Late last week, an exciting article was brought to the public by Wizards of the Coast. Some view the changes as hasty and irrational, but the masses have been clamoring for changes since before States. The only problem is, the masses cannot decide on which cards need banned. Join HKKID and I as we take you through each of the possible choices for banning and why they should (and shouldn't) be banned.
Here's a snippet of the article for those of you who missed the link:
I just got out of the quarterly Events Team meeting that handles the management of the Banned and Restricted Lists, and we've finally decided to put our collective feet down. On March 1st, we will be announcing major changes to the Banned List that should finally correct what has been an egregious problem with Standard over the past year.
I'm not going to go into detail here (nor on the message boards, nor in any e-mail, nor personal phone calls, nor ambushes in dark alleys), simply because we have a process in place for announcing these changes and I'm not about to pull rank. Like I said before, tune in on March 1st. The only reason I'm even bothering to hint at it now is because I want you to know that we are paying attention, we do care, we're not blind to our own mistakes, and we are willing to do whatever it takes to make Magic the most enjoyable, fair, and thought-provoking game there is. The upcoming Standard season of Regionals, Nationals, and Worlds could very well have turned out to be abysmal, and no one wins when that happens.
If we're willing to make a change now, why didn't we do it three months ago? In hindsight maybe we should have. In our defense, we have more data now that points us toward making these decisions, and we wanted to give Kamigawa a reasonable amount of time to impact the metagame before jumping to any conclusions.
I'm sure this news is shocking, but I hope most of you walk away from this article smiling. Better times are ahead.
So, we know something is going to happen, but what? Here's what we think about some of the "recommended" choices provided by members of the site.
1. Banning Arcbound Ravager will help solve the problem
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
Arcbound Ravager, while a very good card, is not at all responsible for the dominance of Affinity in Type II. All Arcbound Ravager does is provide a more resilient Atog effect. Banning the Ravager wouldn't accomplish anything in the long run, and Atog would just become a more important piece of the deck. Ravager is definitely a good card, but it is not the source of the problems with Affinity, and it shouldn't be banned.
The most powerful part of Affinity is easily the overall synergy the cards have with each other. Arcbound Ravager is very synergistic, but is far from being broken.
HKKID - Fact.
Arcbound Ravager is cheap to cast, and gets BIG really fast. He also tends to force your opponent to have an abundance of blockers, or the Ravager counters get moved to the one creature that didn't get blocked. There is also the nice Disciple of the Vault combination kill.
However banning Ravager by himself won't fix the problem at all. Atog is already used in most Affinity decks. Look at the similarites between the two: Atog costs 2 mana, provides an excellent sac outlet for Disciple of the Vault, and MUST be blocked every time he swings. You lose the ability to move the modular counters everywhere, but make up for it with an immunity to Oxidize.
2. Banning Disciple of the Vault is better for the environment overall
Aggro decks are historically known to forego using alternate win conditions in favor of their choice route of fast creatures that hit efficiently. The problem with Disciple of the Vault is that it defies the norm for aggro. Affinity has an alternate win condition that is almost uncounterable and doesn't even require them to attack you. This is plain wrong, as Affinity still has no trouble killing you by attacking. Disciple of the Vault is at the top of the list of cards I believe need banning.
HKKID - Fact
Disciple of the Vault is an absolute powerhouse. The question is always one of order. Versus an aggro deck, the Atog or Ravager goes first, and is followed by a Disciple. The combination kill can then occur in response to whatever sort of unpleasant creature removal your opponent has planned.
Against control, it's a good idea to cast the Disciple first, which lets you go off in response to your Ravager getting Oxidized! Simply put, there is no good method for dealing with a Disciple of the Vault. A 1/1 for B should not be a game breaking creature who is impossible to deal with. That's almost exactly what Disciple of the Vault is. He's above even artifact lands on my list of ban targets.
3. Frogmite and Myr Enforcer NEED to go
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
Quite simply, banning Frogmite and Myr Enforcer in an effort to neuter Affinity would be like trying to castrate a bull with toenail clippers.
The two cards are costed correctly and are smaller than some of the other creatures in Magic's history that came out for a lower cost. (ie. Blastoderm)
HKKID - Fiction
Frogmite is a good, aggressively priced 2/2. Hardly any more broken than Isamaru, Hound of Konda. Even at 3 mana, Myr Enforcer is just an aggressively priced vanilla 4/4 who dies to just about any gang-block or removal spell. I would actually be significantly more worried about Somber Hoverguard and his ability to dodge Oxidize and Viridian Shaman than I would be either Frogmite or Enforcer.
