The term to remember is a military one: Combined Arms. Any good general knows you have to have artillery support and cavalry support for a decent infantry assault. Same thing here. You need edicts, sweepers, exilers, and other ways of neutralizing threats to give your own forces the time they need to win.
A midgame edict like Vapors is harder to use perhaps than Chainer's if your opponent has already swarmed you, but you should have multiple ways to deal with that situation and vapors takes care of 2 for you for 4 mana and a single card. That seems quite good to me. Also with Snapcaster it becomes even better, since it doesn't stay exiled giving you 4 full uses instead of 3.
I think one of the big problem with vapors is that edict effects become worse the longer the game goes on because it's moro likely your opponent's will have something useless/outclassed lying around that they don't mind sacrificing.
I am not denigrating chainer's I am saying vapors is in the same category and superior in effective cmc vs effect. Wrath is an entirely different category. Chainer's is earlier than Vapor but it is NOT an early 2-1. Vapors is later but IS a relatively early 2-1 vs a board where Wrath of God may not suffice. (Thragtusk Comes to mind.):/
The important thing with Chainer's is it is there early. If you need to kill something, it needs to die cheaply when cheap is all you have. Chainers can kill their turn 1 play on the play.
Sometimes, people have: I can recall getting stymied in the third round when playing a mono-red elemental aggro by an Auriok Champion. It's also worth noting that quantity is a quality all of its own: If you can swarm sufficiently to kill before wrath mana is available, either through aggression, comboing out elfball-style or by having protection up fish-style, losing one or two pieces is less relevant. Goblin decks don't care if a given goblin dies: Kill the Chieftain and they play a warchief. Nor do Elf decks: If you get the Archdruid, there's a priest of Titania to fuel the Ezuri overrun.
People don't fight back because it's not a battle they need to win, generally. If you build against a specific spell, you may be hit by the other in another matchup. Protection from red and black does nothing for StP or PtE, Wildfire Efreet gets murdered or edicted, and all of them get wrathed or countered or BSZed. Bolt and StP are popular because they're cheap and powerful, and sometimes removing the one creature is enough to swing the game, but as for which creature that may be, that remains up in the air.
Note: Force of Will could not be the 20th Mythic in MED V. Worth Wolpert announced that FOW would never be reprinted in an MED set, and Wizards won’t violate that promise. They don’t need to. (that’s foreshadowing - see below.)
I can remember allusions to that promise. It isn't official company policy though. One guy saying something does not make a company promise. It's ironic that a decade after the Reserved list, when WOTC was kicking themselves and saying how bad of an idea it was and how they wish the earlier employees had never done it, Worth says something like that. GJ.
to be honest i have to say, that as long MTGO is only PC platform game im out. If it´s ever launch any other platform, like console or mac im playing it in very next day with you.. And i hope that you dont understand me wrong. My meaning is not start any kind of confersation about PC computer problems. I stay in paper until that hapens, and once in while play Duels of the planeswalkers in xbox. I still can send my decklist if you like to read something diffrent...
when you play in paper you cant include every deck your STOPS and Paths, with 300$ manabase, so you must be more creative ;)
Thanks a lot for the positive review and suggestions.
Izzet is definitely on the fringes of playability in Standard. Perhaps Dragon's Maze or maybe even Gatecrash will bring it tools to be more competitive. Izzet Charm is definitely a good card and I wouldn't mind upping the numbers, however, with Burning Vengeance you're pretty much obliged to run Faithless Looting instead. The main Izzet decks I've seen at Counterburn style decks similar to this deck, some of which run Talrand but not all.
I felt this deck was a little more interesting for having Burning Vengeance but the Counterburn style decks might be more powerful. There's a lot of room for experimentation and I'm enjoying the options in Standard right now.
BV was my pet deck for ages. Never was good enough SoM standard, still not good enough now, for the reasons you point out. I'm a hopeless UR enthusiast though.
UR is somewhat competitive though, probably not top tier but I'd say close. Izzet Charm is the big reason for it. You NEED playset maindeck, it's too good versus everything. Talrand is also a superior BV, still has its own problems but definitely an upgrade.
Yes, one of your favorite spells, it kept popping up in your decklists when I would be browsing them for the archetype series. Don't know how I forgot that one. I also forgot Consuming Vapors, which probably doesn't quite "get there" in a legacy-based format, but is a two-for-one at a reasonable rate and can't be written off totally as strictly-inferior to another spell.
You've been playing the format a long time, what did you think in general about my analysis and why people haven't made an adjustment in tribe selection or deck construction to fight back against creature removal?
Great set of suggestions, Pete! The only problem now is that you've jinxed it, because WIzards automatically takes all suggestions made by players on every subject and throws them in the trash and then does something completely boneheaded. So you should have made many totally asinine suggestions so that Wizards would ignore them, and by process of elimination, arrive at a good solution.
In watching your video, it seems to me that you seem to evaluate your card pool as cards in a void without looking for possible synergies. In the video your end up with a different list than your posted one above.
As for the stats window and the suggest lands. The stats window sometimes reports phantom results. clicking and dragging the window sometimes fixes them, but you should do your first suggest lands without any land added to your deck (assuming you are in the tourney deckbuild; ie, 40 card deck), then adjust for the dual mana lands. From the suggest you did, the ratio was 7 U, 11 B, 15 R, or approximately 2 U : 3 B : 4 R. Working with this, this is how I would approach adding land. First take into account the duals (2U, 2B, 4R), we need to add a swamp to balance out the ratio. This gives us 5 lands, leaving 12 to add (or 1 1/3 times our base ratio), thus we add in 2 2/3 islands, 4 Swamps, and 5 1/3 Mountains (or 2U, 4B, and 5R) Giving us 16 lands. Since The stats do not take into effect the overload cost of Mortars, I would add one more mountain as the 17th land. Making my land as The Vents, the 3 gates, 2 Islands, 5 Swamps, and 6 Mountains: The same as you ended up using.
Although, because of the Mortars triple R, it might be better to make the basic land mix 2U, 4B, and 7R.
Every DE that fires is a sale for WoTC. Even in the case where a DE pays out 35 packs (or $140 in product) WoTC still takes in $96 in event tickets, or ~68% of the product. A better way of putting that would be to say that WoTC sold 35 packs for $2.74
By that same token, a 4/3/2/2 draft pays out $44 of product while taking in $112. The product packs are all cracked and either the prize product gets cracked or used to enter another draft, which means that that WoTC sold 35 packs for $112 or WoTC sold packs for $3.20
Using this method, and your logic, what you are really saying is that WoTC should never, EVER run a constructed event (of any format) because getting you to draft is more profitable (actually, getting you to buy packs and crack them is the most profitable). But as I'm sure you know, the draft rate would plummet (and so would pack cracking) if there was no way to use the cards for play. So constructed tournaments must be run. In addition, they must be slightly MORE subsidized because while a draft takes nothing but the product to enter, constructed play requires you to accumulate a collection of cards.
With that established, why then run Vintage or Legacy events?
Well, for one thing, I would not be surprised to find WOTC is perfectly happy selling packs to constructed players @ $2.74/pack. Regardless of who or what format they play. It's good business right there. More people playing = more money. And without the numbers in front of me, I'd guess that many of these people simply WOULDN'T PLAY if it wasn't for those formats. Of course, it would be better to get them to all play standard all the time, but WoTC knows that's simply never going to happen. Some people are simply going to prefer a different way of playing. So again, more people playing is better than less people playing, even if they aren't playing standard.
More importantly though, people who play Eternal Formats still buy standard cards to play in Eternal formats. Creating more demand for Standard cards is right on the tippy top of WoTC's "Let's always do this" list - in every way they can.
To boot, often enough the cards wanted for Vintage play are often NOT the same as the ones wanted for any other format. Vintage players get all crazy over Lodestone Golem and Laboratory Maniac. This helps flatten demand (though I would not say considerably) across cards, which is a good thing as well.
So there you have it. The problem is that the cost of accumulating the necessary cards to play in Legacy and Vintage vastly outweighs the reward potential of getting to buy packs at $2.74 - forget all the crap about the EV for the player - it's in WoTC's interest to keep these people playing, because some of them simply wouldn't play any other way.
And so hence Pete's (and others) ideas on how to get more people playing those formats.
Isn't it actually the case that (if you use the retail value of packs), WoTC actually loses money from events under the normal payout structure?* From what I understand, the purpose of most events is to drive the sale of standard-set packs** or, in the case of pauper/momir, to hopefully get people interested in the game so they buy into standard. Because of their buy-in cost, legacy and vintage don't have the same "gateway drug" benefit that pauper/momir have so the commercial value to WoTC from these format is only what they attribute to the value of having them support the secondary market price of cards that are relevant to those format. And from WoTC's perspective, isn't that function better filled by modern, which is more influenced by the standard-legal card pool and has crossovers with paper magic in a way that vintage and legacy can never have thanks to the reserve list?
Idk, i'm no expert on these things, but being realistic I'm finding it difficult to see the business case for WoTC here.
* And I thought the point of your proposal was to make legacy/vintage events have even greater EV for players than regular events, which would have to imply that WoTC's cut is even smaller (taking into account opportunity cost).
** either directly, or through supporting the secondary market of those packs, obviously.
I still think they need some format in which to play older cards in a competitive environment. If they keep Vintage and Legacy in the mix, and those events never fire, they are losing revenue. If they eliminate them, then they are telling players to never again invest in old formats. Preserving them it a better option.
A lot of effort's gone into this idea, clearly, but I can't help but feel like this is a solution in search of a problem from WoTC's perspective. With the amount of effort that they'd have to put into designing something to try to spark up interest in the older eternal formats, along with the amount of backlash they'd get from players of the newer formats that would get annoyed that these other formats are getting access to unique prizes that they don't get, I'm not sure where the business case is for something huge like this. WoTC also can't be seen to make concessions to the secondary market value of cards (the "x format is expensive so we need better prizes" argument) because that opens up a huge can of worms from their perspective.
Whether the vintage/classic/legacy afficionados like it or not, their formats are only a very small blip on WoTC's radar because the player base and financial returns associated with them are far, far smaller than with standard and even modern. I really can't see them putting a lot of effort into something for a very small proportion of their online player base. The power 9 will obviously be released next year in some format, either a ME5 or "vintage masters" set I'd guess, but I doubt there'll be any fundamental shakeup of the prize payout system. I might be wrong.
Hi! . As some players might remember, i play this tribal legacy in paper. I have nice golgari incect deck, and i really want to see if it does well in competive mtgo games.. so if somebody likes to use this list go for it!
Creature:
3 Scute mob
4 Nantuko shade
4 Nantuko Husk
4 Mortician Beetle
4 Bane of the Living
1 Gleancrawler
3 Mitotic Slime
Spells:
3 Life / Death
4 Chainer´s Edict
1 Diabolic Edict
4 Geth´s Verdict
1 Loxodon Warhammer
1 Maelstrom Pulse
Deck have much synergy with sacrificing creatures. Mortician beetles grow really really fast. Nantuko Shades likes that almost every land can pump it, and Husk will eat great meal if Mitotic Slime is played. Ofcourse Mortician Beetle likes to be near dining table aswell. Nine plus four(flashback) edicts shoud keep enemy creatures thin, while they same time grow Mortician Beetle. And for enemy token swarms, there is four Bane of the Living waiting. Scute mob is third very very dangerous creature, when game is going to last. And for those situations there is Loxodon Warhammer to trample trough enemy lines. For very long game there is also Gleancrawler ist nasty when you can eat Mitotic Slime every turn. Maelstrom Pulse is against impossible situations (like worship) but usually you jus use it as spot removal. Life / Death can either bring back mortician beetles and scute mobs (i never have to reason to try to get bigger) or turn your lands to vegetable meals for Nantuko Husk. And dont forget to use Swarmyard to regenerate your incects.
I have played and fixed this deck alot, so its solid and fun. Enjoy. And if you like to get this more visible just do it. -Eibon
When you play standard, it's easy to find an event that fires. When you play Legacy or Vintage, events are few and far between. If you don't trust the client (as I certainly don't), then are you going to be motivated to play standard or legacy? Even if the client crashes, with your standard deck, you can just try again later. Not so with legacy events.
The term to remember is a military one: Combined Arms. Any good general knows you have to have artillery support and cavalry support for a decent infantry assault. Same thing here. You need edicts, sweepers, exilers, and other ways of neutralizing threats to give your own forces the time they need to win.
A midgame edict like Vapors is harder to use perhaps than Chainer's if your opponent has already swarmed you, but you should have multiple ways to deal with that situation and vapors takes care of 2 for you for 4 mana and a single card. That seems quite good to me. Also with Snapcaster it becomes even better, since it doesn't stay exiled giving you 4 full uses instead of 3.
I think one of the big problem with vapors is that edict effects become worse the longer the game goes on because it's moro likely your opponent's will have something useless/outclassed lying around that they don't mind sacrificing.
I am not denigrating chainer's I am saying vapors is in the same category and superior in effective cmc vs effect. Wrath is an entirely different category. Chainer's is earlier than Vapor but it is NOT an early 2-1. Vapors is later but IS a relatively early 2-1 vs a board where Wrath of God may not suffice. (Thragtusk Comes to mind.):/
The important thing with Chainer's is it is there early. If you need to kill something, it needs to die cheaply when cheap is all you have. Chainers can kill their turn 1 play on the play.
Vs things that don't die to wrath? (Also note, it is not being compared to wrath but another two for 1 for 9...seems a lot more favorable then, eh?
Sometimes, people have: I can recall getting stymied in the third round when playing a mono-red elemental aggro by an Auriok Champion. It's also worth noting that quantity is a quality all of its own: If you can swarm sufficiently to kill before wrath mana is available, either through aggression, comboing out elfball-style or by having protection up fish-style, losing one or two pieces is less relevant. Goblin decks don't care if a given goblin dies: Kill the Chieftain and they play a warchief. Nor do Elf decks: If you get the Archdruid, there's a priest of Titania to fuel the Ezuri overrun.
People don't fight back because it's not a battle they need to win, generally. If you build against a specific spell, you may be hit by the other in another matchup. Protection from red and black does nothing for StP or PtE, Wildfire Efreet gets murdered or edicted, and all of them get wrathed or countered or BSZed. Bolt and StP are popular because they're cheap and powerful, and sometimes removing the one creature is enough to swing the game, but as for which creature that may be, that remains up in the air.
Why settle for a two-for-one at Wrath mana?
Im fairly certain many mac users have found a way to play MTGO without too many problems. (Bootcamp for starters, VM for another.)
This is also kind of ironic:
Note: Force of Will could not be the 20th Mythic in MED V. Worth Wolpert announced that FOW would never be reprinted in an MED set, and Wizards won’t violate that promise. They don’t need to. (that’s foreshadowing - see below.)
I can remember allusions to that promise. It isn't official company policy though. One guy saying something does not make a company promise. It's ironic that a decade after the Reserved list, when WOTC was kicking themselves and saying how bad of an idea it was and how they wish the earlier employees had never done it, Worth says something like that. GJ.
to be honest i have to say, that as long MTGO is only PC platform game im out. If it´s ever launch any other platform, like console or mac im playing it in very next day with you.. And i hope that you dont understand me wrong. My meaning is not start any kind of confersation about PC computer problems. I stay in paper until that hapens, and once in while play Duels of the planeswalkers in xbox. I still can send my decklist if you like to read something diffrent...
when you play in paper you cant include every deck your STOPS and Paths, with 300$ manabase, so you must be more creative ;)
You know a deck is gaining popularity when you start seeing it in Juff. I've seen a number of variants on this lately.
Thanks a lot for the positive review and suggestions.
Izzet is definitely on the fringes of playability in Standard. Perhaps Dragon's Maze or maybe even Gatecrash will bring it tools to be more competitive. Izzet Charm is definitely a good card and I wouldn't mind upping the numbers, however, with Burning Vengeance you're pretty much obliged to run Faithless Looting instead. The main Izzet decks I've seen at Counterburn style decks similar to this deck, some of which run Talrand but not all.
I felt this deck was a little more interesting for having Burning Vengeance but the Counterburn style decks might be more powerful. There's a lot of room for experimentation and I'm enjoying the options in Standard right now.
BV was my pet deck for ages. Never was good enough SoM standard, still not good enough now, for the reasons you point out. I'm a hopeless UR enthusiast though.
UR is somewhat competitive though, probably not top tier but I'd say close. Izzet Charm is the big reason for it. You NEED playset maindeck, it's too good versus everything. Talrand is also a superior BV, still has its own problems but definitely an upgrade.
Id say in aggregate Vapors is superior to Chainer's.
It's a good pc game. I play this game in my spare time as my theraphy.
buy tumblr followers and get tumblr followers
Yes, one of your favorite spells, it kept popping up in your decklists when I would be browsing them for the archetype series. Don't know how I forgot that one. I also forgot Consuming Vapors, which probably doesn't quite "get there" in a legacy-based format, but is a two-for-one at a reasonable rate and can't be written off totally as strictly-inferior to another spell.
You've been playing the format a long time, what did you think in general about my analysis and why people haven't made an adjustment in tribe selection or deck construction to fight back against creature removal?
Great set of suggestions, Pete! The only problem now is that you've jinxed it, because WIzards automatically takes all suggestions made by players on every subject and throws them in the trash and then does something completely boneheaded. So you should have made many totally asinine suggestions so that Wizards would ignore them, and by process of elimination, arrive at a good solution.
In watching your video, it seems to me that you seem to evaluate your card pool as cards in a void without looking for possible synergies. In the video your end up with a different list than your posted one above.
As for the stats window and the suggest lands. The stats window sometimes reports phantom results. clicking and dragging the window sometimes fixes them, but you should do your first suggest lands without any land added to your deck (assuming you are in the tourney deckbuild; ie, 40 card deck), then adjust for the dual mana lands. From the suggest you did, the ratio was 7 U, 11 B, 15 R, or approximately 2 U : 3 B : 4 R. Working with this, this is how I would approach adding land. First take into account the duals (2U, 2B, 4R), we need to add a swamp to balance out the ratio. This gives us 5 lands, leaving 12 to add (or 1 1/3 times our base ratio), thus we add in 2 2/3 islands, 4 Swamps, and 5 1/3 Mountains (or 2U, 4B, and 5R) Giving us 16 lands. Since The stats do not take into effect the overload cost of Mortars, I would add one more mountain as the 17th land. Making my land as The Vents, the 3 gates, 2 Islands, 5 Swamps, and 6 Mountains: The same as you ended up using.
Although, because of the Mortars triple R, it might be better to make the basic land mix 2U, 4B, and 7R.
Couple of misses here:
Every DE that fires is a sale for WoTC. Even in the case where a DE pays out 35 packs (or $140 in product) WoTC still takes in $96 in event tickets, or ~68% of the product. A better way of putting that would be to say that WoTC sold 35 packs for $2.74
By that same token, a 4/3/2/2 draft pays out $44 of product while taking in $112. The product packs are all cracked and either the prize product gets cracked or used to enter another draft, which means that that WoTC sold 35 packs for $112 or WoTC sold packs for $3.20
Using this method, and your logic, what you are really saying is that WoTC should never, EVER run a constructed event (of any format) because getting you to draft is more profitable (actually, getting you to buy packs and crack them is the most profitable). But as I'm sure you know, the draft rate would plummet (and so would pack cracking) if there was no way to use the cards for play. So constructed tournaments must be run. In addition, they must be slightly MORE subsidized because while a draft takes nothing but the product to enter, constructed play requires you to accumulate a collection of cards.
With that established, why then run Vintage or Legacy events?
Well, for one thing, I would not be surprised to find WOTC is perfectly happy selling packs to constructed players @ $2.74/pack. Regardless of who or what format they play. It's good business right there. More people playing = more money. And without the numbers in front of me, I'd guess that many of these people simply WOULDN'T PLAY if it wasn't for those formats. Of course, it would be better to get them to all play standard all the time, but WoTC knows that's simply never going to happen. Some people are simply going to prefer a different way of playing. So again, more people playing is better than less people playing, even if they aren't playing standard.
More importantly though, people who play Eternal Formats still buy standard cards to play in Eternal formats. Creating more demand for Standard cards is right on the tippy top of WoTC's "Let's always do this" list - in every way they can.
To boot, often enough the cards wanted for Vintage play are often NOT the same as the ones wanted for any other format. Vintage players get all crazy over Lodestone Golem and Laboratory Maniac. This helps flatten demand (though I would not say considerably) across cards, which is a good thing as well.
So there you have it. The problem is that the cost of accumulating the necessary cards to play in Legacy and Vintage vastly outweighs the reward potential of getting to buy packs at $2.74 - forget all the crap about the EV for the player - it's in WoTC's interest to keep these people playing, because some of them simply wouldn't play any other way.
And so hence Pete's (and others) ideas on how to get more people playing those formats.
Isn't it actually the case that (if you use the retail value of packs), WoTC actually loses money from events under the normal payout structure?* From what I understand, the purpose of most events is to drive the sale of standard-set packs** or, in the case of pauper/momir, to hopefully get people interested in the game so they buy into standard. Because of their buy-in cost, legacy and vintage don't have the same "gateway drug" benefit that pauper/momir have so the commercial value to WoTC from these format is only what they attribute to the value of having them support the secondary market price of cards that are relevant to those format. And from WoTC's perspective, isn't that function better filled by modern, which is more influenced by the standard-legal card pool and has crossovers with paper magic in a way that vintage and legacy can never have thanks to the reserve list?
Idk, i'm no expert on these things, but being realistic I'm finding it difficult to see the business case for WoTC here.
* And I thought the point of your proposal was to make legacy/vintage events have even greater EV for players than regular events, which would have to imply that WoTC's cut is even smaller (taking into account opportunity cost).
** either directly, or through supporting the secondary market of those packs, obviously.
I still think they need some format in which to play older cards in a competitive environment. If they keep Vintage and Legacy in the mix, and those events never fire, they are losing revenue. If they eliminate them, then they are telling players to never again invest in old formats. Preserving them it a better option.
This is similar to Modern Masters.
A lot of effort's gone into this idea, clearly, but I can't help but feel like this is a solution in search of a problem from WoTC's perspective. With the amount of effort that they'd have to put into designing something to try to spark up interest in the older eternal formats, along with the amount of backlash they'd get from players of the newer formats that would get annoyed that these other formats are getting access to unique prizes that they don't get, I'm not sure where the business case is for something huge like this. WoTC also can't be seen to make concessions to the secondary market value of cards (the "x format is expensive so we need better prizes" argument) because that opens up a huge can of worms from their perspective.
Whether the vintage/classic/legacy afficionados like it or not, their formats are only a very small blip on WoTC's radar because the player base and financial returns associated with them are far, far smaller than with standard and even modern. I really can't see them putting a lot of effort into something for a very small proportion of their online player base. The power 9 will obviously be released next year in some format, either a ME5 or "vintage masters" set I'd guess, but I doubt there'll be any fundamental shakeup of the prize payout system. I might be wrong.
Welcome back, Eibon!
Will you ever come to play on MTGO with us? :)
Hi! . As some players might remember, i play this tribal legacy in paper. I have nice golgari incect deck, and i really want to see if it does well in competive mtgo games.. so if somebody likes to use this list go for it!
Decklist:
Land:
4 Overgrown Tomb
4 tainted Wood
1 Bojuka bog
2 Swarmyard
1 Grim Backwoods
11 Swamp
Creature:
3 Scute mob
4 Nantuko shade
4 Nantuko Husk
4 Mortician Beetle
4 Bane of the Living
1 Gleancrawler
3 Mitotic Slime
Spells:
3 Life / Death
4 Chainer´s Edict
1 Diabolic Edict
4 Geth´s Verdict
1 Loxodon Warhammer
1 Maelstrom Pulse
Deck have much synergy with sacrificing creatures. Mortician beetles grow really really fast. Nantuko Shades likes that almost every land can pump it, and Husk will eat great meal if Mitotic Slime is played. Ofcourse Mortician Beetle likes to be near dining table aswell. Nine plus four(flashback) edicts shoud keep enemy creatures thin, while they same time grow Mortician Beetle. And for enemy token swarms, there is four Bane of the Living waiting. Scute mob is third very very dangerous creature, when game is going to last. And for those situations there is Loxodon Warhammer to trample trough enemy lines. For very long game there is also Gleancrawler ist nasty when you can eat Mitotic Slime every turn. Maelstrom Pulse is against impossible situations (like worship) but usually you jus use it as spot removal. Life / Death can either bring back mortician beetles and scute mobs (i never have to reason to try to get bigger) or turn your lands to vegetable meals for Nantuko Husk. And dont forget to use Swarmyard to regenerate your incects.
I have played and fixed this deck alot, so its solid and fun. Enjoy. And if you like to get this more visible just do it. -Eibon
When you play standard, it's easy to find an event that fires. When you play Legacy or Vintage, events are few and far between. If you don't trust the client (as I certainly don't), then are you going to be motivated to play standard or legacy? Even if the client crashes, with your standard deck, you can just try again later. Not so with legacy events.