|
Serperoth posted:Do you have a link to that? I'd very much like to watch it. SCGLive NJ Leg Rd3 AJ Kerrian vs James Rynkiewicz: https://youtu.be/1Qwm904bq3s
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:04 |
|
|
L0cke17 posted:The problem with modern is that its boring. You don't get to play with any of the fun powerful cards, and it is entirely too fair. In Legacy everything is unfair to some extent which leads to much more interaction and entertainment value per game than modern has. In modern you often don't even have to interact with your opponent until turn three to win. In Legacy if your deck doesn't interact meaningfully on turn one or two, you likely have lost or are losing the game already. Or: The good thing about Modern is that it's controlled. You don't have to deal with the ridiculously broken cards which were often either mistakes or a remnant of old and badly considered design practice. It's fair so you get more interaction and entertainment value per game than Legacy has. In Legacy you have to interact on turn one or two or else you've likely lost or are losing the game already: in Modern you don't have to be so fast, which lets people play other types of decks. The mana in Modern sits about right, where competitive decks can range from one to four colours. You won't get locked out of too many archetypes that seem fun just because of the rather unsatisfying/mechanical reason that the mana's too bad. Nevertheless, pain/slowness/unreliability mostly keep the higher number of colours in check so that competitive modern archetypes range from one to four colours. The gameplay balance is actually fine enough that the meta is allowed to have an impact: tools like Blood Moon will rear their heads (as they are currently) in decks if bases are too greedy. Also Wizards carefully considers combo decks and likes to keep a particular eye on ones that just want to combo, for the sane reason that most people who haven't been inured to it hate watching an opponent playing Solitaire with themselves and don't want to warp their decks/the meta just to keep a check on that. I want Magic to work with a balance of spells and creatures, in accordance with the fact that the game is built around both. This also adds a cool, distinctive Magic stamp to the game, with very few other depictions of wizards being as focused on the support they bring to battle. (This is about 20% advocacy for the devil based on your first post, 80% what I really believe.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Sleep of Bronze posted:Or: I've never seen so many words by someone who obviously plays zero Legacy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
ScarletBrother posted:Spoken like someone who has not played Modern on a meaningful level. I played quite a lot of it, but they banned everything I enjoyed so I left. jassi007 posted:I don't even understand how wasteland is interesting. Oh neat a card that everyone can play to disrupt mana to help prevent t2 combo bullshit. It just makes me look at legacy and see an entry fee required for FoW and Wasteland to participate. I'm alson not terribly intersted in watching everyone brainstorm then fetch over and over. Modern is a format where everyone can play their spells. That sounds a lot more intersting. The biggest thing that modern lacks to see more diversity I think is a 1 mana black kill spell that isn't really narrow. Path and Bolt are too good to shape decks to be red, white, or both. But Legacy is about balancing the ability to have any one spell castable on turn two with the ability to have the mana to cast all your spells around turn four. Mana-denial is what makes Legacy interesting in a lot of ways. There are a huge amount of spells and effects which allow you to increase the amount of mana you have available. Hell the deck you said you want to try is a ramp deck. If you want to make an entire strategy out of having more mana than your opponent with cheap spells and lands which produce more mana than your opponents' lands do, why shouldn't there be ways to interact with you and remove your mana advantage? Casting all your spells is a privilege, not a right. If you only want to play expensive color-sensitive jank off non-basic lands, then your opponent who is playing cheap jank and land destruction will always beat you. But if you play expensive spells, and have conservative mana, with lots of basics and early interaction, you will outclass the cheap threats and LD decks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:Boo hoo, I'm not being fair. To those who prefer legacy, good for you. That doesn't mean modern isn't gaining traction or eventually going to be the primary format. For every person who is SPELLS > CREATURES I hate to tell you there are probably 3x-5x as many people who play magic who don't even get this and probably wouldn't agree. They've changed the game and it isn't going back. Mishra's factory is both a land and a creature and is in fact very interactive. They even help each other and can create complicated board states!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Modern seems good now because Standard is so boring, that's my theory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
