MTG Salvation

I hate foils so this is easy. Beta Power.

Since when do Jund decks board in Golgari Charm just for True-Name Nemesis? Destroying an enchantment has always been relevant. Especially when those enchantments are Sneak Attack, Humility, Rest in Peace, and Counterbalance.

Quote from Caedere »

Overgrown Tomb
Breeding Pool

:B

My bad. Carry on.

(Keep in mind I don't play Standard)

Quote from Grand Superior

I don't actually think that Jund is too unfavored against the TNN decks. Liliana of the Veil is pretty good against True-Name Nemesis and Jund still crushes the Delver decks all the same. It does have to struggle a bit more against combo, though, which has seen a resurgence because they really don't care about an invincible and unblockable Trained Armodon.

I've said it before in previous threads, but having played Jund extensively for at least six months I can tell you it is pretty poorly positioned right now and the printing of TNN has made a lot of the 70/30 and 60/40 match-ups into 50/50's. That's not terrible, but keep in mind most Jund players choose Jund so they can smash the fair blue decks (while conceding to Combo). With that logic, the main attraction to playing Jund is gone and you still have the unattractive part of losing to combo.

At the same time, as I have said in the previous thread, I am not sure that means TNN needs to be banned. It just means the meta is changing and that's not always a bad thing.

Quote from Richard Arschmann

SCG wants to sell the money cards and there's not that much $$$ in Affinity, barring Mox Opal.

This.

When my friend won a SCG Open with Goblins almost every question asked in the interview was about how his bad Goblins deck could beat decks like Deathblade, Shardless BUG, etc. (aka decks that cost $2,000+). Starcity is a business and it is in their best interest to advertise the decks that cost more money.

It actually really annoys me about their coverage because it's obvious half the time the commentators don't know what they're talking, most of the time they are just terrible commentators and should look into another profession that doesn't involve public speaking, and 100% of the time it's clear they are trying to sell cards. There are exceptions to the first two faults, but the latter is omnipresent and in the big scheme of things, as I said, it's in their best interest so I understand that.

Quote from Go.dec

Yeah...because those decks were actually in the meta? Does TNN kill D&T and Jund?

Having played Jund for about six months yeah it actually is. Jund preyed upon fair blue decks (RUG, Shardless BUG, Esperblade, etc.). It used to be a 60/40 and sometimes as bad as 70/30 and I'd say with TNN it's closer to 50/50 now.

I now pack Golgari Charms in my sideboard so yes there are answers, but I've come to the conclusion "Why play Jund when I can just play a blue fair deck?" and have the same 50/50 coin flips with other fair decks *and* not auto-lose to combo.

I'm not saying TNN is banned, but just answering your question that TNN does hurt Jund's presence in the meta.

I currently play at Full Moon Games in Terre Haute once a week and at the university's Magic Club once a week as well. We only recently started playing at the LGS on a weekly basis and only average 8 players (a few playing with proxies), but I have hope. Fortunately there are larger bi-monthly tournaments in Bloomington (The Game Preserve) and plenty of SCG Opens throughout the year.

Unfortunately, this is a huge drop-off from where I was (Madison, WI). We played twice a week at our LGS (MoxMania) for a $5 fee and averaged 25 - 30 players (!). The prize breakdown was 4-0: 6 packs, 3-0-1: 4 packs, 3-1: 3 packs, and 2-2: 2 packs. You could also turn your packs into store credit ($2.25 per pack) instead if you wanted to save up for a Legacy staple, which is what I usually did. I've gotten Dual Lands off of just saving up my prizes after multiple $5 tournaments. It's the most generous prize distribution I've seen for a $5 buy-in, but the store owner is the best I've ever dealt with and understands the whole "treat your customers well and it'll come back" philosophy. As for make-up and player base, most tier 1 and 2 decks represented with a pretty skilled player base (1 SCG Open win, a few 2nd/3rd place finishes, and quite a few Top 8's).

