day in the sun for a few months and then just be pulled back into the bucket again.
So from looking at your post, I think all the decks you mentioned are pretty good to have for Legacy. As I say to everyone trying to choose between some of the popular and proven archetypes: "Pick the deck archetype that suits your personality and makes you feel the most comfortable."
You said you loved Stoneblade. Well your in luck, because Stoneblade is an archetype that is going to stay relevant in Legacy for a long time in my opinion mainly because Wotc keeps been printing cards that have boosted it up in statue like Snapcaster Mage, Supreme Verdict, and the most recent one has been True-Name Nemesis.
ANT and TES decks are not hard to pilot, they are just hard to pilot to multiple victories . You have to know what to mulligan too and what your outs are at all times. Yeah you could say that with any deck but if you make a minor mistake with any of these decks it comes back to bite you more than the other popular archetypes out there.
I hate how people keep saying SnT is a deck for unskilled players. That is totally untrue, it takes skill to take any deck and get to the top 8 in a big tourney. The SnT archetypes are still one of the best combo decks out there. Don't let the thought of people looking down upon you because your playing SnT make you not want to play one of the most successful decks in Legacy.
Oh I do not like Brand, but I can at least interact with him. I may have a slower race on my hands with TNN, but at least I am able to do something about Brand once he is on the table. I would be happy if Brand had not been printed, he has a lot to answer for. But Brand is not this hyper noninteractive card that can be dropped second turn with help from a mana dork and nothing else.
Again my issue with TNN is that he removes from the game the creature combat step. How is that a good thing?
Yes, TNN does kind of do that. Is it a good thing? Yes, it works wonders for the player actually benefiting from TNN. No, it's not a good thing if the opponent does not have cards to take TNN off the board or as you said, interact with it. TNN does die to a Golgari Charm, EE, Engineered Plague, Edicts and so on. Grizzy on the other hand, does die to regular removal but its controller usually doesn't care because he'll probably draw 7 cards or more already! You pretty much need to revoker or needle him from the start, and those are also not staple cards like the stuff that takes out TNN.
Yeah, TNN can be bad, real bad sometimes. But the real question here is whether it is being oppressive as one card to the majority of the format. Is it changing so many decks out there, that all the fair decks just can't beat a deck with TNN more than half the time consistently or it makes a lot of the popular unfair decks moot somehow or just both?
Right now, I'm just not seeing that much with TNN. Have decks with it shown some good results, of course! But so many other archetypes have had their day in the sun.
Recently banned cards are very obvious. Survival Of the Fittest and Mental Misstep crippled the meta and drastically reduced the number of playable decks (nothing like TNN, S&T, or anything else currently being complained about).
But many cards are banned because they were OP in Vintage ten plus years ago. While a discussion on why these cards were restricted would be interesting, it wouldn't shed much light on why they are currently still banned in Legacy.
Agreed...I just wanted Wotc to do an article series like that for the entertainment value not so much the informational value of it.
I would love for Wotc to do an extravaganza article series where they just have a group of people who were involved with the banning of cards just go through the list again for each of the formats and offer the reasons for each card's banning.
Twist its probably okayish to come off, and I would say give frantic search a shot. I also think earthcraft, survival of the fittest and probably windfall could take at least trial runs off the list. Worldgorger isn't banworthy powerwise but I can see why he's on it.
I don't think Windfall should be in the conversation for unbanning or even testing yet. Frantic search is great for solidarity decks but windfall is just on another power level compared to it. And say goodbye to TES or ANT shells themselves. Storm decks are going to try abuse windfall. And could Affinity be great again or a Blue MUD deck comes out?! That might be going a little too far on the hypothetical scale but windfall just has that ability to turn the tide of a game and the format in degenerating ways. Frantic Search is a way more acceptable card to unban compared to windfall.
Never knew what else made Worldgorger Dragon banworthy besides the fact you can legally make a game a draw by doing that Animate Dead loop.
So I am playing in a small tournament with some friends from school, and we all are building decks just for the tourney. I want to make them mad. VERY mad. Cards like stasis are what I am looking for. If you could post the cards that make the most people mad, that would make my day.
Well a Pox deck could also do the job...check out the Pox primer on this site. Pretty much all Pox does is try to destroy your opponent's field and hand the whole game. That'll piss off your friends good if they can't handle it....even though I don't really know why you want to make your friends mad in the first place but whatever.
