Magic-League.com Forum Index Magic-League.com
Forums of Magic-League: Free Online tcg playing; casual or tournament play.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Should we unban nonbasics from 2-3-7 Extended?


Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Casual or Other Decks

What kinds of lands should be allowed?
Basic Lands Only! (The default)
57%
 57%  [ 15 ]
Nonbasics and Basics of COURSE!
42%
 42%  [ 11 ]
Total Votes : 26

Author Message
six
Level 3 Judge


Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 97

PostPosted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:53 pm    Post subject: Should we unban nonbasics from 2-3-7 Extended? Reply with quote

There has been a lot of discussion, nay, complaining about the lack of nonbasics allowed in 2-3-7 Extended, my pet format. I did not create the format nor did I set the rule for only basics, but people continue to ask me why there are no nonbasics allowed. My best guess is due to Wasteland, Strip Mine, City of Traitors, Crystal Vein and most notably Ancient Tomb, with a nod to the Urza's uberlands as well. Now, I've given it a lot of thought and personally I see no reason to unban nonbasics, but I'd like to see what people think and, for those who disagree, WHY we should unban them.

For examples, here are the arguments I have seen so far:

1) No nonbasics means that monocolor aggro is too good!
--> umm, monocolor aggro wins sometimes, sure

2) Nonbasics allow for better manabases for tricolor decks
--> This is true, but tricolor decks have been successful such as SaTiVa's bant deck, so it's hardly a rule.

3) The format sucks without them!
--> Most players saying this have yet to try the format and instead like to theorycraft about it, saying things that may or may not be true but they have no evidence to back it up. To you I say I don't care what format you want to play so stop hating on ours.

I just wanted to run through the 3 basic arguments and my current responses to them, but I am open to ideas and ready to discuss it.

Note: THE OUTCOME OF THIS POLL WILL NOT AFFECT WEDNESDAY'S 2-3-7 Extended Trial! Do NOT rework your decks!
Back to top
Acid_Christ



Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Posts: 799

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:00 am    Post subject: Re: Should we unban nonbasics from 2-3-7 Extended? Reply with quote

six wrote:

1) No nonbasics means that monocolor aggro is too good!
--> Maybe you should play the format before making assumptions.

2) Nonbasics allow for better manabases for tricolor decks
--> Learn to play with what you have. It makes the format interesting this way. And makes you have to think.

3) The format sucks without them!
--> /#care

Back to top
Lunari_
Level 3 Judge


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 82

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Wasteland, Strip Mine, City of Traitors, Crystal Vein and most notably Ancient Tomb"

Six, you do realize that NONE of the above are legal in Extended, right?

I don't think that banning nonbasic lands makes 3-color decks unplayable, but in my opinion there really isn't any reason to ban them. All it does is shut down certain types of decks almost completely (mainly 2-color decks that don't play green or for some reason don't want to play Rampant Growth -effects and can't afford playing artifact fixers). 12 Swamp 12 Plains does not a good mana base make.

"OH OH OH I have this awesome deck idea! Wait, I can't make the mana work" shouldn't happen in a format meant for FUN. It's quite disappointing to realize that your idea can't be made to work just because some donkey lost to Riptide Lab in a PTQ final and wants to go on a crusade to remove all the impure lands from the game when he can't even accept that he would've won if he hadn't misplayed. Don't try to misunderstand me on purpose here, of course some things should never work ("I want to play turn 2 tidehollow strix and turn 3 woolly thoctar every game, omg why doesn't this work?!") but it happens way more often than it should for a fun format.

Instead of asking "Why should we unban them?", you should be asking "Why the hell are they banned?".

Banning ALL nonbasics because of a couple exceptions, especially when they aren't even in the format is like banning all artifacts because Black Lotus is too good.


Last edited by Lunari_ on Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
asamodious



Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the rule to ban non basic lands was put into place because when this format was created it wouldve mad it too powerful. Now its not needed at all.

When this rule was in place your deck couldve ran

4x tolarian academy
4x gaea's cradle
4x wasteland
4x Strip mine
4x City of Traitors

The only lands you can play in extended now are fetchlands and shocklands. Which is just gonna let people play decks that are more then one color and have a good mana base! Theyre are only a few lands that could be problamatic and can just be banned (could include ghost quarter, academy ruins and the like)

I think the banning of nonbasics is out of date for this format and isnt needed anymore.
Back to top
asamodious



Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 362

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Instead of asking "Why should we unban them?", you should be asking "Why the hell are they banned?".