4. Cranial Plating is an issue that needs taken care of
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
The football helmet is definitely something you need to watch out for, especially when paired with Ornithopters or Somber Hoverguards. However, it is not as big of a threat as many people say. Does it increase the speed of some of the kills Affinity delivers? Oh yeah. But is this card the reason for Affinity's dominance on the metagame? No.
That's the true question. Why would anyone want to ban Cranial Plating if it isn't the problem with Affinity? Who knows?
HKKID - Neither
Cranial Plating is definitely a powerful card, especially in conjunction with Blinkmoth Nexus. It has essentially conspired to keep Wrath of God from being playable. On the other hand, Plating relies heavily on having lots of artifact lands in play, and does nothing without a creature to equip it to. There is no particular need to ban it, unless Wizards desires to return Affinity to the days of 10 counterspells and 4 Broodstars.
5. Aether Vial needs to be removed from Type II
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
The Vial is just a decent card. It allows for aggro decks to drop their critters without the fear of a counterspell, but only to an extent. The reason that the Vial appears so powerful is because Affinity's best utility creatures cost 1 or 2 mana. Instant-speed Disciples and blockers may be annoying, but they are not associated with Affinity's power. The Vial actually tends to make Affinity play more controlling and somewhat slower often times too.
HKKID - Fiction
Aether Vial is a good utility spell, but not bannable. It provides an excellent method of accelerating out your 1 and 2 drops, but it is easily destroyed, and is not an aggressive threat by itself. Sure, instant speed critters are powerful, and all the more so if they are free. That's not grounds for a banning. Furthermore, Ravager as a whole is still insanely good without Aether Vial.
6. Eternal Witness is too good
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
Everyone has a card that they just hate. For me, it's definitely the twisted little Cleric, but for some reason, people have lately begun to get angry with one of my favorite staples, Eternal Witness. Why would they do such a thing?
The only answer I can find is that they aren't angry with the Shaman at all. They are angry at green's apparent dominance of the metagame. Currently, 3 of the top 4 decks in Type II use green as a main (or their only) color. Each and every one of these decks is playing 4 Eternal Witness.
We've had good cards in the past, but why all the uproar now? Eternal Witness is one of the few powerful cards in Magic's history that doesn't have to be in a certain style of deck. She can fit in any deck running more than one or two Forests.
Eternal Witness is very powerful, but honestly, she's not extremely powerful, and thus, shouldn't be banned.
HKKID - Fiction
Eternal Witness is a horrible beatdown creature, a poor win condition, and a bad chump blocker. Sure she's played in every deck with green, but so are Viridian Shaman, Sakura Tribe Elder, and Oxidize. These cards are the reason people play green in the fist place! Having a good or powerful ability is not grounds for banning a creature. Creatures get banned because the deck that revolves around them is distorting the entire format.
I'm not sure how this even made our question list. The absurdity of banning a 9-mana sorcery is beyond comprehension. Even when playing against a Tooth and Nail deck, everybody knows the correct play is to cast Cranial Extraction naming Sundering Titan first. Tooth and Nail isn't the most dangerous spell, even in the deck that bears its name!
Banning the artifact lands would do more than "neuter" or "bring Affinity down a notch"... Banning the artifact lands would make Affinity, as well as some other decks, completely UNPLAYABLE.
For that reason, I really don't want to see them banned.
HKKID - Fact
The surefire way to neuter the power of Affinity is to ban the artifact lands. Every single one of the Ravager cards discussed above, and even some of the ones we havent (such as Thoughtcast), rely on having lots of artifacts in play. Without the lands to provide that steady source of artifacts, the deck falls apart. This does have the "unpleasant" side effect of "killing" decks like KCI, however that deck has not had a serious impact on the standard metagame since Onslaught Block rotated.
One possible solution to the artifact lands which has been seeing a lot of discussion is making them Legendary. This does seem to make sense from a flavor perspective. After all, how many Great Furnaces can there possibly be? It also blends nicely with the Legend heavy Kamigawa block. Unfortunately, while this may be good from a Type 2 perspective, it's bad for Magic overall.
