Messages

[feel]

Second, as was said before, one tournament result, especially one that came so soon after the change, can hardly be considered solid proof for an unhealthy meta. I think the meta is quite healthy right now. Look at the Top 8 of the last larger Highlander tournament in Leipzig for example: http://www.mtgpulse.com/event/16039#224955

I think Leipzigs tournament is not representative for this meta, because it had only 31 players and therefore much less competiton.
Comparing a 31 player tournament to a tourament with 131 players is like comparing a tournament with 131 players to one with 500 players or an 8 player Tournament to a 31 player tournament. The difference is huge.

Due to the lowered competition also bad decks can reach the top 8 due to variance reasons. As an example Benjamin Jeschke reached the top 8 with UB control. I'm not totally sure but I think he never plays Highlander (-> doesn't know the meta) and just built a deck for this tournament.

Because of curve reasons Aggro decks need to play a low curve (many one and two drops). If one decides to build an HL aggro deck from scratch you will quickly notice that there are not that many quality cmc1 creatures around. Because of the spoils mulligan fixing the mana problems 5c (and 4c aggro as well) were taking up a very big share of the Aggro decks making other multicolor aggro decks more of a budget choice. The extent in which this happened is of course debatable. Please note that RDW has been and still is a T1 deck because the reach (burn) of the deck is so plentiful and there are also quite a few hoser cards (PoP, Moon, Ankh etc.).

I disagree on that. It's absolutely not true that decks with fewer colors have been only a budget choice. You can see that WW and RDW reached GP XI top 8, which means that it was fairly competitive as well. And there have also been enough 3 colored decks, which Vazdrus table shows.
I also think that there are enough quality CC1 creatures. But sure, it's your opinion and an opinion is never wrong.

To avoid mana problems the 4c decks now need to put a bigger focus on fixing it and play a slower Midrange game to avoid having uncastable cards in hand that need be played early like Wild Nacatl. How has the use of Wild Nacatl changed in those decks. Nacatl is the best Aggro creature printed so far in the history of magic. However the 4C Blood decks of GP 13 do not play it. They can not support the colore requirements of the card that early in the games where Nacatl is best and instead decided to build a slower Midrange deck. The Naya Zoo deck (which does not have to support black) plays the Nacatl. With the spoils mulligan rules you would also have to justify why to not just play a 4c Blood Aggro list like Maqi (3rd place Gp 12) or even a 5c Aggro list. Please note I do not feel the 5c Aggro was too strong but rather limited deck building choices in the Aggro shard too much while the spoils mulligan pushed HL gameplay twoards fast-paced aggro centric game play.

The key word is that you feel, that the spoils mulligan took freedom in deck building. I feel the opposite. Whenever I build a deck today I'm noticing that its impossible to play too many high-CC or too many low-CC cards. Now it seems to be that the backbone of many more decks it the CC4 slot. You can also see this behaviour in the total played cards analysis I linked in my first post in this thread.

E.g. it's really hard to play the 6-mana Elspeth now in a deck, while this was no problem then ago. The mana curve today needs to be much more standardized (centered around CC3 and CC4) than with spoils mulligan, which absolutely takes away deck construction freedom. The spoils mulligan could be and was used in deck construction to tickle more power out of your deck, which especially ramp decks and control decks could abuse. Note that also the appearance of oath reduced quite a lot.
I still think the things that happend with spoil mulligans have been far away from being unfair. What's happening in standard and modern is much stronger.

What I'm saying is: We can't take it as the fact whether the new mulligan takes or gives freedoms, since it's determined how people feel with it.

I also feel that the 4c Blood Midrange deck is slow enough to have problems against Staxx and even slower controlish decks. Especially because the free-mull will make it so, that the midrange decks can not curve out as nicely as before. This of course will have to be seen. I actually will play a BO5 with my Staxx deck against Hitman (who placed second in the Gp 13) with 4C Blood for the ladder tournament. Feel free to participate in those leagues in the future, they are a lot of fun. Please also note that Hitman did not have good 4-0 finishes in his local "FNM" tournaments with 4C Blood so the deck seems to be in line. It just was an often played and copied deck in GP 13, because people made conservative deck choices because of the mulligan change 3 months before. The three trials before GP 13 on site in Frankfurt were won by RDW, Staxx and a midrangey Multicolor deck I think.

Yes, GP XIII might be a shitty statistics sample. The next GP will show.

[UB Reanimator is an A+B Combo Deck]

UB Reanimator is an A+B Combo Deck :

...

I hope you will point out in the next post how Signets + Wildfire are a combo. I'll ignore this reanimator topic from now on.

Free-Mull

1)
Also, the main reason the mulligan was changed to the free-mull was to diminish the amount of games with perfect curves making the construction of a good mana curve in your deck more important and to slow down the games a little bit.

For this you  have to acutally play since deck lists will not be a good metric. I feel this goal has been achieved.

2)
A secondary reason was to stop the 5c Aggro decks.

