Veeky Forums what is the strongest color in magic

Discard is not card advantage unless you play stuff like hymn or mind twist.

I would say that Inquisition / Thoughtseize / Lily definitely give black options to have access to more / better cards than their opponents.

>plays a card to make opponent lose 3
>-1 is bigger than -3
>somehow not card advantage

Red, because red has goblins, and red is the best.

If not red, maybe red/black monsters as long as their goblins.

Goblins are the best.

Not modern goblins, because I haven't played since innastrid? Or however it's spelt. And im sure I missed about 90 sets since then.

Blue is the strongest color in the game because it has two things going for it, Card draw, which is the most powerful thing you can do in magic and permission which stops other people from using their cards

Blue is also the best color because it enables and supports other strategies so well, wanna dig for your combo piece? use a brain storm, is your combo a turn slower than theirs? use a force of will to not lose the game on the spot

It's also the hardest color for wizards to balance, look at treasure cruise and dig, pretty innocuous 8 and 9 mana spells when you look at them at face value but until they were banned in EVERY FORMAT except standard they fucked those formats up harder than they had ever been fucked

Because of this wizards doesn't like printing good blue cards anymore because it's too hard to balance with the rest of the game, which is also why green cards and creatures in general have been getting so much better over the last 6 years, because it's fundementally easier to deal with a creature than an opponent drawing 3 cards for one mana

Discuss the positives and negatives of each color.

Okay this is the objective ranking:

Blue > Black > Green > White > Red

Not my preference but its the way things are.

>mana ramp

the answer has always been mana ramp. which can be easily countered.

you're half-right.

blue/black is the strongest color. or rather "dark blue"

the amount of fuckery that can be acheived is insurmountable outside cheese builds from old cards.

i play with groups that are not tournament, but hobby-ist, (like, "i play a card that turns your permanents into enchantments, and then i destroy your enchantments, lol") and i play with tournament types.

blue/black is always the way to go.speed, control, and edge.

Who Sultai master race here?

There are only two real colors: blue and green. The other colors have weaknesses, which means they're only useful as supplementary colors.

What is even the purpose of having colors in the way MtG has them?

Over time the color pie has blurred a lot, but in general:

>blue
pros: power over the metagame (permission, card advantage, access "hidden" information, bypass various mechanics)

cons: possible to walk into bad trades against decks with distributed threats / get juked by your opponent if they know what they are doing. but this could be said of all colors, but with (pure) blue it can be easy to be overwhelmed after one or two bad trades (in my experience)

>black
pros: able to remove almost everything in the game from the game, access to some metagame advantage that blue shares (duress, cabal therapy, draw engines). Lots of evasion, lots of punishment, lots of win conditions, and the best tutors in the game

cons: any card draw comes with a life or resource cost besides mana (life, cards in play, etc), lots of the hate removal you pack in black can be completely irrelevant and should be sideboarded appropriately. you can lose to your own cards (confidant, etc)

>Standard
Green or White
>Modern
Green for sure. People splash just for goyf. Hell I saw a Blue Moon splash green for goyf.
>Legacy
U
>Pauper
U
>Vintage
U or

>able to remove almost everything in the game from the game
u wot m8

To make deck building more interesting, if every deck in the game was just 5colorgoodstuff.dec it'd get old really fast. It also makes really good flavor.

>green
pros: hard to get manascrewed, easily acheives mana advantage. This is almost as good as card advantage; the reason it's not is because you waste cards in hand for the purpose of ramping, and need to then also draw your threats and turn them sideways before they can actually win the game. There are plenty of green combo decks that can win right off the bat, making big plays like Tooth and Nail into sundering titan/blightsteel collossus/eldrazi shenanagins or hermit druiding through their library, so it's hard to say green is bad, but it's "the worst" (in my opinion) once you realize how limited green's win conditions are

cons: slow, requires winning with creatures and through combat (almost always), no direct damage, card draw usually requires a creature on the board or only applies to drawing lands

>white
pros: distributed small threats which require board wiping and single target removals, able to generate card advantage through proxy cards (tokens), many enchaments and creatures that add "new rules" to the game, that instate restrictrions on what cards or mana sources can or can't be used (hosing combo decks, turning off win conditions, etc). Has great situational removal, and evasive beaters with vigilance to lock down combat.

cons: no direct damage spells, virtually no card draw compared to blue and black. Linear (in my experience).

I don't mean you can remove everything with one card, but rather: for any card ever printed, there is a black spell that can remove it (either from the hand, the graveyard, or the battlefield, or the library). It's just harder to remove
enchantments and artifacts

>red

What should be the best color, but is not
pros: can hose the metagame advantages of other colors and win before they retake the board(see: red deck wins, etc), direct damage at instant speed, able to pack evasive fliers, lots of haste, lots of tokens

cons: totally stalls out after hosing said metagame, usually forced to 1 for 1, hard to ramp mana-wise, removal is predictable, numerous "chaos" effects rely heavily on RNG, card advantage is extremely poor compared to other colors

all colors can be "good" or combined in ways that effectively advance a plan to win the game while shutting out an opponent, especially since colorless cards can augment the capabilities of a given deck.

