|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 12:57PM
#1
|
|
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Latest Developments, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 9:17PM
#2
|
|
|
I feel vindicated.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 9:32PM
#3
|
|
|
Bravo. Perfect assessment of and solution to the situation. Extra kudos for even telling the community this in advance. Again, bravo.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 9:39PM
#4
|
|
|
Bravo. Perfect assessment of and solution to the situation. Extra kudos for even telling the community this in advance. Again, bravo.
I agree with the above statement exactly. Well done, Mr. LaPille et al.!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 10:07PM
#5
|
|
|
I think this tells us that not only is nothing getting banned on December 1st, but don't be surprised if they ban something January 1st. It makes sense to do it that way, though, because of the way that the qualifier season works out.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 10:13PM
#6
|
- Warm, wet and squishy inside
|
I figured the unusual extended rotation had something to do with it. Normally, you know many years in advance what's rotating in and out, and suddenly the format changed. A significant number (but not extreme) of the "problem cards" were cards from Onslaught Block. I hardly think that's an accident.
Looking at Top 16, btw, doesn't really feel all that great to me. It still seems like a bunch of tribal decks taking the cake. Tezzerator preys on tribal decks, especially ones with small creatures (at least it seems that way from way over here), so I'm not going to count it as "not-tribal". And All-In-Red seems like it just needs to "get lucky".
Lastly, claiming that elf decks could have cannibilized themselves is silly; Affinity decks could cannibilize themselves when it was the dominant deck. You know, everyone started playing Affinity.
I'm not claiming the elf deck is unbeatable, but if it takes Pro-Tour quality skill to beat it and only FNM skill to win with it, it'll probably be a pain in the butt. The fact that it's isolated in extended certainly helps.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 10:51PM
#7
|
|
|
Fair analysis, if your point is to prove that Elves! is beatable.
However, it does not at all take into account how much sideboard (and even maindeck) slots you have to dedicate to beat Elves.
If I think the format will be full Elves, I definitely want to beat elves consistently (60 to 70%). A fair estimation is that I will have to pack 4 to 8 "direct" answers (which may not be effective against other decks) main, plus an additional 4 to 6 post board.
Why so many? Because if I do not have any hate card in my opener, I know I have to either mull, or draw one in the next 3 turns.
Even worse, I can pack as many hate as I want, I sometimes will not be able to beat a turn 2 kill. and this is very frustrating.
By the way, does it remind you of anything? Yeah, I am thinking Affinity here, defining (some may say spoiling) a format in which coming to a tournament with less than 8 maindeck anti-artefact (purposedly for Affi) and 4 in the side was plain suicide.
Amiel Tenenbaum commented after Berlin that even though he was fully aware and prepared for the Elves invasion, he still went something like 2-2 against it. Because Elves just has draws that you cannot beat. And consistently.
Not to mention another fascinating experience which will apparently define Worlds extended format, the math-skills testing Elves on Elves matchup...
syle
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 13, 2008 - 11:41PM
#8
|
|
|
Great article. Coherent, logical and well written.
We shall see what the future holds.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 14, 2008 - 12:33AM
#9
|
|
|
Unlike the more narrow cards that answer affinity and dredge though, pyroclasm is going to be good against various other decks too. Firespout even more so, if you want an answer for the majority of games in which elves don't go off turn 2 (or as a backup to 4 pyroclasms). Rule of Law is good against storm combo decks also, and I remember getting beaten by Pyrostatic Pillar in round one of a PTQ last year where a red/green aggro deck stomped on my combo deck.
Word is that Thoughtseize is good against many decks, too. So are Chalice of the Void and Jitte, for that matter. I don't think running those kinds of cards is as big a "sacrifice" as loading up sideboard slots for Kataki & Hurkyl's Recall, or for Tormod's Crypt, and Leyline of the Void.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 14, 2008 - 1:30AM
#10
|
|
|
I posted this on the other thread, which I hope some members of R&D are paying at least some attention to, but I'd like to post it here as well.
I'm actually very, very glad to see an official confirmation that they are not only on top of the situation, but actively researching it as well (instead of waiting for the players to do all the work for them). It is also extremely nice to have them tackle the issue in a very timely fashion (mid-November, still two weeks before the next B&R change).
I'm also glad they understood that March was way too late to act. I'm not 100% sure I agree with "breaking schedule" to do what effectively amounts to an emergency ban (if one turns out to be necessary), but at least they are giving a lot of advance notice that this may be the case. The main reason I was so adamant about a decision in December was because March was too late and I didn't consider "emergency bans" as an option. The added flexibility makes missing a December decision much less serious.
All in all, huge props for that article.
Although my main fears have been quelled, I'm disappointed mostly with two thing about the article:
1. If after Worlds Elves needs to get toned down, even assuming they "rescue" the PTQ season with an "emergency ban", that still represents a very high-level event that was "wasted" in a "dead" format (the second, as PT Berlin then counts as wasted as well). If there are bans after Worlds, I would prefer to have had those bans before Worlds to see what the Pros do with the format (the one that would be used in the PTQ season!). This is much less worrying than having the "dead" format until March, but should still be a factor for consideration IMO.
2. They don't seem to be considering Logistic reasons at all (or if they are, they should have mentioned it).
Ivo.
|
|
|