QFT.
Back to top
PakTu



Joined: 29 Dec 2006
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

asamodious wrote:
The only lands you can play in extended now are fetchlands and shocklands.


And you forget about the karoos, the new lands from Lorwyn block, all the man lands, urzatron, and artifact lands. Looks like more than just those fetchlands and shocklands now doesn't it?
Back to top
P_P4E



Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 579

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:16 pm    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

First of all ive played the format and it is terrible.


Second of all, why not just keep it how it is? If you're going to change it why not make it good? Adding nonbasics won't make it less terrible.


Just bustin' chops.
Back to top
PakTu



Joined: 29 Dec 2006
Posts: 64

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So its terrible to one person. We could say i hate peasnt magic, so lets add in rares. So we can make the count, 5 rares, 10 uncommons, and the rest commons. Yea that would make it so much better.


Or you know vintage, I really hate that. So why not get rid of all instants. That would be so much better for my aggro decks.
Back to top
derflippi
Level 4 Judge


Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 1402
Location: Weiterstad

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Basics beeing banned makes deckbuilding more challening. Therefore, I like it this way.
Back to top
six
Level 3 Judge


Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 97

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lunarvoltage wrote:
"Wasteland, Strip Mine, City of Traitors, Crystal Vein and most notably Ancient Tomb"

Six, you do realize that NONE of the above are legal in Extended, right?

I don't think that banning nonbasic lands makes 3-color decks unplayable, but in my opinion there really isn't any reason to ban them. All it does is shut down certain types of decks almost completely (mainly 2-color decks that don't play green or for some reason don't want to play Rampant Growth -effects and can't afford playing artifact fixers). 12 Swamp 12 Plains does not a good mana base make.

"OH OH OH I have this awesome deck idea! Wait, I can't make the mana work" shouldn't happen in a format meant for FUN. It's quite disappointing to realize that your idea can't be made to work just because some donkey lost to Riptide Lab in a PTQ final and wants to go on a crusade to remove all the impure lands from the game when he can't even accept that he would've won if he hadn't misplayed. Don't try to misunderstand me on purpose here, of course some things should never work ("I want to play turn 2 tidehollow strix and turn 3 woolly thoctar every game, omg why doesn't this work?!") but it happens way more often than it should for a fun format.

Instead of asking "Why should we unban them?", you should be asking "Why the hell are they banned?".

Banning ALL nonbasics because of a couple exceptions, especially when they aren't even in the format is like banning all artifacts because Black Lotus is too good.


OK, a number of problems here. First of all, you didn't understand what I meant by citing those examples. The 2-3-7 rules are not just for extended, they're for all formats. I know those specific lands are not allowed in extended, but rather than saying "extended and t2 can use nonbasics but banned in legacy and vintage" which sounds dumb, it's just a catch-all.

Secondly, you seem to equate fun with no mana problems. The fun of magic isn't everyone hitting their mana every game (which you give a nod to by saying you don't want strix into thoctar every game), rather, adding a challenge by limiting the quality of lands. Another reason "fun" formats might do this is because everyone has access to basic lands, whereas not everyone has access to the awesome nonbasics in real life.

Thirdly, why are they banned? I thought I covered that. I *DID* ask why they are banned, then I offered an idea of why they are banned. I don't see the format changing drastically for the better with their unbanning, so I am personally not interested in changing it. The unique deckbuilding challenge of 2-3-7 doesn't get adulterated that much with nonbasics, so really it comes down to the majority's preference.
Back to top
Sofa0King



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CMA-Flippi wrote:
Basics beeing banned makes deckbuilding more challening. Therefore, I like it this way.


For once, I agree with him.
Back to top
Lunari_
Level 3 Judge


Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 82

PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

six wrote:

OK, a number of problems here. First of all, you didn't understand what I meant by citing those examples. The 2-3-7 rules are not just for extended, they're for all formats. I know those specific lands are not allowed in extended, but rather than saying "extended and t2 can use nonbasics but banned in legacy and vintage" which sounds dumb, it's just a catch-all.