   

	GP XIII	GP XIII	GP XIII	GP XII	GP XII	GP XII
ARCHETYPE	Appearance	TOP 8	TOP 16	Appearance	TOP 8	TOP 16
5C-Aggro				8	1	1

I personally hate the first goal, because it makes games less interesting and less fun. Now games will be lot because a player missed his critical two drop, although he plays 15 of them.. so we can play only deck with no crucial slots and this could be the exact reason why UR and Greed Aggro are so strong.

The appearance of 5C Aggro - Of course.. the almight 5 Color aggro... What's wrong with this Archetype?
8 Decks in 101 players is not too much and 1 of them making top 8 and top 16 is just an average value - it indicates that this deck has perfect average strength. So why do you want to nerf it? And why do you consider 4 Color Greed decks less problematic than on 5 color? It loses to the same things and has the same strenghs. But this time 4 Color seems to be a clear deck to beat. How many decks with Christian Hauck's exact 4C blood list participated and how many reached the Top 2?
You're not hating BUG Oath even though Jonny Al-Saidi won the GP with it. We could also randomly hate Scapeshift. It's not a problem for the format at all, but neither was 5-Color. So yeah, let's just hate Scapeshift!

edit: By the way - I think the statistics you provided on the 5-Color aggro appearance would also be interesting for other Archetypes. Would it be possible to create it?

[officially]

You also still have not acknowlegded  that Gunnar played a combo not a control deck.

Zombify + Fattie in Graveyard is not combo. Neither is Llanowar Elf + Natural Order..

If you only had mislabeled a deck that would be no problem. But you have deliberatedly made the free-mull tournament look bad with your "statistics".

Well, according to my definition Naya is such a Greedy problem deck that everyone complained about. And no, I did not fake anything to make the meta look bad. If the pure statistics gives you the impression that it is bad then this might be the case! The first and second place even played the exact same deck! Yay! Netdecks in highlander!
I presented the meta and categorized the decks accoring to my interpretation. Yes, decks that just picks the best aggro or midrange decks of X colors and play almost only non-basics are the same category. Midrange decks are usually also aggro decks, they just abuse their acceleration more (2nd round smiter or something). I also categorized Patrick Richters BUGw Aggro as such a deck in GP XI.

People also argued that I put MonoR and MonoW into one category. The same with UW and UR, where the strategy is much more distinct - one plays combos like Sword Foundry and the other one tries to apply preasure with burn.
I just grouped decks that have things in common. I never said that they have the same archetype!
However I think it's pretty arbitrary that you complain about badly categorized decks in the new GP and not in the old ones.

I picked the 3 most representative tournaments that have been. And the Hanau GPs are the biggest one by far! You think random FNMs would be more representative?
By still - how do you justify that the effect that the free mulligan should bring is realized? Can you support it with facts?

Of course we could wait for the next GP. Maybe it will look better.


----------

Now I want to talk about my personal impression as a player - the council officially exists to keep the format as healthy as possible. In my eyes that failed. I supported my impression already with facts. If the meta would have improved, then I would like the new mulligan. But it ceases the meta PLUS it makes the games more luck dependend to opening hands.

Mana curve of Dethloff Zoo:
24 25 9 8 2 (2.1 Avg)
(Ghor-Clan is no 4 drop)

Mana curve of the 4cBlood Midrange:
12 20 15 13 4 (2.6 Avg.)

Mana curve of the RDW from 2 years ago (K. Lorenz):
18 22 18 6 (2.1 Avg.)
Fireblast as 0, SoM Dragon as 4)

Mana curve of WW from 2 years ago (Niznansky):
17 22 12 9 (Avg. 2.2)
(Dismember as 1, Procession as 3)

I did not check for Cards with X costs and did not check for further cards that are in "wrong spot" of the mana curve. I got the values from the mtgpulse  function. Jack, You might do the stuff you ask people to do yourself first before you make shit up next time. It might be less embarassing  

This Naya is of course a midrange deck. It plays 5 mana donks + aether vial and the high mana slots consists of 9 4-drops and 2 5-drops. Please compare the mana curve of Mono-R or Mono-W with this Naya. You can observe a clear difference.
Who ever said that midrange decks can't play watchwolfes or kird apes?

However, if you call this Reanimator deck a control deck or not doesn't change anything in the conclusion.

So you're basically saying that my statistics is wrong because rated Naya as Midrange? Yes, I don't remember exactly, but I think I named it midrange in the very first version of that post. However, I changed it quickly to 'Greedy goodstuff' and I did that definitely before you mentioned it (I'm sure there are logs in case of doubt).
So again: You're saying that my statistics is wrong because of something that I don't say?

I made a statistic and you're onlyarguement is 'you categorized two decks incorrectly?'. Well, I said it before - my statistics looks of the reason why the free mulligan was introduces is now realized. The reason was multicolor Goodstuff decks. Maybe you don't need to call Naya Midrange, but in my opinion Naya fulfills the definition of these problem decks. It's also exactly playing 3 basics (one of each color). I call it greedy.

when jan dethlofss facetime deck is a midrange deck, then my name is jon finkel. everything that relies quite heavily on 1 OR 2 drops is an aggro deck, midrange relies on 3 and 4 drops etc.