L0cke17 posted:I played quite a lot of it, but they banned everything I enjoyed so I left. I would say that while mana denial can in itself be interactive, it is not meaningfully interactive. Removing your opponent's ability to interact with you does not make a game interactive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
We get it guys. Modern players and Legacy players enjoy their own format more than the other. Accusing people of never having played a format is in no way an actual counter-argument to what they post. Legacy packs most of it's decision making in a smaller number of turns than Modern. That's because most of the battle in Legacy is fought before the first real threat hits the table. It's all about your position before things start happening. Both formats are pretty diverse. I already knew this about Legacy, but I saw just how diverse Modern could be in Richmond. The banning of Deathrite Shaman in Modern really opened that format up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
L0cke17 posted:I played quite a lot of it, but they banned everything I enjoyed so I left. The deck i said I want to play is a deck that wins via creatures, which means it has plenty of opportunity for interaction by my opponent. they can just bolt the loving metalworker if they want to. Thats how you beat a ramp deck. Wasteland is required to stop non-interactive decks that are all spell decks. If legacy had cards banned to slow / limit combo like modern, then wasteland wouldn't be necessary at all. You like spell/combo decks. Clearly. So in a format you want to play, Wasteland is a card that needs to exist. I get that. I don't care to play that format. I am perfectly ok with a format defined by creatures, not spells. My favorite decks to play in the 90's were nether spirit, khabal ghoul, ashen ghoul bazaazr of baghdad deck and white weenie. Now I like Affinity and Infect. Fox of Stone posted:Mishra's factory is both a land and a creature and is in fact very interactive. They even help each other and can create complicated board states! Yeah Mishra's factory is not anyone's issue with legacy. It is a card type (manland) that spawn a million copies of it and its ancestors see play in every format forever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:I would say that while mana denial can in itself be interactive, it is not meaningfully interactive. Removing your opponent's ability to interact with you does not make a game interactive. That's why you run a miser's stifle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Creatures shouldn't be > spells (both should be approximately equal in terms of viability) but Modern isn't bad in that regard with burn decks, Storm, and manland control decks all being non-comedy options. I'll be very disappointed if Wizards bans anything else from Storm, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Music For Cats posted:Modern seems good now because Standard is so boring, that's my theory. I eagerly await not having to play a game for 50 minutes because UW Control can't find it's wincon and has counterspelled/verdicted/d-sphered all of mine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Music For Cats posted:Modern seems good now because Standard is so boring, that's my theory. Pretty much this. I'm tired of playing Black Devotion and its variants or UW/x control, I don't want to buy Domris for RG/x, and what else is even viable in the current standard? Blue Devotion? That deck's even more boring. I'm basically drafting until the next set comes out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:We get it guys. Modern players and Legacy players enjoy their own format more than the other. Accusing people of never having played a format is in no way an actual counter-argument to what they post. I didn't say that he never played Modern. I said he hadn't played it in a meaningful way. He said himself that he quit around the time that Second Sunrise was banned. The format is not the same now as it was then. He talked about Storm as if it was killed by the banning of Seething Song. It's a tier 1 deck. I guess saying "your perception is outdated and incorrect" would have been better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
This just in: If Wizards dissolved the Reserved List and made a decent run of Legacy Masters, you'd be able to bear witness to the last game of Modern ever played.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
I will say that I'm really hoping that when all the great Azorius cards rotate out in the fall that the premier control deck in Theros/Huey standard isn't base blue/white. Gimme Grixis, or U/B, or U/R, or BUG, or something. gently caress
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Pretty much this. You could play something dumb like UG Devotion and vomit out 4/3 Master of Waves Tokens that survive the Babemaster getting killed. Or Prime Speaker Bant. Play that. I like that deck. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Just play Pauper, it owns
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