Not going to lie, the current setup is significantly less vibrant and the skill level lower and I've definitely seen a drop off in my skill. However, as Tormod always says "If you build it, they will come" and I've already seen some improvement in the skill and player base so like I said, I have hope.

Quote from Tormod

Why not ban Kird Ape because turn-2 forest exists? (They did once for old exteded, and realized how dumb it was... but apparently banning Nactl for Modern wasn't "dumb")

Ugh. Don't remind me. I played back then and Taiga into Kird Ape is still my favorite turn one play since I was 10 years old or something. For them to ban Kird Ape back then was ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as banning Wild Nacatl in a format where Delver is legal. Given I understand Delver isn't as good without Ponder, Brainstorm, etc., but it's still quite silly that Nacatl is banned.

...I guess that was off-topic, but that Kird Ape stuff really gets under my skin. Doesn't help that Zoo is basically a dead deck in Legacy. I guess that at least relates to this thread...:mad:

Boom! Top 4.

And yes I agree about Shaheen. I rarely watch commentary, but he comes across as an ass and it's clear his knowledge is dated at best and at worse misinformed.

Like you said, I'm guessing it's because the Pro Tour is going on at the same time.

Quote from Valanarch

And why is Force of Will such a commonly used card? It's because Turn 1-2 wins are expected, which is exactly my point. What I'm saying is that the average player does not want have to face the prospect of turn 1-2 wins.

Everything in your posts seems to indicate you have never played a single game of Legacy and all your arguments come down to conjecture and a biased opinion.

Turn 1 and 2 wins are expected? More like they *can* occur, but they are outliers. Then you're saying "That is why people have to play Force of Will!" You're using circular logic that is flawed at best and in reality is misinformed.

If Legacy were dominated by Turn 1 and Turn 2 wins then the format would be mostly Char Belcher and Spanish Inquisition. Instead, as we can statistically see, the format is mostly Aggro (citation: http://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE). You can clearly see on the right side that 43% of Legacy decks Top 8'ing are Aggro and Combo is only 32% with Goblin Charbelcher at a whopping 1%!

This graph also shows that Legacy is one of the healthiest formats with a reasonable breakdown of Aggro/Control/Combo and a relatively stable banlist. The community and meta are self-regulating and for the most part, Wizards hasn't done anything. By the inverse you have Modern where Wizards is putting their hands into everything and look how that's turning out with a laughable banlist and pro players saying in public that they don't like playing Modern, but they have to during Modern season.

Nevertheless, TC added diversity to the format since UR Delver

Yes, the format was so diverse in legacy that at a legacy GP, three of the eight top decks were main decking Pyroblast.


It was like the argument against banning surviai: "This format is diverse! You got AggroSurvival, ControlSurvial, and even ComboSurvival.

Treasure Cruise had a high penetration rate in decks, I can finally start using Jund again and going back to 1 for 1ing people. Worldgorger Dragon is back, I can do my silly combos to get back in the game.

Oh its good to be in Legacy!

*sees the modern banlist*

Man that blows. Modern's metagame already feels forced but banning Pod seems harsh, wish they found another way. I have that deck built too ;/

Quote from LandBoySteve »

Quote from Dice_Bag »

The only MONO Blue decks are those. That's an important difference.

If your whole deck is built around a Blue engine to keep it together and functioning, guess what, your a Blue deck. Regardless of what you have borrowed or stolen from the other colours.

The problem is, this is a prejudicial and biased position. Technically, if a deck has more than one color in it, it is not a "blue" or "black" or whatever deck. It is a multi color deck.

The biggest offender in probably all of Legacy is Miracles.

Do you know how many white and red cards are in Miracles?

To call that a "blue" decks is nothing less than what I said it is, prejudicial and biased.

Ironically, I get that those same prejudices and biases ultimately lead to what gets banned or not for if enough players allow their prejudices and biased to keep them from the gaming tables and attendance drops like a stone, WotC will have no problem banning the card they believe is causing the problem.

Fortunately, these prejudices and biases seem to be in the minority right now as Legacy is probably at the height of its popularity.