Blue is more likely to draw the cards it needs to win, thus it is more likely to win.

There are other ways to do that, like card synergy, which is more flexible.

That just reminded me of a question I had about pauper. If wotc decided they wanted to build sets with balancing pauper in mind, what would be the biggest changes?

except for pic related, of course

Blue>black>brown>white.
Green and red arent colors.

The fact that you can bait a counterspell absolutely isn't a weakness: it may technically be a one-for-one interaction, but you're still casting two cards from your hand with the intention of only one sticking. And that's not a good position to be in.

Especially when Mr Blue Player also has access to better selection/advantage than you do.

pauper is faaaaairly balanced as is. If they wanted to balance it further, then card selection on par with Serum Visions at least need to be printed for W/R. Black already has good card advantage engines in Read the Bones and similar cards, and Green has Commune with the Gods and that new 1G instant.
They'd also need to print more stack-manipulation in non-U colors at common and probably give W a 1 mana instant speed removal on par with Disfigure.

That's a good point

Blue's biggest weakness is mana-base, but then again, you're usually able to draw up the mana you need, so imo it's hard to find cons to the color, in any format besides (maybe) limited

>card advantage is extremely poor compared to other colors
Burning away multiple creatures with one spell is sure satisfying, though.

Pretty much from Shards of Alara block onward (so like 2008 or 2009) they started shifting their design philosophy from "spells > creatures" to "creatures > spells" because community feedback at the time was that they want to win via combat damage and not to stalling a game out forever and then winning with little pings or a combo kill.

In Standard right now Green is the strongest color, and it's probably tied for strongest in Modern (tied with Black IMO). in Legacy and Vintage Blue is still king.

The only reason Green can hold a candle to Blue is that all of Green's land thinning and beater searching is almost a match for Blue's draw power and shutdown capabilities.
>madness Avacyn's Judgement late-game
>so many dead X/1s and X/2s
>whatever's left can't block the all-out attack
Always a beautiful sight to watch tokens and fodder disappear.

Silly user, everyone knows it's Black.

Isn't this just a dumb question given formats existing?

I think the colour that gets a creature that attacks a 3/2 flier on turn two is the strongest.

Which colour was that again? Probably red or green, because that is the super aggressive colours.

I hate when people argue that Delver is breaking the color pie. Its requirements are genuine and even in Delver lists, blind flips aren't guaranteed to get there and you need to expend cards to achieve it.

I just like delver. I like blue getting interesting creatures that aren't leviathans.

I too like Blue getting the most aggressive one-drop to have ever been printed.

It isn't like it started a wave of UDWs and bluesligh. It can't fit into a traditional deck of weenies or aggro dudes.

>Red is probably the color whose design space was explored the least throughout Magic's history.
Oh, not at all. Reds design space was explored quite extensively. By blue and white.

>"a" creature that attacks a 3/2 flier on turn two is the strongest.

> the strongest
> not having Griselbrand attacking turn 2
Black Undead Lives Matter

Try this
Though I am bad at magic

Delver doesn't break the color pie, it's just that his stats are super pushed. If he had less power and/or didn't have flying he would be fine.

maybe 10 years ago, at the moment it's: green>white>black>blue>red

>I too like Blue getting the most aggressive one-drop to have ever been printed.

Is this a joke?

delver is a legacy and vintage playable aggro-tempo card, this isnt

Vintage is irrelevant and Goblin Guide sees more play in Legacy than Delver in Modern.

>Vintage is irrelevant

say that to my face fucker

Also I should add that Delver isn't even that great in Vintage anymore, it has really fallen off.

Legacy and Pauper are the only formats where Delver is dominating.

Black is the selfish color so it's supposed to do good enough on it's better than other cards. So, it's gotta be versatile.

But Red is also a good mono, usually.

Fuck your face fucker.

Black has enchantment destruction now?

That has more to do with how Blue spells are fucking great in Legacy and absolutely batshit bonkers in Vintage. Delver is just a threat that synergizes with playing Blue spells. As far as aggressive threats go, Goblin Guide is going to be generally a faster clock unless you turn 1 Delver, turn 2 flip.

Yung Peezy and Mentor really have just shit-fucked every other creature that isn't a Spaghetti Monster, Merfolk, or Thalia out of the format.

>green
>using tarmogoyf as an example
kek.

I said this before, but for one extra mana you can put a creatures much stronger than that, and i don't even need to go far (pic related). Tarmogoyf being strong is just a meme.

>it's downside losing life
black doesn't have much artifact/enchantment destruction.

That card is not just blue, you do realize that. Also, pic related. Fuck your control.

You are retarded and conceited. It is incredible.

Spoiler alert, needing three fucking green is a big deal. You can cast Goyf off of a tropical island and a wasteland.

