Bannings II / 2012, October 15th

[coldcrow]

Dreamer raises very valid points.

The problems are never the tutors, they are the problem-cards by themselves.
If you ban the tutors you end up in an EVEN MORE goodstuff or linear oriented meta, and by definition, its predators. Why? Because you take away tools to reduce variance. If you do the better single cards, or a critical mass of blowout cards are going to define decks. An example could be some form of Wildfire U/R/w control.

Imho there should be a clear decision of the council to embrace the formats inherit variance and unban accordingly, I wouldn't be even shy of unbanning sacred cows like mystical or vampiric. Everything is worth testing except for Power 9 + fast mana with negligible drawbacks.

There are problems if you start to ban cards which are "just-too-good".
a) Has the meta really adjusted to the offenders (playing U/R/x control vs. goodstuff?)
b) Facing a hateful meta the deck still thrives, so ban all the tutors (pod, survival, demonic, worldly, enlight. etc.) variance will rise due to not being able to tutor as efficiently, so blowouts will happen even more, some decks will cease to exist (pattern)
c) Ban the blowout cards (drain, btb, tabernacle etc.) you end up with the next set of too-good cards (too efficient creatures, next set of tutors).

This is , of course, not very accurate but imho in a nutshell you cannot balance a singleton format, except very clear "broken" cards (lotus, ancestral, time walk).

[MMD]

So, we have two different format evaluations regarding the role of the Tier 1 tutors and understanding how to play (against) a Goodstuff deck. I think both side have good arguments and none of us is totally wrong or right.

YES, I agree that Goodstuff's basic/main strategy is playing the best cards available and overpower the opponent's cards BUT without the Tier 1 tutors Goodstuff will loose more often to a hate or combo card which bypasses the higher powerlevel of the goodstuff deck. Without the tutors, Goodstuff needs to decide about a new strategy not to loose against this by adding either speed or control cards OR just accepts the increased risk loosing on the spot if the opponent manages to drop the "anti goodstuff" or combo card. Just replacing the tutors with Vindicate like effects is just one part of the tutor application and will not solve the problem for Goodstuff as they will not help him against a lot of (semi-) combo cards (e.g. Scapeshift, Natural Order...) and even more important, they cannot be used to "ask questions". Just think about an empty board/hand in the mid/late game...

All in all I think that the current single card banned list is quite OK (just Mana Drain, Eladamri´s Call and Umezawa's Jitte should be on the Watchlist IMO), so I am quite satisfied with the banning policy of the council in general. Banning Tier 1 tutors may or may not hurt Goodstuff more than other decks – may or may not increase/reduce deck diversity. To be honest I am not 100% sure but this is also not the main issue in HL. I think I have subconsciously abused this discussion as the Council seems uninterested to take actions regarding the main issue in HL. My complaint is neither the tutors nor the creatures, it's the mana base! The current rock solid 3-4 coloured mana base is what pushes Goodstuff over the edge. It really surprises me that so many people are eager to discuss single cards but do not see the mana base as the bigger problem of the format.

I will not stop promoting the discussion about a modification of the mana base in Highlander. As long as HL allows 10 duals + 10 fetchies (+ Spoils mulligan) all decks will be inferior to the Goodstuff strategy.
Here's the discussion about this topic: http://www.magicplayer.org/forum/index.php?topic=583.30, just for those which are lost in the bad structure of this forum.

I would even go further and say that even the mana base is still not the biggest problem. HL has not a card based problem it is the activity of the community itself but this does not belong to this topic as there is already a topic for this here: http://www.magicplayer.org/forum/index.php?topic=819.0 as well.

[Dreamer]

So, we have two different format evaluations regarding the role of the Tier 1 tutors and understanding how to play (against) a Goodstuff deck. I think both side have good arguments and none of us is totally wrong or right.

YES, I agree that Goodstuff's basic/main strategy is playing the best cards available and overpower the opponent's cards BUT without the Tier 1 tutors Goodstuff will loose more often to a hate or combo card which bypasses the higher powerlevel of the goodstuff deck. Without the tutors, Goodstuff needs to decide about a new strategy not to loose against this by adding either speed or control cards OR just accepts the increased risk loosing on the spot if the opponent manages to drop the "anti goodstuff" or combo card. Just replacing the tutors with Vindicate like effects is just one part of the tutor application and will not solve the problem for Goodstuff as they will not help him against a lot of (semi-) combo cards (e.g. Scapeshift, Natural Order...) and even more important, they cannot be used to "ask questions". Just think about an empty board/hand in the mid/late game...

