B&R — Holding Wizards of the Coast Accountable
Written by First_Revenge
With the June 30, 2025, banned and restricted announcement (B&R) fast approaching, I’d like to discuss why bans are required and why, at least from my reading of the March 2025 B&R, Wizards of the Coast’s (WotC) metrics suggest a ban(s) will occur. Here’s what I would ban from the format:
It’s a big list most are unlikely to agree with, but my rationale is below:
Where's Legacy?
A balanced metagame between the aggro, combo, and control macrotypes is typically suggestive of a healthy metagame. should be balanced between . The Legacy metagame per MTGTop8 shows that one month out from the June 30 B&R that aggro is at 33%, control is at a woeful 14%, and combo is clearly overweight at 53%.
So what? Just because I say this metagame is imbalanced is a problem doesn’t mean it is. The following is from WotC’s March 2025 B&R:
"By the numbers, today's Legacy does a good job of emulating a balanced format. The most played deck, Dimir Reanimator, isn't taking too large a piece of the pie. The next handful of decks consistently showing up aren't doing so at clips that are wildly out of bounds."
"The issue is that, despite several different decks, the format's slower macro-archetypes, like midrange and control, have largely been pushed out of the metagame as environmental pressures have wildly condensed the games."
Time is a flat circle. You could copy and paste that statement into the upcoming June 30th B&R, and it would still make sense. The March B&R made it clear that despite Legacy acting “healthy,” it wasn’t.
A major reason cited was that "slower macro-archetypes, like midrange and control," were absent. In the March B&R, the whipping boy for this problem was Sowing Mycospawn. The general sentiment was Wasteland stapled to Strip Mine made it challenging to impossible to play longer games.
UB Reanimator was a problem then, too, since it's combo of Entomb+Reanimate pressured games to end early. The choice to ban Troll of Khazad-dûm was to ostensibly slow things down.
On the cusp of the June B&R, the same problem persists, albeit for different reasons. Control at 14% is where it was in March. When control, or any macrotype, is competitively absence from the format, that should trigger a ban(s) to remedy.
Given the state of current Legacy, WotC will have to swing the ban hammer again, assuming they are serious about remaining ideologically consistent with their prior statements.
Based on the metagame numbers, helping control and midrange's share of the metagame pie must come at the expense of combo. Numerically, that's the only way.
Oops, All Spells!
Oops, All Spells! play pattern is generally unenjoyable; the community-at-large seems to be over it. Maybe WotC doesn’t want to ban the deck out of existence, but it’s been running amok for too long.
A more controlled ban in March would have brought the temperature down. However, their choices were insufficient and the pot boiled over. Therefore, WotC should ban Balustrade Spy and Undercity Informer.
This ban isn’t necessarily about the Oops, All Spells! win percentage or metagame share. As of this article's publication, it is 3% of the metagame, according to MTGTop8.
"In the coming weeks, we'll keep an eye on the prevalence and win rates of the various all-in combo and fast-mana decks that bubbled to the surface of Legacy."
As far as I’ve observed, win rates and the prevalence of Oops, All Spells! have decreased. Per the metrics WotC outlined, a ban isn't required. Personally, I'm tired of the Oops, All Spells! play pattern, but WotC not taking action against is a realistic possibility.
WotC is open to community feedback, so a ban tagging Oops, All Spells! is not off the table.
This isn’t a sufficient place to stop, though. Even if Oops, All Spells! was ejected from Legacy, it’s still only 3% of the metagame — well short of the metagame balance worth striving for. It is unreasonable to argue that a deck constituting 3% of the meta is the sole reason for control and midrange's historically low metashare. The rot runs deeper.
The Real Problem: Compact Combos
The problem with the current metagame is the top decks have compact combos blurring the lines between archetypes. Why play all-in combo when you can play combo within an undedicated shell? Why play aggro when you could play aggro with a combo finish? Why play control when you can play control with an “I Win" button built in?
Combo's metagame share ballooned because it's hybridized other archetypes, largely at the expense of of the shells the combos inhabit.
UB Reanimator
UB Reanimator has achieved an historic first. Three consecutive ban cycles have targeted it and it still remains 20% of the metagame at the time of this article's publication. The next most-played archetypes, Dimir Tempo, which is essentially UB Reanimator without the combo package, and Cephalid Breakfast, are at 6% each.