All I know is I will be so glad when the B&R announcement comes out so I can go on with life as it is until the next B&R announcement comes out and these few biased players to start screaming for "X" card to be banned again.

Maybe I've been playing this game too long but after a while, all the complaining gets very old.

Oh please. No one is talking about "all of the mono blue decks." They're talking about all of the blue decks. Is UR Delver red? Yes it is. And is it blue? Yes it is. I've got news for you: a deck can be color X without being only that color. It isn't a bias. Go ahead. Talk about all of the green decks. Or all of the red, black, or white. The reason people don't talk about "how many" there are is that there AREN'T as many. Add this to the fact that most blue decks including multicolored ones do have 22+ blue spells thanks to FOW, and it becomes really obvious why people talk about the color blue. Even in the very example you used of Miracles. You realize there are more blue cards in the deck than white and red combined right? Sometimes by a ratio of 2:1. If you want to argue whether or not that's a problem, that's your prerogative. If you want to pretend "much blue" isn't a real thing in Legacy, you're making a very foolish argument as the numbers disagree.

Question from a "Biased" player. What have I asked to be banned? Also why can you not just move on with your life now? Why is it so important you visit this thread? I think a deck running 4x Force, Brainstorm, Ponder and them some mix of Delver, Git probe, Daze and Cruse happens to be a "Blue" deck. Sue me.

See here's the thing, I don't agree with you, that doesn't make me biased, out to destroy the game, out to harm you fun or kill your Sunday afternoon. It means I have an opinion. I also happen to think it's fairly spot on. I mean if your decks whole engine happens to be one colour then guess what, your decks that colour. It's like saying Elves is a black deck. No, it's not. It's Green. Telling me Delver is not a Blue deck is just as laughable to me. You "Splash" other colours, like Elves does, but a splash is just that, a splash. You can move one interchangeable part for another and still have a working deck. Switch the Green in RUG for White and vola, whole "new" deck. Try cutting the Blue from it. I want to see what happens.

Seriously, stop trying to make out that those who disagree with you are stupid/don't understand the format/are biased/are prejudicial to the, sorry, your, correct way of thinking. We are not all the same, we do not think alike, we will disagree. But that's does not mean that when disagreements arise that we are out to destroy Legacy. Please, take your straw man and burn it elsewhere. Return here when your not going to just deflect and attack everyone who happens to have a different point of view to your own.

Also, how many Red cards in Miracles, often none or two main. White? Ten. Blue? Twenty four.

Quote from Dice_Bag »

You can not fix years of mistakes with a stroke of a keyboard, they need to find penicillin for this, not just amputate.

You're right. That's a great analogy. They do need to find a penicillin - a long term solution - one that not only retroactively heals those years of mistakes, but that also prevents new mistakes going forward. In general, I think R&D does a good job. However, in my years of playing, the constant failure on their part has been the inability to achieve balance between blue and the other colors. They just can't seem to stop making blue cards that warp multiple formats.

Sadly, Mark Rosewater once acknowledged the issue, but he now seems to shift the blame. Years ago, Mr. Rosewater wrote this article about why blue is too good and how they can tone it done:
http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr168a

That was published in 2005 and gave me a lot of hope at the time. Then Lorwyn was released in 2007. The words in that article must have been ignored by R&D as Faeries took over. Of course, later we also had Jace, Delver, True Name, and the others that you all already know.

Nowadays, Mr. Rosewater has this posted on his Tumblr:

Magic’s power level ebbs and flows and at any one time certain colors will be weaker and stronger. It is R&D’s goal to have all the colors balanced over time.

Hey that seems positive! But reading on...

Then why is blue so good in older formats?

R&D is capable of many things but we can’t change the past. Early Magic had many broken blue cards and making new cards will not make those broken cards disappear.

To me, that's an unfortunate shift in tone. Where once he wrote an article listing the issues with the design of blue, he now seems to throw his hands up and say that although those cards are broken, it's not his problem.

While Development is to blame for some power-level mistakes, Design is certainly at fault for continuing to create an environment where blue has near exclusive access to the most inherently powerful abilities of the color pie.