Those combo decks are a lot slower than any viable current ones. Not really combo ones in the first place. The questions may be harder to answer, but they'll also be asked far more rarely if the tutors end up being bad. Yeah, there may be a random loss here and there to "Didn't have a tutor for answer in hand", but there will be far more of "Was just outclassed and outsped because I didn't have any tutors to ask questions with".

Also, there is no such thing as "Goodstuff hate". Goodstuff decks are just that - piles of cards that are really really good on their own, no synergy requirements or hoops to jump through required. There is typically a very loose plan consisting of "aggro or midrange?" and that is it. There is no vector other than the mana base to attack them at to "hate them out".
Trouble is, the current mana base hate is strewn out every which way, generally a ridiculously crappy draw - especially without fast tutors to get them in time. Furthermore, the current manabases largely laugh at hate. They just don't care. Again, banning the tutors just results in Goodstuff getting better and the anti-goodstuff things becoming even more miserable. At least nowadays you can fight them with synergy and having a plan - it's not better, but it's competitive.

To be honest I am not 100% sure but this is also not the main issue in HL. My complaint is neither the tutors nor the creatures, it's the mana base! The current rock solid 3-4 coloured mana base is what pushes Goodstuff over the edge. It really surprises me that so many people are eager to discuss single cards but do not see the mana base as the bigger problem of the format.

There has been a consistent message throughout this thread by me and others that Goodstuff derives it's power not from the tutors (the very notion itself is somewhat absurd because goodstuff typically runs Worldy, Eladamri, Natural Order and, if on black, Demonic. Not anywhere near enough to base a strategy on) but from the extreme consistency and hate-resiliency of the mana base. It is the thing that allows the goodstuff decks to pick and choose the best of the best from four colours while remaining ridiculously good at curving out smoothly.

[LasH]

The problems are never the tutors, they are the problem-cards by themselves.

Not 100% true exspecially not in a singleton. Tutors can make "innocent" cards to a problem (for example mystical would pump the miracle theme). If you have the ability to abuse tutor's in a standard format you get a silverbullet decklist: Examples: https://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=20264 or http://www.mercadia.de/home/page.php?site=magic/deck2/deck&id=185

Tutor's alow to ONLY play the best cards at 1 off. If you dont have tutor's you are forced to play specific cards more often (in highlander it means u have to play more artifact hate instead of just harmonic sliver).

Cutting ONLY the cheap tutor's will result in diversity as MMD alrdy pointed out pretty well. Thats the right direction.

Also, there is no such thing as "Goodstuff hate". Goodstuff decks are just that - piles of cards that are really really good on their own, no synergy requirements or hoops to jump through required. There is typically a very loose plan consisting of "aggro or midrange?" and that is it. There is no vector other than the mana base to attack them at to "hate them out".

There is goodstuff hate. Alot to be honest. But these cards are hard to bring into game or you have to build around them which makes your deck weak (b2b, humility, PoP for example). Futhermore these cards are real 1 off's while goodstuff has many options in each slot (o-ring, vindicate, maelstrom pulse, detention sphere). Would be a different story if you could play 4 copies of b2b or if you would have 3 cheap tutor's to cheat b2b into play.

[pyyhttu]

I think I have subconsciously abused this discussion as the Council seems uninterested to take actions regarding the main issue in HL.

//Offtopic:

Just wanted to jump in and say: not true. (We're just exceptionally patient, just look at long time watchlist queen Stoneforge Mystic)

And rest assured: I follow every comment through RSS and make notes to form pros and cons of future scenarios. There's actually so much material that probably no additional banning/unbanning clauses need to be thrown in as you guys have pretty much provided it all already.

\\Offtopic

Now, if we just could get data to mtgpulse to see how dominant combo just is currently...

[GoblinPiledriver]

What makes the Power 9 and other cards banworthy? It's the fact that they are undercosted, in comparison to other cards. Why are the cards which I want to be banned so strong and omnipresent, because they are undercosted.

Banned Cards:
Black Lotus  --      3 too less (compared to Pentad Prism)
Time Walk    --     2U too less (compared to Time Warp)
Ancestral Vision -- 2U too less (compared to Concentrate)
All 5 Mox'es  --     2 too less (compared to Signets)
Sol Ring      --     3 too less (compared to Everflowing Chalice/ Ur-Golem's Eye)
Balance       --    1W too less (compared to Cataclysm)
Mana Crypt    --    2-3 too less (compared to Everflowing Chalice/ Ur-Golem's Eye)
Mind Twist    --     B too less (compared to Mind Shatter)
Tinker        --     xU too less (compared to Reshape)


GW+X-Staples:
Stoneforge Mystic        -->  2 too less (compared to Taj-Nar Swordsmith/ Godo, Bandit Warlord)
Tarmogoyf                -->  G too less (as it was primary planned by Wizards)
Knight of the Reliquary  -->  2 too less (compared to Wolfir Silverheart)
Worldly Tutor:           -->  2 too less (compared to Summoner's Pact)
Mystical Tutor:          -->  2 too less (compared to Long-Term Plans)
Enlighted Tutor:         -->  2 too less (compared to Idyllic Tutor)
Green Sun's Zenith:      -->  G too less (compared to Chord of Calling)
Eladamri's Call:         -->  2 too less (compared to Summoner's Pact)
Demonic Tutor:           --> 1B too less (compared to Diablic Tutor)
Natural order            -->  1 too less (compared to Dramatic Entrance/ 0,5 Tooth and Nail)

Of course you will think nobody plays Dramatic Entrance, Long-Term Plans or Taj-Nar Swordsmith. But that is the mana cost Wizards think is a fair one.


I ask again, is it good for a format when every deck plays the same cards, if they are on color? In my Grixis-Staxx I didn't played Lightning Bolt and Brainstorm, because I thought they would not fit in the deck. Maybe this was wrong.
Nearly every deck plays this GW staples, and very much decks are GW+x. So they are playing with these cards against these cards. So they are dominating the format. This is the new diversity(2 years old,but I didn't see it before) between Naya, Bant, Pattern-Rector and 4-5C.decks. Other decks appear seldom, because they get beaten by such cards with overprower and high consistency. When you say Tutors can be replaced by hate cards such as Oblivion Ring or Vindicate, when I say it's fine. At least they couldn't attack or build up the final combo.
If the GW+X decks get weaker all the underplayed decks with other strategy's and other colors and cards will appear more often. And that is what I call diversity.



Knight of the Reliquary:
The Knight starts usually as a 4/4, can grow easily +2/+2 every turn. often he is the biggest creature on the board. It's quick 8/8 like Wolfir Silverheart which cost 3GG. By the way it searches Wasteland, Maze of Ith, Volrath's Stronghold, Karakas and every needed Manland. Knight is a combination of Terravore/Splinterfright(which doesn't start as 0/0) and makes every turn a Crop Rotation(just like Jace TMS makes every turn a Brainstorm). The Knight fixes perfect all needed mana. And all this for 3 Mana. That's what I call an overpowered card.


Natural Order:
You only not loose against Natural Order when you shot Primeval Titan (or Progenitus) immediatly, if you couldn't handle Primeval Titan when you face a maximum amount of utility-lands and man-lands. Primeval Titan is a very good card for 6 mana, but for 4 mana he is just too strong. Natural Order and Primeval Titan get even played in decks where Primeval Titan alone wouldn't get played and where he is the most expensive card. This shows how overpowered Natural Order is.(Just like Stoneforge Mystic and Batterskull)


Tarmogoyf:
You say it's only a good Vannila creature. Yeah sure it doesn't have a true ability. But does he need a ability if he is just too big and destroys other creatures on his own, and kills the opponent quick. Because of creatures like Tarmogoyf green is played so much and creature in other colors are played so less .Even in Legacy this creature is played far too often, and Legacy would be more diverse if he would get banned.

[LasH]

This is the best post so far in this thread. GW Piledriver. Thats exactly the problem of these cards and the format.

[Kristian]

Snipped for simplicity.

I pretty much agree with all of it. However, one point that could be raised is that just because Wizards deem a mana cost "fair" for an effect, does not make it so. Besides, cards are balanced to other formats, not german highlander.

Furthermore, even though GWx would lose alot of tutors provided all cards listed there was banned, it's not certain that it would help. The bannings would also hurt other decks and it might be costing them more competitiveness and thus the goodstuff/aggro decks could benefit from it. I played several of the cards listed in control shells in order to acquire some of the consistency I saw in the aggro decks.

[Tiggupiru]

Ignoring the fear that I sound like a broken record, I much rather see the fetchlands go than these ~10 non-land cards. If the fetches are gone, you need to run these cards in a GW deck with a very slight splash possibly and that is a pretty big incentive to switch colors completely. They would still remain to be good cards, but running them would expose you to the inherited weaknesses green and white cards have. Most notable Achilles' heel to GW are blue cards and blue control decks are big winners if fetches go.

I totally agree with Piledriver when he say it's not good for the format if everyone runs the same cards given they are on the color, but that will happen eventually again if these cards are banned. People will eventually figure out what's good after the bans and after a while the hive mind settles for what the optimal build is. It might not be GWx, but that really doesn't matter as the underlying problem is still well and truly alive. Then we are faced with the same situation and are forced to ban more cards to keep the same cards appearing in all of the decks and the loop continues. The only way this can be prevented in the long term is to make decks to stick to an archetype. I think this happens with the fetchland ban. You can still run the best cards your two colors offer as the new manabase will allow that, but two-colored goodstuff is considerably less scary than four-colored one.

[Dreamer]

What makes the Power 9 and other cards banworthy? It's the fact that they are undercosted, in comparison to other cards. Why are the cards which I want to be banned so strong and omnipresent, because they are undercosted.

The banned cards are banned because they are ludicrously powerful. Ancestral Recall would be banned even if other card draw did not exist simply because it is retardedly strong.

GW+X-Staples:
Stoneforge Mystic        -->  2 too less (compared to Taj-Nar Swordsmith/ Godo, Bandit Warlord)
Examples from before the rise in creature power
Tarmogoyf                -->  G too less (as it was primary planned by Wizards)
Would probably be ok at 1GG. Still just a dumb beater that isn't anything truly special

Knight of the Reliquary  -->  2 too less (compared to Wolfir Silverheart)
Worldly Tutor:           -->  2 too less (compared to Summoner's Pact)
Completely different cards with completely different purposes. Examples invalid.

Mystical Tutor:          -->  2 too less (compared to Long-Term Plans)
Enlighted Tutor:         -->  2 too less (compared to Idyllic Tutor)
Comparisons to a ludicrously unplayable card and another that is completely different on top of being on the worse side of the border of playability.

Green Sun's Zenith:      -->  G too less (compared to Chord of Calling)
Chord of Calling is an instant and has Convoke, both of which are huge. GSZ is quite appropriately costed.
Eladamri's Call:         -->  2 too less (compared to Summoner's Pact)
Different cards with completely different purposes. Eladamri is a great defensive card, decent for combo. Pact is pretty strictly a combo card where the cost is rarely paid at all.
Demonic Tutor:           --> 1B too less (compared to Diablic Tutor)
Comparison to an unplayable.
Natural order            -->  1 too less (compared to Dramatic Entrance/ 0,5 Tooth and Nail)
Comparisons to an unplayable and a card with different function that is barely played, if at all.

Of course you will think nobody plays Dramatic Entrance, Long-Term Plans or Taj-Nar Swordsmith. But that is the mana cost Wizards think is a fair one.

What Wizards thinks is a "fair" cost is irrelevant. Their "fair" cost for unrestricted search-to-hand is unplayable. They think Mana Leak is too strong of a card (and not the totally out-of-pie blue atrocities that were in the format simultaneously). That is to say, they are not anywhere near inerrant and grossly wrong on many points. Furthermore, they print cards with Standard in mind, not a 100 card singleton format played according to the normal rules for the game.

What matters is the cards' impact on the format.

I ask again, is it good for a format when every deck plays the same cards, if they are on color? In my Grixis-Staxx I didn't played Lightning Bolt and Brainstorm, because I thought they would not fit in the deck. Maybe this was wrong.
Nearly every deck plays this GW staples, and very much decks are GW+x. So they are playing with these cards against these cards. So they are dominating the format.

Colour staples are a perfectly fine thing. Lightning Bolt exists. Birds of Paradise and Noble Hierarch exist. Preordain exists. There cards allow a certain baseline to form, which in turn allows for a metagame in the first place.

This is the new diversity(2 years old,but I didn't see it before) between Naya, Bant, Pattern-Rector and 4-5C.decks. Other decks appear seldom, because they get beaten by such cards with overprower and high consistency. When you say Tutors can be replaced by hate cards such as Oblivion Ring or Vindicate, when I say it's fine. At least they couldn't attack or build up the final combo.
If the GW+X decks get weaker all the underplayed decks with other strategy's and other colors and cards will appear more often. And that is what I call diversity.

Pattern isn't a top deck at the moment. It is playable, but that is it. There are better cards than some others. Problem is you can play them all in the same deck. Ban some, Goodstuff just picks up the next best cards and the hilarity continues, only you don't have Pattern and some other decks anymore. For example, the Goyf ban hurts GWx Goodstuff the least. They shrug and play something else. RUG aggro, UG/UGb Tempo? Much less choice on what to play. Those already underplayed archetypes would suffer far more than GWx Goodstuff.

Banning Demonic would kill Black in the format. The only other card that is sufficiently interesting for non-Pattern strategies (which play black for Nantuko Husks) is Volrath's Stringhold, and that card alone does not carry a colour.

Tarmogoyf:
You say it's only a good Vannila creature. Yeah sure it doesn't have a true ability. But does he need a ability if he is just too big and destroys other creatures on his own, and kills the opponent quick. Because of creatures like Tarmogoyf green is played so much and creature in other colors are played so less .Even in Legacy this creature is played far too often, and Legacy would be more diverse if he would get banned.

There used to be a time when you unconditionally splashed for Goyf, and woe if you played green without it. That time is long gone. Legacy has a bunch of green creature-heavy decks that don't play Goyf because he just doesn't cut it for their plans. The only decks that still play Goyf are blue-based disruption decks that need efficient, easy to cast beaters. Goyf fits the bill so it gets used, like any card ever.


@Tiggupiru

[MMD]

Banning Demonic would kill Black in the format. The only other card that is sufficiently interesting for non-Pattern strategies (which play black for Nantuko Husks) is Volrath's Stringhold, and that card alone does not carry a colour.

Not true. There will be enough competitive cards in black left. The problem black has is that most of the cards are either removal, disruption or tutors, so nothing to build a deck around. Black is and will be an important secondary/splash colour with or without Demonic Tutor. But yes, you will take away the strongest card from probably the weakest colour.

By the way, I can accept a discussion about "Stoneforge Tutor" but I think discussing about a ban of the other creatures mentioned is nonsense.

Where can I pay for the Fetchland ban?

[delta_strike]

To ban fetch lands is crazy talk. I think it will ruin the format completely. I dont see the big problem whit goodstuff. But i will certainly play a different format if fetch lands should get the hammer.
And all the talk about goodstuff being the one to beat I dont really see it. Because the last 5 tournament i have been to it has been in the top 8 but it didten win any tournaments.

but that's just my opinion

[MMD]

To ban fetch lands is crazy talk. I think it will ruin the format completely. I dont see the big problem whit goodstuff. But i will certainly play a different format if fetch lands should get the hammer.
And all the talk about goodstuff being the one to beat I dont really see it.

I really hoped for a more qualified and discussable input than that...

[pyyhttu]

Where can I pay for the Fetchland ban?

We threw together a 5€ test tournament at Helsinki on 17.11. where fetches are banned, another on 1.12 or 2.12. Just to get grasp if the idea is worth pursuing. We'll report back how it was.

[MMD]

Where can I pay for the Fetchland ban?

We threw together a 5€ test tournament at Helsinki on 17.11. where fetches are banned, another on 1.12 or 2.12. Just to get grasp if the idea is worth pursuing. We'll report back how it was.

+10

2-3 colour mana bases are no problem even without fetchlands but I really see Back to Basics & friends becoming too strong and fun killing. Perhaps they have to go, then...