Leatherback Baloth is completely unsplashable and pretty hard to cast in anything but monogreen. Leaherback Baloth comes down a full turn after Tarmogoyf. And to top it off Leatherback Baloth doesn't even reach the same P/T as Tarmogoyf does in long games. There's a good reason why goyf sees major play in the formats it's legal in while Leahterback Baloth is a tier 3 green aggo creature in modern. (in that specific deck it is, however, a more important piece than goyf)

Green:
+ good mana flow
+ strong and low cost creatures
+ some capacity for lifegain
- not many good options to draw cards

Black
+ good at drawing cards
+ removals/control
+ fairly strong creatures
- absolutely NO defense against artifacts and enchantments

Blue
+ best color for drawing cards
+ removals/control
- weak creatures
- some issues with mana
- Slow. You're fucked against more than one opponent, or if he knows how to deal with your bullshit.

White
+ low cost zerg rush
+ lol lifegain lol
+ fairly good number of removals and control through enchantments
- you will be ripped to shreds by 20/20 trample green creatures
- bad at drawing cards

Red
+ direct damage
+ good cards for rushing your opponent
+ good against artifacts
+ good defense against numberous weak creatures (cheap board wipes)
- you don't do shit if your opponent is shitting lifegain every turn

Vintage is more of a toss up.

Blue and Black are both absurd in Vintage. There's a reason it is the 'Yawgwin' format, and why several Vintage players have said it is the strongest card in the entire game.

Blue is definitely the strongest in Legacy, and I agree with Green for Modern.

>Green: not many good options to draw cards

definitely not true in the current Standard, green has the best card advantage out of all colors

>White:- you will be ripped to shreds by 20/20 trample green creatures

also not true, White currently has the best removal out of all colors

Is outdamaged by turn four.

doubt it, 100% flip rate is impossible, in legacy it's probably something like 70%

Commander: Blue
Vintage: Blue/Black
Legacy: Blue
Modern: Green
Standard: it's a mess

Overall: Blue

>People unironically trying to rank monocoloured decks
You're all dumb. Why would I run a mono deck in anything but EDH, and only for tricky combo purposes?

Objectively White is the best support colour, followed by green and blue tied for second, with black and red tied for the last spot.

For focus colours, Black is objectively the best, followed again by green and blue, with white and red taking up the rear.

Now in tri colour, Blue and Green are tied for top spot, followed by black and white, with red taking up the rear.

People will disagree based on personal preference, but keep in mind monobrown is not red, and I'm primarily talking about from a card advantage/removal/ramp stand point. Any deck can be good, the colours I've listed are generally better than others for casuals. I personally run 3 R/X/x decks, but red is distinctly harder to use as both a primary and a support colour unless you have a specific strategy involving it.

I would have to agree with them YawgWill is legit the most busted card in the game of Magic.

this is a random example. Point is, there are much stronger cards for 2-3 manas. Goyf "can get stronger" but that doesn't really mean much when there are tons of cards in the game that can do that, and sometimes gaining new abilities.

to add to that

Delver decks in Legacy have about 50% spells, to increase that chance to flip a turn 1 Delver you would need to play a Brainstorm on your turn 2 upkeep.

So I'm not even sure if it's even 70% it could be lower.

If you Mull while on the play, you get an extra scry. I would say, with a properly made deck, it's about 80%.

The only good draw green have needs to have creatures, and cannot be used again. It's definitely weak on the drawing department.

>White currently has the best removal out of all colors
a 20/20 trample With hexproof. Happy?

Duskwatch Recruiter, Tireless Tracker, Collected Company all generate cards and are overall much better than any blue draw spell.

There is a very strict condition in those.

The first one doesn't draw anything if it's not a creature, and you also put whatever good card you could get at the bottom of your deck. Collected company is not even a draw, and Tireless Tracker requires a land and 2 mana to draw just one card, so it's a very weak and slow draw that won't help at late game.

I can't imagine wanting to play a format where Green is considered respectable.

Then don't play Limited friendorina.

Green has artifact hate, Enchantment hate, good creatures, fetches both creatures and lands, card draw thanks to fucking tireless tracker and investigate now, and even has good removal now that fight and one-sided-fight are solidly within its domain

It literally has no downside besides lacking massive AoE removal, but even THAT exists in some form thanks to The Great Aurora, which has actually seen play and success recently

White/Green covers everything you could possibly want out of a deck besides burn and counterspells, and guess what both of those have been declared unfun and hostile to new players so they don't fucking exist in any strong form in standard anyways

Pic related is the strongest if you know how to use your brain

What would you guys place discarding in terms on terminology?
Like, I was thinking it acts as some sort of averter like counterspells, but instead of targeting spells, you target cards.

Black is the patrician color. Blue is considered power for a reason, though.

You forgot that sacrificing the Clue puts a +1/+1 counter on the Tracker. In addition, because the decks that run the card are so often reactionary, they can leave mana up and sacrifice Clues during combat or at the end step. Tracker is great card advantage and there's a reason he's five dollars, roughly.

You have literally never played a real format. If you can take a deck right now that runs Goyf in Legacy, cut Goyf for a better card and report back to me with some playtesting, let me know.

This kind of attitude irks me and makes it hard to trust Eternal player's suggestions for fixing MtG.

Fight isn't real removal, nor is one sided fight. Just get rid of their creatures.

Green may be too good because of CoCo, but the fact that it needs creatures to do card draw and creature removal is a big weakness and you can't pretend that it is the same thing as just drawing cards and killing dudes.