So, Merchant Scroll is restricted in Vintage so we might as well ban it in Legacy and Extended too? Also, I'd like to hear why you think that those lands are too good in Vintage and/or Legacy 237. They aren't anywhere near overpowered in the original formats, and I can't see why things would change so much by removing all non-237 casting costs. Well, Strip Mine is an exception, but that's why it's banned in Legacy and restricted in Vintage.

six wrote:
Secondly, you seem to equate fun with no mana problems. The fun of magic isn't everyone hitting their mana every game (which you give a nod to by saying you don't want strix into thoctar every game), rather, adding a challenge by limiting the quality of lands.

I never said everyone should hit their mana every game. I said that removing nonbasics shuts down certain kinds of decks. My description of "fun" does not include not being able to play some decks I like because nonbasic lands are banned for a nonexisting reason. It doesn't make mana bases more challenging to build, it leaves decks of type A (monocolored aggro decks, for example) relatively unscathed and makes decks of type B (two-colored nongreen aggro decks, for example) more or less unplayable. The decks that you _can_ play are not hurt by this at all.

Let's say that you removed instants from Magic. Sure, most decks only have to make a couple minor adjustments like replacing Chord of Calling with Weird Harvest in Elves and Slay with Deathmark in some random black deck. These decks aren't hurt at all. On the other hand, a deck like mono-blue control that relies on counterspells, is rendered unplayable. It's not a scale from black to white with shades of grey in between, it's a gap with black on the other side and white on the other side. Scales mean you have to find the right balance. Gaps actually make the game LESS challenging, because there is one scale less.

six wrote:
Thirdly, why are they banned? I thought I covered that. I *DID* ask why they are banned, then I offered an idea of why they are banned.

I might be dumb but I don't really see how you covered that. I think I've made it quite clear why, in my opinion, the idea you offered isn't a valid reason for banning nonbasics.

drfort wrote:
I voted to keep things basic. I think the point here is to have a unique format, distinct from "regular" extended, which is a format utterly dominated by nonbasic lands. Give basic lands a chance.

Being able to play only cards with cmc 2, 3 or 7 doesn't make it different enough from regular extended? Wth is the point of this format then?
drfort wrote:
In the most recent trial, a 3 color deck won. In a format with no birds or nonbasics. Not saying it's absolute proof, but I think it shows that the format CAN survive and be diverse with just basics.

On this one, I agree with you. Removing nonbasics doesn't mean that 3 color decks are unplayable.

Also, SaTiVa's Bant deck is a bad example of a 3 color deck because it's only really 2 colors.

CMA-Flippi wrote:
Basics beeing banned makes deckbuilding more challening.

I assume you mean nonbasics. And as I said, gaps make the format less challenging. Removing options only makes decisions easier (at least in this case, I know it's not a hard and fast rule).


Someone please give me a reason other than "because it already is that way so why change it".
Back to top
Fridolin



Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:50 am    Post subject: Strategies Reply with quote

Currently, mana fixing means playing signets which is pretty lame.

Even when you have the signets, certain strategies are still impossible. Just think about slide with access to:

* Slide
* Starstorm
* Dragon
* Renewed Faith
* Knight of the Reliquary
* Viridian Shaman
* Life from the Loam

Sounds like a good deck to me which still has metagame issues (Mind Shatter).

Another interesting deck would be

* Tooth and Nail
* Temple of the False God
* Vesuva
* Oblivion Stone
* Platinum Angel
* Sakura Tribe Elder
* Kodamas Reach
* Mind Spring
* Simic Sky Swallower
* Thorn Elemental

So nonbasic lands allow for a wider range of playable decks.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Give it a trial run then make a decision.
Back to top
SarcasticRat



Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 30

PostPosted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's absolutely no reason to ban non-basic lands in this format. It's an outdated idea. Having only basics hinders the deck-building in a bad way. We're already stuck with only playing 2-3-7 cards, is it really necessary to also make all the mana bases suck so every game comes down to who can luckbox the right colors or who plays the least colors?

Seriously, give the format a try with non-basics. People who think it will somehow make the format worse are out of their minds. Making non-basics legal will open the format up so much, and allow for much more interesting decks to be competitive rather than lame crap like MUC, etc.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Casual or Other Decks All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

All content on this page may not be reproduced without consent of Magic-League Directors.
Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.


About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy