This thread is for discussion of this week's Top Decks article, which goes live Thursday morning on magicthegathering.com.
The more I see these winning decks the more I think that wasteland should be reprinted. Either that or a solid NONBASIC land destroyer that can't be countered is needed.
Yeah nice and diverse. All but one deck runs blue. All but one of those decks runs four delver and four snapcaster. Only Red green is really different from the others. Nearly all the blue decks ran vapor snag and ponder. More than half ran Mana Leak, and more than half ran all four.
So basicly you play blue, or you don't have much of a shot?
Yep, pretty much. Blue is more dominant now than it was in, for example, the Mercadian Masques-Invasion Standard era. That era had Counterspell, Fact or Fiction, Rising Waters, and later Opposition . . . and yet red-green midrange was considered the top or one of the top decks. Now? Now we've had a decade or more of color "balancing," and yet blue is riding roughshod over the format.
I think it's time for us to consistently and seriously demand much, much higher standards of design and development. We shouldn't allow Rosewater and Forsythe to keep shrugging their shoulders and saying "Well, we underestimated this. Oops!" What is R&D being paid for, exactly?
yeah... getting REAL sick of seeing blue, since you see it in almost every single deck. The majority of them run the same 16-18 cards (4 delver, 4 snapcaster, usually 2 phantasmal, 3-4 mana leak, and 3-4 vapor snag). There should really be some more anti-blue in standard, or SOMETHING to help balance out the sheer power that blue has. I agree with crimson, we should demand some higher standards of design. Love how they added alot of things to screw over the b/g pod deck that the FFL claims was dominating, but added almost nothing to the other colors to balance against blue (besides thrun... 1 card out of 2 blocks isnt enough for me)
I think one of the problems with Blue is that is covers way too much ground. And when they make new abilities, they seem to think, "Well, this works in blue" or "why not add it to blue." They've given blue the domain over too many strong abilities. Blue now has not only counter, bounce, and mill, it has field control, -x/-0, flicker, hexproof, copy creatures, aggro creatures, a few efficient big creatures, and even a few +P/+T which it should never had. And when they come up with something new, they give it to blue. Even though I've had fun with it, why did blue get Soulbond, when blue seems almost as selfish as black, but not nearly as spiritual. Blue got miracles over black, which it may be understandable for black not to have them (though again, they are more spiritual), but blue had less of a reason. Maybe they just need to have some design ideas where they don't think "oh, this is a magical ability, which color is all about Magic....blue!" I used to love playing blue, because it would be a challenge to play and/or you needed another color in the deck if you wanted to show any sort of aggression. Now, blue just does everything. And I think white could be closing in to that same situation, as exiling a creature is the same as destroying a creature, but it's just normally better. But white doesn't have the unblockables or hexproof yet.
Another problem we may be having in the current generation is that playing multicolor decks is too easy, with an excessive abundance of dual lands and mana fixers. This allows certain combinations to be played that should be otherwise tough to get together. So if you're not running blue, why not? You get some of the obviously strongest cards in the format if you do.
MaRo's tumblr today has given me another theory for why Blue is almost always the undeniably best color.
MaRo keeps saying that Red isn't allowed a long-term game, because it's the "short-sighted" color, and it's the color that seeks to win ASAP. Conversely, Blue is the long-term game color. Of course, unlike Red, where "good at short term" seems to lead them to think "has to have no late game to make up for it", being good at the long-term game without any way to GET there is bad, so Blue is allowed plenty of early game stall (and these days, thanks to Delver of Secrets and friends, even early game aggro).
So Red's not allowed any way to compensate for its weakness, but Blue's allowed plenty to compensate for its. Maybe Wizards needs to rethink this "some colors are short term, others are long term" policy. Make EVERY color able to play at all points of the game (albeit not with equal proficiency).
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.