The Wonder Weapon posted:1. A uncounterable, revive-able 4/4 Vigilant Lifelinker on turn 3 that can also be a control-killing sword 1. It costs 5 mana, and when everyone is playing a mix of Path, Decay, and Bolt its questionable they would ever get to cast it. 2. If it doesn't kill him, it puts him so close practically any man you have in play will kill him. 3. I think the 'speed of the format' nonsense should just stop. They created a magical christmas-land where everyone gets to cast their spells and their expensive nonsense without worrying about dying. Which makes games miserable because there is no need of or really any incentive to interact with your opponents. Just look at Richmond's top 8. 6 midrange decks with a combo kill, and the only viable aggro deck in the format. No control at all. 4. They only add a lot of time if you're a slow player. If you're playing slowly you will draw or get slow play penalties. That's not the cards' fault, that's the players who don't practice enough to not be slow. jassi007 posted:People will surely change their mind about a format they play by being told how boring it is... They probably won't, but if they're told its boring enough then they may get out and try the thing others say is more interesting in comparison, realize its better and play more Legacy. All pretty much any Legacy player wants is more people to play Legacy with. Sleep of Bronze posted:Or: I honestly don't believe that a policed, controlled format is a good thing. If something is the 'best' let it be, people will find answers, or at least they can in Legacy where there is pretty much every card ever printed available. There are only two bannable cards in Legacy right now in my opinion, Delver and True-Name Nemesis. They invalidate so many other things, and make Blue the best color for creatures, library manipulation, stack control, and board control. At the very least Blue shouldn't have the two strongest men in the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:This just in: If Wizards dissolved the Reserved List and made a decent run of Legacy Masters, you'd be able to bear witness to the last game of Modern ever played. Except no. There are quite a few Modern players that don't enjoy the playstyle of Legacy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:Except no. There are quite a few Modern players that don't enjoy the playstyle of Legacy. Both of them would get over it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
What does non-interactive actually mean? People have called Dredge, Storm, and Charbelcher non-interactive but realistically there are ways to stop all of those decks! I'm pretty sure Dredge and Storm are more interactive kills than Hive Mind + Pact.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Zoness posted:What does non-interactive actually mean?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
I would hazard a guess that most of the people who actively dislike the "playstyle" of Legacy are doing that because of a distorted idea of what Legacy is. Every time this discussion comes up we usually have someone wander in talking about how Legacy is a noninteractive turn-two combo format or some dumb poo poo. The primary reason to shift the default eternal format from Legacy to Modern is supply and cost. Unfortunately that's really all the reason you need, at least if you care about being reasonably able to continue to grow the format in question.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
L0cke17 posted:4. They only add a lot of time if you're a slow player. If you're playing slowly you will draw or get slow play penalties. That's not the cards' fault, that's the players who don't practice enough to not be slow. Draws and the threat of slow play penalties don't actually do anything to stop control decks from taking the full round time + 10 minutes to finish a match, though. It's a pretty miserable experience to have every single round go over time in a larger tournament.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:The deck i said I want to play is a deck that wins via creatures, which means it has plenty of opportunity for interaction by my opponent. they can just bolt the loving metalworker if they want to. Thats how you beat a ramp deck. Wasteland is required to stop non-interactive decks that are all spell decks. If legacy had cards banned to slow / limit combo like modern, then wasteland wouldn't be necessary at all. You like spell/combo decks. Clearly. So in a format you want to play, Wasteland is a card that needs to exist. But you're designing a deck to not interact at all. Chalice 1 removes their ability to bolt your man, Cavern of Souls to make your men uncounterable. You're going to wasteland and port them and play Lodestone Golems to keep them from being able to interact with you at all with anything at a higher mana cost, and by the time they naturally draw 5 lands to play their 2-mana kill-spell on your Metalworker you have killed them. Also, Wasteland would certainly see play in decks even without a combo threat. The decks it is best against aren't combo, because they usually don't care about getting wastelanded. The decks that care are the ones trying to have the mana to cast every spell they want on turn two every time. Things like Shardless Bug, and MUD and all the three color Delver decks. Those matchups are where Wasteland really shines. ScarletBrother posted:I didn't say that he never played Modern. I said he hadn't played it in a meaningful way. He said himself that he quit around the time that Second Sunrise was banned. The format is not the