I don't think this is a correct line of reasoning. The same argument could be offered for any card whatsoever. Does it follow that nothing should be on the banned list? Does being the branded product of Wizards of the Coast confer upon a slice of cardboard a status so elevated that I, being a mere mortal, display the wrong mindset towards life itself when I call it rubbish?
I'm thankful for TNN in one sense, it's invigorated the format and caused me to do a lot more testing than I had been doing previously. It's cool that Prison is back, at least in a small way. Reid Duke did very well at the helm of Bant, not so much when he tried Pox the following week.
In another sense, I don't like what's become of the format. Squeezing the fair decks into the various flavors of TrueBlade results in a lot of pretty sad mirrors, and a deal more degeneracy. I liked the pre-TNN format better. I think TNN should be banned. That doesn't mean I won't adapt, or that I won't play TNN myself. It's like if I saw a drunk driver on the road. I'm going to adapt by getting away from that person, and I'm going to "call for a ban" by phoning the police. That's what TNN is to me. A drunk driver on my street.
Your not displaying the wrong mindset in life you complain about something. Yes, life does suck sometimes as does Legacy. You are displaying the wrong mindset in life and Mtg if you don't try to deal with an obstacle and still complain about it.
Complain about it all you want, no laws of physics is going to stop you from making noise about TNN and I'm certainly not going to judge you if you have a valid reason(s) with evidence to back it up. And I guess I was trying to reach to far with the whole life thing. But I think playing Mtg does echo some components of life. Sometimes you try your hardest and still the *** still hits the fan. Just as Standard rotates through many expansions and you have to say goodbye to your favorite JMTS but then meet him again in Legacy, we also say goodbye to good friends because of different circumstances then sometimes meet them again in some other place. Is Mtg life? For some it is a big part of their livelihoods but yeah for most of us it is a game that is mostly for entertainment and making friends. Yes, yes, you can just look at a piece of f*** toast and find the answers to life but I do think Mtg does offer some good life lessons.
What I was specifically referring to and then making the mistake of generalizing my argument, is that TNN is very new to the format and it deserves to be respected a little more (I know people, it's a stupid design seeing that Wotc is all about interactive but still). Players just have to take some deep breaths and try to at least do some testing to adjust to this new meta. A lot of my friends complain about TNN but they haven't even tried playtesting to see if their situations were that hopeless, they just tend to just throw their arms into the air after they get trounced by a Stoneblade or Thresh deck with TNN. And I just feel that a lot of people calling for TNN's ban are just doing it too early even if it's been more than a month. We need to still fight (or join) against these decks that have arisen with the help of TNN. And hey maybe someone out there can find a viable answer other than "play another deck or play TNN". But for now everyone should just chill.
Will it come to point where the format is just warped with TNN? That is a possibility. But the same is true for the opposite of that question.
I think there are situations like this which occur in legacy, but it's a constructed state of game in a vacuum only. If you play DRS you will be playing maybe BGX so why couldn't it be that you also Thoughteize him to get thoughtseize off hus hand so you still have answers. Why can't you discard TNN before it enters the battlefield, why can't it be possible that you topdeck Abrupt decay and kill the jitte and use DRS after the boardwipe to exile creatures, so basically TNN only deals 1 dmg and you have time to find an answer. Maybe then you draw a Pernicious Deed or Golgari charm and kill TNN?
That's also true for constructed game situations... so you can't construct any possible situation to say TNN is over the top, because after this scenario a Nimble Mongoose with a Jitte will also do the job, right? (If it would be played in a deck with supreme verdict)
Greetings Heskatet
Yes, I did say that the whole scenario that I stated in that one paragraph was insignificant. If you read the next paragraph in my response you would see that I said it was "only one game". Yes the game could have gone in any direction to get to that one game state. But the real reason I created that scenario was to illustrate the frustration that players go through when dealing with another up and coming superstar of a creature.
That scenario illustrates something that, I wouldn't say is traumatic to a player, but it gives a player a bad memory about a card. Once a player accrues enough bad memories about a card then by common sense it would open up the possibility that they would think it would be "banworthy" card. And that is not the right mindset to go through when your playing in Magic or even towards life itself. If there is an obstacle, you must deal with it and not hope for other people to solve it.
In the next paragraph I stated that I had the same troubles with Goyf. It was giving me a lot of losses and I did think it was "banworthy" but no one ever banned it and it was an obstacle that I needed to confront. So to confront the obstacle, I just joined the obstacle by playing Goyfs and so did everyone else.
This is the same thing I'm saying about TNN, no matter how many bad memories its has given you, it's probably here to stay for a few months and probably more. It's just going to be like Goyf or Delver or DRS and just may end up supplanting other cards in your MD or SB.
