Apparently you need listening comprehension. In an interview they already made the statement that vision was banned because "it was good enough in legacy" and "they didn't want a situation where you suspend it on turn 1 then 1 for 1 with counter spell then draw a bunch of cards and their screwed."
Snapcaster has nothing to do with the banning of visions and the logic of "ban 1 good card because another good card that has zero interaction with it is coming out" is completely flawed. It's not my reading comprehension, it your logic of the format, the people developing it and your logic of the game itself that is flawed in this situation.
Whatever you say.
Anyways, right now I don't see any card that claims for a ban, rather everything is more or less beatable with the appropriate sideboard. It's just that there are so many different decks that the 15 slots don't seem enough.
Are we to the point where we can consolidate the ban list discussion into one thread now? With the list not changing every week the discussion has toned down considerably. I'm looking for feedback here as we would like to reduce the number of stickies.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
Are we to the point where we can consolidate the ban list discussion into one thread now? With the list not changing every week the discussion has toned down considerably. I'm looking for feedback here as we would like to reduce the number of stickies.
LOL! It calmed down because a certain poster was suspended and he could not drop the matter.
Ugh, people also complain this way about standard atm. Why is diversity so bad?
I don't know if I would complain about it, but it makes deck tuning MUCH harder, and makes the outcome of tournaments much more fickle and dependant on the luck of who you get matched up with. It definatly has a negative impact on the game, but the question is do the positive effects of variety outweigh the negative. I think so, but I can see where the complaints come from.
Are we to the point where we can consolidate the ban list discussion into one thread now? With the list not changing every week the discussion has toned down considerably. I'm looking for feedback here as we would like to reduce the number of stickies.
Just by looking at dailies and the variance of the format, it would seem it's very well balanced at this point. There really isn't a single deck anybody can pidgeonhole into being the "best" deck right now, so I'd say yes.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find me online - I'm on Cockatrice * Tag - Badd B - Or on MTGO - Tag - Cbus05
Diversity is what makes people love legacy. Or at least it was some months ago.
So diversity is certainly a good thing.
I think, and this is a guess because I do not follow legacy closely, that diversity is much easier to build and sideboard for because it's card pool contains more catch-all answers than Modern does. Modern has no Force of Will that can answer or slow down a wide variety of threats.
I would argue that the catch-all answers makes Legacy less diverse because people gravitate to them and build decks around them.
Take the blue shell, add in SFM and stuff: you get Stoneblade in all its color combinations.
Do the same and add goyfs/delver: you get Thresh
Add in Deeds and board control: you get Landstill.
Sure, the decks could be considered diverse but they all revolve around the same staples.
It's not quite the same. There is no next best FoW. Disrupting Shoal would never be played. There is no next best Brainstorm. Ponder and friends aren't even close. Once you get to Legacy power levels, next best usually tends to not be good enough.
I would argue that the catch-all answers makes Legacy less diverse because people gravitate to them and build decks around them.
Take the blue shell, add in SFM and stuff: you get Stoneblade in all its color combinations.
Do the same and add goyfs/delver: you get Thresh
Add in Deeds and board control: you get Landstill.
Sure, the decks could be considered diverse but they all revolve around the same staples.
It's not quite the same. There is no next best FoW. Disrupting Shoal would never be played. There is no next best Brainstorm. Ponder and friends aren't even close. Once you get to Legacy power levels, next best usually tends to not be good enough.
I feel that power level IS the problem with magic in general. Certain people want to only play with those level cards and when Wotc tries to reinvent them in a more balanced way those players complain the power level is not the same. That leaves Wotc very few options when trying to create new cards. When they do print powerful cards (Mental Misstep) they get grief from all sides.
It's only a problem if you enjoy playing "fair" - ie. Standard. Eternal formats should have that "broken" feel to them. The wow factor is one of the main draws. I'd imagine playing Standard decks over and over again would get boring pretty fast.
I will agree to disagree. There is no reason the card pool should be as limited as it is in eternal formats. Broken cards are broken cards and probably shouldnt have been made in the first place.
I will agree to disagree. There is no reason the card pool should be as limited as it is in eternal formats. Broken cards are broken cards and probably shouldnt have been made in the first place.
And that ends this episode of what do we want banned. Stay tuned to the ban list discussion thread for more answers.
Ok that was cheesy. If we need to re-open this we will.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Whatever you say.
Anyways, right now I don't see any card that claims for a ban, rather everything is more or less beatable with the appropriate sideboard. It's just that there are so many different decks that the 15 slots don't seem enough.
L1 Judge
LOL! It calmed down because a certain poster was suspended and he could not drop the matter.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z_Qqnq8pI8
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Just by looking at dailies and the variance of the format, it would seem it's very well balanced at this point. There really isn't a single deck anybody can pidgeonhole into being the "best" deck right now, so I'd say yes.
Diversity is what makes people love legacy. Or at least it was some months ago.
So diversity is certainly a good thing.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Take the blue shell, add in SFM and stuff: you get Stoneblade in all its color combinations.
Do the same and add goyfs/delver: you get Thresh
Add in Deeds and board control: you get Landstill.
Sure, the decks could be considered diverse but they all revolve around the same staples.
I feel that power level IS the problem with magic in general. Certain people want to only play with those level cards and when Wotc tries to reinvent them in a more balanced way those players complain the power level is not the same. That leaves Wotc very few options when trying to create new cards. When they do print powerful cards (Mental Misstep) they get grief from all sides.
And that ends this episode of what do we want banned. Stay tuned to the ban list discussion thread for more answers.
Ok that was cheesy. If we need to re-open this we will.