It's not as if non Blue decks can not compete, Lands for example was tearing up Delver before ANT came back, it's just that if your playing 7/9 rounds the filter Blue offers reduces the inherent random nature of the game and gives those players an edge. Banning of Brainstorm will not stop that from continuing to be the case. Banning Brainstorm will simply mean that next people will want Ponder gone when it's numbers start to climb.

You can not fix years of mistakes with a stroke of a keyboard, they need to find penicillin for this, not just amputate.

Also to those that are confused about where I stand since I seam to talk from both sides of this fence, I want Brainstorm left alone but I also admit it's an issue. If it's not fixed, it's an issue that will one day be solved in a manner I dislike. Do not say it's never going to get banned, only Force and Wasteland will "Never" Be banned. Nothing else, regardless on how loved is needed for the health of the format. After all Survival was very much loved....

I am not saying that Lacey and Brainstorm are the same, nor am I saying it would not have an impact on the game to remove it, I am saying though that Brainstorm is just a card in this format, just like Lackey is just a card. Neither of these are true Pillars. They are just played items.

I understand the format and that's why I think it can survive without Brainstorm. It would be a blow to many decks, but Legacy would not just die overnight. If you took out Wasteland, the duals or Force then I think you could make the argument we would have issues, but Brainstorm? It would be painful to watch it go, but not backbreaking.

@Land
I do not believe for a moment that if you take away Brainstorm the format collapses. I would like to see any proof you have of such an event waiting to be.

Also your pillars are wrong, in no given order:
Duals
Land control (Wasteland, Port)
Answers (Force, Decay)

Brainstorm is just another card, it's no more a pillar than Goblin Lackey is.

Quote from pittplayer »

And here comes the reactionary posts dismissing my views and eager to go back to complaining about brainstorm for a few more years. I am for banning the broken card.. not the enabler. Tendrils by its existence makes a lot of cards unplayable and needing of bans. In the format I talked about.. what are you tutoring for? Belcher? Spy? Maniac? We already have Infernal Tutor, Burning Wish, Living Wish, Enlightened Tutor.. is Demonic Tutor really THAT much more powerful? I feel its safe. Show and Tell is on the same power level as Tinker, or at least if Tinker is a 10 then Show is a 9.5. And Top being in the format slows games down to such a huge degree. Also with Brainstorm and Treasure Cruise in the format I think Top just pushes blue control decks like CounterTop to being overpowered. I would appreciate if people either A. Ignore my post if you have nothing constructive to say about it. or B. Give a well thought out opinion or counter argument. Tell me what decklist would be sooo overpowered by Demonic Tutor in the format with Tendrils and Show gone? And to be clear.. Im not advocating a ban of Tendrils because I " lose a lot to it " or whatever snarky comment you want to make. Im advocating its ban cause there are a lot of cards on the ban list BECAUSE or tendrils. Getting rid of it would allow more cards in the format.

It is not a reactionary post mate, it is just me stating it how it is. But since I was on my mobile when I posted and thus I kept it short, allow me now to answer you in full.

First: I was once like you, I mean we are going back to 2002 but at one point I wanted the ban list to solve all the cards I hated. I even wanted Force banned. Time passed, I learnt, things changed and now my views are very different. I see the list as a very touchy thing. To me that list is like good government, it works best when I do not know it is working at all. But that said, sometimes you just need to do things that have to be done, at those points and only those points should the list change. Adding cards should be only done when the format leaves no other choice. Not a day sooner. So a card like SnT which is doing nothing of any consequence of late, should not be touched until it is harming the format.

Lets look at what you asked for and examine why I responded as I did.

Ban:
Tendrils: This card is a mistake, yes, storm was a foolish idea that causes degenerate things to happen. The deck is not the greatest of fun to play against, but it is not really all that strong. Its weaknesses are both the flaws in play caused by the person playing it and well timed disruption from those playing against it. In my term playing Goblins, this deck was the one I hated the most, but it would always lose to Thresh. It fits well into the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" dynamic of the format. It also is not as powerful as it first seems, almost never winning events and these days fast becoming a relic of its past glory. The card is busted yes, but it sits in a format full of busted cards so thats not really an argument. The card is not dominating, if anything it is diminishing and is in no danger of taking over the format. It is safe to keep.