same now as it was then. He talked about Storm as if it was killed by the banning of Seething Song. It's a tier 1 deck. I guess saying "your perception is outdated and incorrect" would have been better. I know storm wasn't killed when they banned Seething Song. However, since they showed they were willing to ban one card from it they will be willing to ban another and another and another until it ceases to be good. I quit because it wasn't worth practicing and playing a deck when it could just have things banned out of it again in three months in a format where bannings happen consistently, to focus on a format where the wasn't likely and the deck I was playing now would still be there in six months. e: Zoness posted:What does non-interactive actually mean? People have called Dredge, Storm, and Charbelcher non-interactive but realistically there are ways to stop all of those decks! Typically non-interactive means that your plays are minimally influenced by what your opponent does. With all of those decks 90% of the time they will execute the exact same game plan regardless of what their opponent is playing, and very little interaction that their opponent will likely play will have an impact on their game state. ex: Lightning Bolt vs one Empty the Warrens token is useless, and even more useless against the Charbelcher. Counterspells almost never matter against Dredge, because most of their spells are cast for flashback-sac a man. That gives them their zombies from Bridge from Below, regardless if the spell resolves or even has an impact on their opponent at all. L0cke17 fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
L0cke17 posted:But you're designing a deck to not interact at all. Chalice 1 removes their ability to bolt your man, Cavern of Souls to make your men uncounterable. You're going to wasteland and port them and play Lodestone Golems to keep them from being able to interact with you at all with anything at a higher mana cost, and by the time they naturally draw 5 lands to play their 2-mana kill-spell on your Metalworker you have killed them. Wait, he's designing a deck that answers threats to his main plan and you're saying that's not interaction? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:People will surely change their mind about a format they play by being told how boring it is... No, but people might be influenced on their decision to get into a format when people literally spew lies from their mouth about a loving format they don't play like these following gems. jassi007 posted:Wasteland is required to stop non-interactive decks that are all spell decks. Sleep of Bronze posted:The good thing about Modern is that it's controlled. You don't have to deal with the ridiculously broken cards which were often either mistakes or a remnant of old and badly considered design practice. It's fair so you get more interaction and entertainment value per game than Legacy has. In Legacy you have to interact on turn one or two or else you've likely lost or are losing the game already: in Modern you don't have to be so fast, which lets people play other types of decks. Look, I play both a shitload of Legacy and Modern because I am a degenerate grinder of both SCG Events and Pro Tour Related events. I do prefer Legacy (pretty significantly, to be honest) and that's whatever, but to be honest I actually agree with The Wonder Weapon's article. The way things are going now, Legacy will eventually die due to card availability and whatever and that's basically inevitable because Wizards is dumb. I understand that people get frustrated by Legacy due to card prices and I get that, I really do. What I can't stand is when people, after they decide they can't get into a format, decide that they have to hate the format and start making up poo poo that can deter potential new players from getting into it because they paint the format as something that its not, like a 'Turn 1 Combo Format' or 'The format where you have to play blue and Force of Will', and that is loving frustrating as hell, and I wish people would stop doing that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
L0cke17 posted:They probably won't, but if they're told its boring enough then they may get out and try the thing others say is more interesting in comparison, realize its better and play more Legacy. All pretty much any Legacy player wants is more people to play Legacy with. Yeah, being told that modern is boring is going to cause me or someone else to drop 1-2k on duals, FoW, Wastelands, etc. Or are you in touch with legacy players that will trade modern staples into legacy without some INSANE premium of trade credit? If so PM me, I'm interested in playing legacy at the right price. Oh also, please move your playgroup to my town so I can play the deck that I'll build for a reasonable price.