Is this the kind of argueing style that we're having here? Really? Look at the deck, he plays more than enough 3-,4- and even 5-drops! But sure, if you want to call it pure aggro instead.. just exchange 'Greedy midrange' with 'Greedy goodstuff' and the rest of my statistics stay the same.
By the way: I explored that my post didn't even call Naya a midrange deck.. it called it a goodstuff deck. Any doubts on that?

.. that's in strategies:
2 Mono-Colored Decks
3 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored control
1 Greedy Combodeck

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
5 (!)

A mono colored deck is not a strategy at first but just ... a mono colored deck.
And the difference between your "greedy" control deck and your two colored control deck is not a strategical one. Adding one or more colors to a deck doesn`t automatically mean a strategical shift.
All in all your strategy-sheme is totally random and misguiding. It`s a foolish try to glorify the pre-free-mulligan era.

Yes, I agree on that that Mono-R and Mono-W are completely different strategies. So I should change the strategy count from 5 to 6.

----------------------

In general the statistics show that the 'Greedy goodstuff' decks didn't reduce as a deck to beat.. Wasn't this the reason why people were argueing for the new mulligan?

I picked the last three Grand Prixes.. And the hanau grand prixes just are the biggest tournaments in the format. Feel free to do this kind of analysis for other tournaments. At least I evaluated something instead of using my format impressions as an argument.
It is evident that every mainstream format defines itself over big tournaments. That's where netdecks are born and the meta is set up. That is because a deck needs to be highly competitive to reach the top 8 in a tournament with 130 other players.

This Naya is of course a midrange deck. It plays 5 mana donks + aether vial and the high mana slots consists of 9 4-drops and 2 5-drops. Please compare the mana curve of Mono-R or Mono-W with this Naya. You can observe a clear difference.
Who ever said that midrange decks can't play watchwolfes or kird apes?

Yes, you could argue that UB is a combo control deck. But its definitely not a pure combo deck since a combo is usually ending the game, where reanimator is playing a usual game where it wants to stabilize.. it just tries to bypass the high mana cost of its creatures.
If you call Reanimator a combo deck, then you should also call BUG oath a combo deck, since the plan 'bypassing the casting cost' is exactly the same.

However, if you call this Reanimator deck a control deck or not doesn't change anything in the conclusion.

A comparison of the meta games of the Grand Prixes in Hanau:

Please note, that I call every deck with at least 3 colors and less than 10 basics 'greedy'.


With Spoils:

GP XI - 28th December 2012

1 Tendrils Oath
1 BUGw Aggro
1 RDW
1 WW
1 BUG Oath
1 RBGW Goodstuff
1 Jund
1 Ur-Control

.. that's in strategies:
1 Mono-Red
1 Mono-White
3 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored control
1 Greedy Combodeck

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
6 (!!)

Total card statistics

Different cards total:
439

The most healthy meta, that i've ever seen in my life.


GP XII - 20th April 2013

1 BUGw Oath
1 GB Elves
1 4 Color Goodstuff (No Blue)
2 4 Color Goodstuff (No Red)
1 UR Control
1 5 Color Aggro
1 UW Control

.. that's in strategies:
1 Two-colored Midrange
4 Greedy Goodstuff
1 Greedy Control
1 Two-colored ControlAggro
1 Two-colored Control

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
5

Total card statistics

Different cards total:
359


With Free mulligans:

GP XIII - 29th December 2013

3 Greedy 4 Color Midrange (No Blue)
1 Greedy Naya
1 Greedy Jund
2 UR Control
1 UB Reanimator

.. that's in strategies:
5 Greedy Goodstuff
2 Two-colored Control
1 Two-colored Combo Control

Decks with low non-basics count: 3
Greedy Decks with high non-basics count: 5

Different Strategies:
3

Total card statistics

Different cards total:
347


Conclusion:

The fact that the majority of the succeeding decks are 'Greedy Goodstuff' Decks after the spoils mulligan clearly shows that the 'Free Mulligan' failed to solve the the problem why it was even proposed - to reduce the amount of 'Greedy Goodstuff' decks!

In fact, the meta with spoils had even less 'Greedy Goodstuff' decks. With 'Spoil mulligans' it was even possible to have success with a tribal and Mono-Colored decks, while the 'Free mulligan' we have with 'Greedy Goodstuff' and 'UR Control' two dominant strategies.

The fact that the total amount of different cards reduced even though many playable cards have been printed in the last editions also supports, that the meta is reducing.
Note, that red (and partly black) was really underrepresented in the GP XII, which usually reduces the amount of different played cards (of course the played cards reduce, if you look at only 3.8 colors instead of 5).
Even though is underrepresentation doesn't occure in GP XIII the amount of different played card is still lower.

Indepent if I like the new 'Free mulligan' or not - it degenerates the vivid meta the Highlander once had.


edit: Devided Mono-R and Mono-W into seperate strategy, moved Reanimator to another strategy.
edit: Seperated UR and UW.

A > B >>>>>> C

Sorry, but road to paris is the number one bug in traditional magic.. first you got only lands, then you got no lands, then you got no chance.