One could argue this metagame percentage isn’t problematic in vacuum, but if WotC's goal is to fix the format's macro-archetype balance, bans must again target combo.
How To Fix It
The compact combo that powers UB Reanimator is Entomb. Without Entomb, reanimation packages must trend bigger, slower, and more committal. WotC has been balked at targeting Entomb by branding it as a pillar of the Reanimator archetype, which they are vehemently in support of:
"We believe that the Reanimator strategy is a core part of what makes Legacy feel like Legacy and is fun to have in the format."
I don’t disagree, but when we encounter the same problem for a fourth consecutive time, we must accept the subtle approach is untenable. While WotC's view may be misguided, I respect their commitment.
If WotC considers Entomb a pillar of Legacy, what’s left?
"We've learned that is more fun and less frustrating to play against when it must be a more committal synergy deck that isn't afforded the luxury of straddling the line between a tempo-y aggro deck and a combo deck."
If the goal of the March B&R was to make UB Reanimator a more committal strategy, it failed. Reanimator still has respectable "tempo-y aggro...combo" plans featuring Orcish Bowmaster, Tamiyo, Inquisitive Student, Murktide Regent, Barrowgoyf, and Kaito, Bane of Nightmares. UB Reanimator is noticeably worse without Troll of Khazad-dûm, but it remains the most popular deck by a country mile.
Albeit confusing for their stated goals, by WotC’s word, some part of the midrange plan needs to go. This leaves two realistic options: Orcish Bowmasters or Tamiyo, Inquisitive Student. My money is on an Orcish Bowmasters ban, since it punishes players digging for answers to the combo half of the deck. This differentiates it from other generically good black threats — it's a pseudo lock-piece.
Banning Orcish Bowmasters would take a bite out of the UB shell, which comprises Dimir Tempo and UB Reanimator — more than a quarter of the metagame. I don’t think an Orcish Bowmasters ban would solve the problem, however, as there’s no shortage of good threats in black to fill the four open slots; as was the case following the Psychic Frog ban.
The real enemy isn’t a specific midrangey black card, it’s combo's real estate in tempo. Thrice bans specifically targeting UB Reanimator has proven ineffective at solving the problem since the problem remains.
Banning Orcish Bowmasters, at best, depowers UB Reanimator/Dimir tempo to fall in line with the rest of the meta. Once the next powerful black threat pushes this archetype over the top, we'll be in the same place with whatever B&R is to come. If WotC is serious about severing the bridge between UB Reanimator and Dimir Tempo, they must concede Entomb is the card to ban.
Nadu, Winged Wisdom
WotC has remained silent about Nadu, Winged Wisdom, since banning it in all formats other than Legacy and Vintage, including Commander, so there’s no reason to believe it's on the chopping block.
While the Nadu decks currently aren’t a problem, they’re the mirrored image of UB Reanimator. If Entomb+Reanimate is the combo within Dimir Tempo, Nadu is the combo within what would otherwise be Bant Midrange. While not a problem regarding metagame percentage — 9% between Cephalid Breakfast and Bant Nadu at the time of this article's publication — why on would anyone play traditional midrange or control when the cost of the Nadu combo is eight slots (four Nadu, four Nomads en-Kor)?
Control typically grinds card advantage to beat opponents, but grinding against the power/efficiency/quantity of modern day threats has been rendered obsolete, in no small part due to Nadu's presence.
Nadu can be built with all the strong white removal to masquerade as a control deck, but its goal is to assemble A+B to not-draw (hi Orcish Bowmasters) a minimum of eight cards. Cavern of Souls ensures the combo hits the board, at which point any form of interaction cannot undo the overwhelming advantage the Nadu player accumulates.
Conclusion
Improving control and midrange's metagame share was the major narrative of the March B&R. I’m not sure why that narrative has fallen off — it's as true today as it was in March. WotC agrees; they've said as much.
The current meta features just as little control and midrange as it did three months ago. Based on that, today's metagame should be unacceptable unless WotC’s goals for Legacy's curatation have shifted from their most recent, explicitly written views.
The format needs big swings rather than a chiseling at the edges. Players are attached to the cards I’m calling to ban and while I have a distaste thinking Entomb needs to go, I don’t see another option to root out the problem.
The June B&R is the fourth ban cycle with UB Reanimator in the crosshairs. Entomb was given multiple chances to demonstate that it wasn't the problem. Form