I am not at all trying to be that guy who is trying to make up random situations or bringing up bad memories of a card to show that it is a banworthy card. I've grown out of that through experience.
Love how people are just throwing the whole book on how to deal with Nemesis. Innocent blood? I haven't heard that card since Pox was made popular by Reid Duke. And Dueling Grounds?!! Please educate me on how a competitive build today would care about that card. You don't have to be so blunt to players that think TNN should be banned; they know that edict spells and other answers exist, hopefully...
In my mind TNN is a creature that does block and attack when I'm playing a storm deck. Yet it is a pretty scary when he/she/it is holding a jitte and I really don't have anything to do since that crazy Stoneblade guy kept Thoughtseizing me and just wiped out my board with a Supreme Verdict 2 turns ago and all I got is a DRS looking pretty stupid right now and I realize I'm just too far behind...
But you know what, that's only one game, just change your strategy the next game and that's it...I mean I was also in that "BAN GOYF!" group when I was getting my *** handed to me by Goyfs but you learn to just make adjustments or play with Goyfs. And now a lot of Control decks and Aggro decks play Goyf but I don't see Wotc banning it. Nemesis is going to join the party and if you can't beat it, join it. Nemesis is looking like another Delver or Goyf or DRS, just a creature supplanting other cards.
Whether Wotc does end up banning it because it's "non-interactive" is up to them and I don't really care if they do. They sure succeeded in giving EDH another toy to play with and I'm pretty sure they wanted to make another big splash in Legacy and succeeded greatly in that too.
This is the problem with TNN. Had it been any other color it wouldn't be nearly the same. But no. It's blue. Blue decks now get to do "fair" as well, if not better than the non-blue decks while still getting to play Brainstorm and Force of Will.
Agree with you there...Wotc has really made a no-no on printing out a card like this; it's as if they wanted it to start a controversy in Legacy. How does "protection from something" sound blue or something a merfolk would usually have? It sounds more like white, if anything they should have made it a white creature.
Back on the main topic here, we're just going to have to see more results being put out; if somehow every "fair" deck out there needs to put in Nemesis or continually need to put in cards to deal with it then I would vote for it to be banned or something else to give "fair" decks more diversity in strategy. Probably all of the "unfair decks" don't care about it, it's just a creature that does nothing to hamper their combos. Yes there are a multitude of answers to Nemesis, but if all the answers are just to beat one card rather than one deck/archetype then that is not good for a format.
Why in the world would Show and Tell play Yawgmoth's Bargain? The whole premise of the deck is that it drops a win condition and, well, wins with it. Griselbrand and Emrakul are cards that can win you the game by themselves. Yawgmoth's Bargain gives you the amazing ability to pay life to, instead of being a win condition by itself, try to find a win condition and another Show and Tell to drop it into play with.
It's kind of like being asked "do you want to have a very high chance of winning the game right now, or would you rather pay a lot of life in return for a lower chance of winning the game?" and you're choosing the latter.
People keep bringing up this "Show and Tell and Yawgmoth's Bargain would be amazing together!" but I don't see why in the world they would. It has very little synergy with the deck.
Agreed, it's just like the arguments on how unbanning Frantic Search is going to make Reanimator decks better than they are. Reanimator needs the low mana curve to fight off hate and get its combo going fast, the last thing that it needs is 3 CMC spell to gum up the works...
I'm pretty sure if Wotc were to ever bring Yawgmoth's Bargain back it would be because they took Griselbrand out. Not that Griselbrand is ban worthy as of yet in my opinion but having both Bargain and Griselbrand out in the metagame at the same time just doesn't sit well with me--feel free to call me out on this because I'm really not basing this one on any factual evidence just surmising that having 2 effective cards in the card pool that basically say "Draw X cards for X life" seems like it would open the door for something degenerate to happen sooner or later.
In saying that, I wonder how the metagame is going to change if Wotc just said "We had it with Griselbrand!" and ban it only to un-ban Bargain to "balance it out".
It seems that the price and availability of a card can theoretically warp the format in the situation you described is pretty interesting. I don't know what WOTC would do in that situation if somehow a small group of players relative to the field ended up having cards that no one else could possess that made their decks overly superior.
Yet then again, I surmise that a lot of events must unfold for any situation like this to happen. An overpriced Tabernacle or Moat is not very enticing to any players who want to hoard the best cards to dominate Legacy. A situation like this might arise if the population of Legacy players at any point in time becomes so huge that a reprint protected cards like dual lands are only possessed a small group of people relative to the whole. But this situation is very unlikely to happen.