Show and Tell:
The fact that you compare this to Tinker quite frankly leads me to think you have not got the faintest idea on what you are talking about. There is ONE card in this format you can compare to tinker, this is not it. SnT is the card that is I feel the least popular in this format as a whole. A shaved monkey could play this deck and do well with it. It is not fun, it is not interesting and I hate it with all my being. If you have a look at my list of legacy decks you will note I do not own this card in my box of toys, that is by choice, not because it costs money. That said, not being fun to play against is not a reason to ban something and, while I could personally care less if someone burnt every copy of this card to keep some third world village heated in the winter that does not mean its ban worthy. If anything, it means I should have no say in if this card ever got banned because my hate for it might cloud my choices. SnT cheats on mana, thats really the soul of the card and its not really fair in the way it does it even if it acts fair by letting both players do it. The deck it is played in though is VERY inconsistent. It spends much of its time digging for what it needs since it runs so few actual combo cards and a whole lot of filler. The way to beat this deck is to stop them Cantripping. I suggest CoTV if you want this deck to go away.

A note on Tinker: Tutors that cheat mana costs are head and shoulders above cards that just cheat mana costs or are just tutors. Thats why Stoneforge is played and Steelshaper's Gift is not. Natural Order is the only card in this format I would argue is akin to Tinker and if Elves took over (And that is my pet deck, I sat down and penned a Primer on it) I would think it would be the first to go.


Sensei's Divining Top:
In a format where Blue has almost all the card manipulation, taking this away would be foolish. It is the card that non Blue decks can use to have any kind of card quality. If Miracles is a deck you hate, look at other cards to complain about. If time is an issue you have with this card, tell the person playing with it to speed up. If you find it hard to kill, play Grip. This card is strong AND its not Blue. Lets not strip that from Legacy. Also, its just not strong enough to be banned. I mean, at all. It's not stronger than Jace, Brainstorm or hell, even Library. It just gets more Air time thanks to one very prominent deck.


Unban:
Black Vise, Mind Twist: Go ahead. The rest of us don't get why they are banned either.


Mental Misstep:
The issue with MM is that, sadly, it answers itself. I think that if it had of costed one mana more, it would have been fine. (A colourless mana more so you have to pay something and not leaving it free) It pushes the format to an even more Blue state since running it with Force is just a natural fit. The card was banned because it pushed non Blue decks out of the format and I would expect that to be an issue again. If you have never played with it, it can seem benign but it is anything but. It warps the format around itself as you need to run it to fight it and that means that you start building with 56 card decks.

I would like to see this card reprinted at an updated mana cost. As it is though, it is not safe to ever unban.


Demonic Tutor:
I really do not know how to explain to someone how this is broken without saying something like "Honestly, just test it." I know that might seem like a cop out, but really, its just... Look you can not look at a card that is conditional and compare it too one that is not. Enlightened Tutor has limits on what you can fetch and does not place it in your hand, the wishes kill your sideboard space and make you build around them forcing you to fill you sideboard with answers you can fetch thus decreasing your options when it comes to "Real" sideboard slots. They can also only fetch a limited number of cards. (Death wish aside) As for Infernal Tutor, again it is conditional and its not Instant. D Tutor is just like having 5+ copies of any one card in your deck and its just nuts to think about it like that. Also you can fetch out what you need in a given situation. It gives you too many options with no restrictions. That is why it is broken.



Anyway, if you want to talk on this some more send me a PM. This kind of thing will clog up this threat and it's not really needed. I would be happy to talk to you on cards, because like I said, you remind me of how I was at one point. With time comes a changing of perspective and I would like to think that in a few years you will come to look back at moments like this and laugh as you see the game with new eyes.

No card is a "Magic Wand". Lotus does not suddenly make you win a game if you play it, but that doesn't make it any less busted.