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:I would hazard a guess that most of the people who actively dislike the "playstyle" of Legacy are doing that because of a distorted idea of what Legacy is. Every time this discussion comes up we usually have someone wander in talking about how Legacy is a noninteractive turn-two combo format or some dumb poo poo. I think Legacy is awesome, I just don't have the cards for it. When I bought into Modern ($15 fetches) it was a much cheaper way to play a non-rotating format. Now the price difference isn't all that much. I'm invested into Modern at this point, and there are events nearby for me to play in. That's why I prefer it to Legacy. I don't think one format is better than the other, I was just pointing out perceptions of Modern that are wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Wait, he's designing a deck that answers threats to his main plan and you're saying that's not interaction? Playing against a land destruction deck is probably the least interactive Magic you'll ever play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:I would hazard a guess that most of the people who actively dislike the "playstyle" of Legacy are doing that because of a distorted idea of what Legacy is. Every time this discussion comes up we usually have someone wander in talking about how Legacy is a noninteractive turn-two combo format or some dumb poo poo. Really it's just supply at this point. I never thought Scalding Tarn could be the same price as Jace the Mind Sculptor. And Legacy does feel noticeably different than Modern. Also, anyone that saw Cedric's round 3 feature match at SCG Seattle last weekend should understand why Top will never be unbanned in Modern.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
I only play Theros block constructed because every other format is full of unfair cards and non-interactive decks and all I want to do is actually play magic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I only play Theros block constructed because every other format is full of unfair cards and non-interactive decks and all I want to do is actually play magic. My version of fun is superior to your version of fun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
I think its fine to enjoy legacy more than modern or vice versa (I have bought into both formats although I play modern much more) - modern is a different style of magic closer to standard with the most obvious thing being that unfair decks are neutered to make up the fact that forces and dazes are not in the format. The crux of the argument is that legacy is slowly dying because of the reserve list and modern has proven to be an eternal format people are willing to support which makes sense to me. Most new players to magic will go torwards the "cheaper", more widely played format that deviates the least from what they are used to (standard and draft) (arguable but i think generally has logic to) and modern is going to become that format in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I only play Theros block constructed because every other format is full of unfair cards and non-interactive decks and all I want to do is actually play magic. Force everyone to play Planechase
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Pretty much this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
I play modern so I don't have to keep up with the rat-race of standard. I would prefer to play legacy. In legacy each turn has a far greater number of decisions, especially when you consider the best card in the format, Brainstorm. Winning or losing due to mana screw, even with wasteland present is rare as draws are smoothed out very effectively either by brainstorm in the base blue decks. Or by Aether Vial in death and taxes and other "fair" decks. Whereas in modern, it happens far more regularly. If they'd reprint brainstorm into modern, I'd enjoy the format far more, but as it is, modern is just ok with my least favorite archetype, creature based midrange being the dominant deck. Modern is fine, and is better than current standard but it pales in comparison to legacy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Speaking of this trade premium people apparently do for legacy, what's that all about? I got into it way back and never had to care about much aside from trading "old cards for old cards" and "new cards for new cards." How much of a markup are people expecting when you're trying to trade your elspeths and stormbreaths for FoWs and wasteland?Entropic posted:"Beats my deck" As much as I love spells, I guess it's this really primal desire to want to play with and keep things on the field for more than an instant (lol) that makes permanents more satisfying to a lot of players. You even see the same things in board games since nothing outside of deckbuilding games, AFAIK, is played as if all cards were spells. Even then the cards don't really interact outside of reaction/attack cards and every turn is seeing the player build their engine. The spells/permanents dichotomy is a problem with the infrastructure of the wizard game. You can't really change it without making wizard poker a different game. (Though a lot of problems could be alleviated if they didn't tie colors into interactivity via spells/permanents. Green should have a counterspell too. Like a sac a dude and pay 1 life FoW or whatever. E: ok I'll stop effort posting from my phone. Thread is going too fast.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:04 |
|
|
I wish Wasteland was in Modern too, but drat do some of you guys ever get mad about mana denial not being a realistic strategy in Modern. (If not Wasteland, how about Price of Progress?)
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 19:11
|
|