On another note, I think that the reason why many players don't want to play Lands is because of its mechanics. In my experience, I learned to play magic by playing creatures, instant/sorceries with some enchantments and artifacts to help me win the game. With a lands deck you have to play the same game with a different look. Instead of playing spells and creatures to interact with your opponent, your going to rely on lands, lands that you are accustom to tapping for mana. And I bet that many players are turned off by this aspect when they look at playing a lands deck vs. something like RUG Delver.
Of course getting of the reserved list would help immensely for making the pool of potential players for Vintage and Legacy grow. I would surmise that Modern would become the new Vintage in terms of representation on the Pro Tour if Wotc just decided to do away with their reprint policies and started reprinting all of the Vintage and Legacy staples.
But that's what the higher ups at Wotc stand for and they want this card game they made to be "collectible" in their own perspectives. Compared to Yugioh, that reprints what were rare cards to oblivion and has like 20 tiers of "rareness", Wotc wants to have some select cards be rarer than others forever. Wotc is clearly doing this out of pride and not as a business in the economic sense. If they are clearly for the money they would be like Konami and Black Lotus would probably be as rare as some card like Restoration Angel by now.
Frantic Search would also boost Enchantress decks too, it would make playing blue in Enchantress decks the norm because you have Frantic Search in conjunction with Cloud of Faeries. Yet, I'm not a Enchantress expert myself and I don't really know if Frantic Search is going to boost Enchantress up to Top Tier just like that.
Overall I think Frantic Search just gives a boost to something Wotc doesn't really like--giving combo decks more power and/or consistency in any format. They are willing to ban anything that deals with combo but once that card gets on the ban list, Wotc is very reluctant to take it off of the banlist even it it is basically harmless in Legacy as of now--see Earthcraft.
Removing duals would create more potential room for other players to enter the format. No longer would players have to spend hundreds of dollars on duals on top of fetchlands to actually create the majority of competitive decks in Legacy right now and shock lands could get reprinted over and over again.
Yet banning duals would also not make Legacy, Legacy: an eternal format (in my opinion). Dual lands have been there from the start and were used in a lot of decks over the usual basic lands or in conjunction with basic lands. A Legacy format without dual lands of old, would just be a Modern+ in my opinion. I know that is harsh but when I go into a more powerful format I expect my manabase to be more powerful and diverse too.
There is really no best choice for Legacy really, it's a long term format unlike Standard which just rotates over and over. Archetypes in Legacy will probably have there day in the sun for a few months and then just be pulled back into the bucket again.
So from looking at your post, I think all the decks you mentioned are pretty good to have for Legacy. As I say to everyone trying to choose between some of the popular and proven archetypes: "Pick the deck archetype that suits your personality and makes you feel the most comfortable."
You said you loved Stoneblade. Well your in luck, because Stoneblade is an archetype that is going to stay relevant in Legacy for a long time in my opinion mainly because Wotc keeps been printing cards that have boosted it up in statue like Snapcaster Mage, Supreme Verdict, and the most recent one has been True-Name Nemesis.
ANT and TES decks are not hard to pilot, they are just hard to pilot to multiple victories . You have to know what to mulligan too and what your outs are at all times. Yeah you could say that with any deck but if you make a minor mistake with any of these decks it comes back to bite you more than the other popular archetypes out there.
I hate how people keep saying SnT is a deck for unskilled players. That is totally untrue, it takes skill to take any deck and get to the top 8 in a big tourney. The SnT archetypes are still one of the best combo decks out there. Don't let the thought of people looking down upon you because your playing SnT make you not want to play one of the most successful decks in Legacy.
Yes, TNN does kind of do that. Is it a good thing? Yes, it works wonders for the player actually benefiting from TNN. No, it's not a good thing if the opponent does not have cards to take TNN off the board or as you said, interact with it. TNN does die to a Golgari Charm, EE, Engineered Plague, Edicts and so on. Grizzy on the other hand, does die to regular removal but its controller usually doesn't care because he'll probably draw 7 cards or more already! You pretty much need to revoker or needle him from the start, and those are also not staple cards like the stuff that takes out TNN.
Yeah, TNN can be bad, real bad sometimes. But the real question here is whether it is being oppressive as one card to the majority of the format. Is it changing so many decks out there, that all the fair decks just can't beat a deck with TNN more than half the time consistently or it makes a lot of the popular unfair decks moot somehow or just both?
Right now, I'm just not seeing that much with TNN. Have decks with it shown some good results, of course! But so many other archetypes have had their day in the sun.
Agreed...I just wanted Wotc to do an article series like that for the entertainment value not so much the informational value of it.
That would just be awesome...
I don't think Windfall should be in the conversation for unbanning or even testing yet. Frantic search is great for solidarity decks but windfall is just on another power level compared to it. And say goodbye to TES or ANT shells themselves. Storm decks are going to try abuse windfall. And could Affinity be great again or a Blue MUD deck comes out?! That might be going a little too far on the hypothetical scale but windfall just has that ability to turn the tide of a game and the format in degenerating ways. Frantic Search is a way more acceptable card to unban compared to windfall.
Never knew what else made Worldgorger Dragon banworthy besides the fact you can legally make a game a draw by doing that Animate Dead loop.
Well a Pox deck could also do the job...check out the Pox primer on this site. Pretty much all Pox does is try to destroy your opponent's field and hand the whole game. That'll piss off your friends good if they can't handle it....even though I don't really know why you want to make your friends mad in the first place but whatever.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=483236
Your not displaying the wrong mindset in life you complain about something. Yes, life does suck sometimes as does Legacy. You are displaying the wrong mindset in life and Mtg if you don't try to deal with an obstacle and still complain about it.
Complain about it all you want, no laws of physics is going to stop you from making noise about TNN and I'm certainly not going to judge you if you have a valid reason(s) with evidence to back it up. And I guess I was trying to reach to far with the whole life thing. But I think playing Mtg does echo some components of life. Sometimes you try your hardest and still the *** still hits the fan. Just as Standard rotates through many expansions and you have to say goodbye to your favorite JMTS but then meet him again in Legacy, we also say goodbye to good friends because of different circumstances then sometimes meet them again in some other place. Is Mtg life? For some it is a big part of their livelihoods but yeah for most of us it is a game that is mostly for entertainment and making friends. Yes, yes, you can just look at a piece of f*** toast and find the answers to life but I do think Mtg does offer some good life lessons.
What I was specifically referring to and then making the mistake of generalizing my argument, is that TNN is very new to the format and it deserves to be respected a little more (I know people, it's a stupid design seeing that Wotc is all about interactive but still). Players just have to take some deep breaths and try to at least do some testing to adjust to this new meta. A lot of my friends complain about TNN but they haven't even tried playtesting to see if their situations were that hopeless, they just tend to just throw their arms into the air after they get trounced by a Stoneblade or Thresh deck with TNN. And I just feel that a lot of people calling for TNN's ban are just doing it too early even if it's been more than a month. We need to still fight (or join) against these decks that have arisen with the help of TNN. And hey maybe someone out there can find a viable answer other than "play another deck or play TNN". But for now everyone should just chill.
Will it come to point where the format is just warped with TNN? That is a possibility. But the same is true for the opposite of that question.
Yes, I did say that the whole scenario that I stated in that one paragraph was insignificant. If you read the next paragraph in my response you would see that I said it was "only one game". Yes the game could have gone in any direction to get to that one game state. But the real reason I created that scenario was to illustrate the frustration that players go through when dealing with another up and coming superstar of a creature.
That scenario illustrates something that, I wouldn't say is traumatic to a player, but it gives a player a bad memory about a card. Once a player accrues enough bad memories about a card then by common sense it would open up the possibility that they would think it would be "banworthy" card. And that is not the right mindset to go through when your playing in Magic or even towards life itself. If there is an obstacle, you must deal with it and not hope for other people to solve it.
In the next paragraph I stated that I had the same troubles with Goyf. It was giving me a lot of losses and I did think it was "banworthy" but no one ever banned it and it was an obstacle that I needed to confront. So to confront the obstacle, I just joined the obstacle by playing Goyfs and so did everyone else.
This is the same thing I'm saying about TNN, no matter how many bad memories its has given you, it's probably here to stay for a few months and probably more. It's just going to be like Goyf or Delver or DRS and just may end up supplanting other cards in your MD or SB.
I am not at all trying to be that guy who is trying to make up random situations or bringing up bad memories of a card to show that it is a banworthy card. I've grown out of that through experience.
In my mind TNN is a creature that does block and attack when I'm playing a storm deck. Yet it is a pretty scary when he/she/it is holding a jitte and I really don't have anything to do since that crazy Stoneblade guy kept Thoughtseizing me and just wiped out my board with a Supreme Verdict 2 turns ago and all I got is a DRS looking pretty stupid right now and I realize I'm just too far behind...
But you know what, that's only one game, just change your strategy the next game and that's it...I mean I was also in that "BAN GOYF!" group when I was getting my *** handed to me by Goyfs but you learn to just make adjustments or play with Goyfs. And now a lot of Control decks and Aggro decks play Goyf but I don't see Wotc banning it. Nemesis is going to join the party and if you can't beat it, join it. Nemesis is looking like another Delver or Goyf or DRS, just a creature supplanting other cards.
Whether Wotc does end up banning it because it's "non-interactive" is up to them and I don't really care if they do. They sure succeeded in giving EDH another toy to play with and I'm pretty sure they wanted to make another big splash in Legacy and succeeded greatly in that too.
Agree with you there...Wotc has really made a no-no on printing out a card like this; it's as if they wanted it to start a controversy in Legacy. How does "protection from something" sound blue or something a merfolk would usually have? It sounds more like white, if anything they should have made it a white creature.
Back on the main topic here, we're just going to have to see more results being put out; if somehow every "fair" deck out there needs to put in Nemesis or continually need to put in cards to deal with it then I would vote for it to be banned or something else to give "fair" decks more diversity in strategy. Probably all of the "unfair decks" don't care about it, it's just a creature that does nothing to hamper their combos. Yes there are a multitude of answers to Nemesis, but if all the answers are just to beat one card rather than one deck/archetype then that is not good for a format.
Agreed, it's just like the arguments on how unbanning Frantic Search is going to make Reanimator decks better than they are. Reanimator needs the low mana curve to fight off hate and get its combo going fast, the last thing that it needs is 3 CMC spell to gum up the works...
I'm pretty sure if Wotc were to ever bring Yawgmoth's Bargain back it would be because they took Griselbrand out. Not that Griselbrand is ban worthy as of yet in my opinion but having both Bargain and Griselbrand out in the metagame at the same time just doesn't sit well with me--feel free to call me out on this because I'm really not basing this one on any factual evidence just surmising that having 2 effective cards in the card pool that basically say "Draw X cards for X life" seems like it would open the door for something degenerate to happen sooner or later.
In saying that, I wonder how the metagame is going to change if Wotc just said "We had it with Griselbrand!" and ban it only to un-ban Bargain to "balance it out".
It seems that the price and availability of a card can theoretically warp the format in the situation you described is pretty interesting. I don't know what WOTC would do in that situation if somehow a small group of players relative to the field ended up having cards that no one else could possess that made their decks overly superior.
Yet then again, I surmise that a lot of events must unfold for any situation like this to happen. An overpriced Tabernacle or Moat is not very enticing to any players who want to hoard the best cards to dominate Legacy. A situation like this might arise if the population of Legacy players at any point in time becomes so huge that a reprint protected cards like dual lands are only possessed a small group of people relative to the whole. But this situation is very unlikely to happen.
On another note, I think that the reason why many players don't want to play Lands is because of its mechanics. In my experience, I learned to play magic by playing creatures, instant/sorceries with some enchantments and artifacts to help me win the game. With a lands deck you have to play the same game with a different look. Instead of playing spells and creatures to interact with your opponent, your going to rely on lands, lands that you are accustom to tapping for mana. And I bet that many players are turned off by this aspect when they look at playing a lands deck vs. something like RUG Delver.
But that's what the higher ups at Wotc stand for and they want this card game they made to be "collectible" in their own perspectives. Compared to Yugioh, that reprints what were rare cards to oblivion and has like 20 tiers of "rareness", Wotc wants to have some select cards be rarer than others forever. Wotc is clearly doing this out of pride and not as a business in the economic sense. If they are clearly for the money they would be like Konami and Black Lotus would probably be as rare as some card like Restoration Angel by now.
Overall I think Frantic Search just gives a boost to something Wotc doesn't really like--giving combo decks more power and/or consistency in any format. They are willing to ban anything that deals with combo but once that card gets on the ban list, Wotc is very reluctant to take it off of the banlist even it it is basically harmless in Legacy as of now--see Earthcraft.
Yet banning duals would also not make Legacy, Legacy: an eternal format (in my opinion). Dual lands have been there from the start and were used in a lot of decks over the usual basic lands or in conjunction with basic lands. A Legacy format without dual lands of old, would just be a Modern+ in my opinion. I know that is harsh but when I go into a more powerful format I expect my manabase to be more powerful and diverse too.