A mass errata would effect the artifact lands in all formats. In Extended, Ravager Affinity is a powerful, but not excessively powerful, deck. Recently a RBUGoblin Welder-based artifact reanimator deck has been showing up as well. You'll never guess what artifacts it uses to feed the Welder.
The artifact lands are insanely broken in Standard. But once they get into the larger cardpools of Extended and beyond, they are comparable to basic lands that die to an Energy Flux.
As much as I still believe that Arcbound Ravager isn't the key piece to stop in Affinity, the only cards I can honestly see the DCI banning are the Disciple and the Ravager. The artifact lands are only a true threat with Disciple of the Vault around anyways. They also belong to many different decks, not just Affinity.
Banning Disciple of the Vault and Arcbound Ravager is a nice 1-2 punch to the defining deck of Type 2. It does not kill the possiblity of an "Affinity" variety deck being played, however it does make it much more likely that the deck will turn into a Ornithopter - Cranial Plating sort of countermagic based Affinity deck rather than the aggro-combo monstrosity we have now. It also rather pleasantly leaves artifact lands in the format, so that if red wants to play Great Furnace (to feed to Shrapnel Blast) they could be used as they were originally intended to.
Banning just Disciple of the Vault is still a significant blow to Affinity. Without having the ability to "combo out" of a bad position, the artifact deck loses a good deal of its explosive power. However, it does remain a very fast deck, and will likely remain a force in the T2 metagame.
In summary
We hope you have a wonderful Valentine's Day. Expect to see us writing fairly often about Type 2 (as well as other formats), and you can be sure to see an overview on the changes to Type 2 as soon as we get the announcement on March 1st.
I liked the article a lot. It was rather good. And I think your right about the banniings, but I think its more realistic that they'll ban the artifact lands. They will go all the way just to make sure raffinity doesnt run wild even after the bannings..
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Einstein »
Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -how passionately I hate them!
Quote from Nietzsche »
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
[thread=41221][my extendo sig][/thread] [thread=56664][moderator helpdesk][/thread] [Pen and Paper Inn]
Just add me on msn if you have any questions or just want to talk
what metagame are you following? It would splash damage: KCI and big red. As well, as lots of rouge decks..
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Einstein »
Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -how passionately I hate them!
Quote from Nietzsche »
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
[thread=41221][my extendo sig][/thread] [thread=56664][moderator helpdesk][/thread] [Pen and Paper Inn]
Just add me on msn if you have any questions or just want to talk
I know they are dreadfully casual, but many casual players use the artifact lands for KCI and Cog-type decks...
They aren't overly competitive, but the bannings will have an effect on casual players too...
I mean, would watching Affinity completely die off be fun? Kind of ;). But if we nuke some casual decks that the casual players enjoy in the process, Wizards is hurting two "formats" at once in Type II: the competitive and the casual.
We've got plenty of casual players here that play in tournaments and follow the Banned list...
That's why you see thinks like Snakes and Rats at FNM... The people piloting them sure aren't competitive players, but they still play at the tournament to socialize and such, but I digress.
As effective as it would be, banning the artifact lands would cause more trouble than its worth, and I haven't been convinced otherwise...
Of course, you might get a different side from HKKID
Still, the fact remains that they want to "fix" Affinity...
Banning the artifact lands destroys it.
There's a difference.
EDIT - Belgareth: Ah, but do you not miss the days of Sarnia Affinity, when it was a slow and clunky deck, being far from broken?
Yes, I'm tired of Affinity, but rather than make it worse than White Weenie (by removing the artifact lands), why not instead, make it as terrible as White Weenie (by pulling the Disciple and Ravager)?
Thanks for the great article, ButteBlues18. I can't wait for the next ones.
On the note of the bannings, I would like to see Disciple and mabye Ravager banned. While artifact lands would kill it, it would also hurt other decks which is not a good thing.
4. Cranial Plating is an issue that needs taken care of
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
The football helmet is definitely something you need to watch out for, especially when paired with Ornithopters or Somber Hoverguards. However, it is not as big of a threat as many people say. Does it increase the speed of some of the kills Affinity delivers? Oh yeah. But is this card the reason for Affinity's dominance on the metagame? No.
That's the true question. Why would anyone want to ban Cranial Plating if it isn't the problem with Affinity? Who knows?
HKKID - Neither
Cranial Plating is definitely a powerful card, especially in conjunction with Blinkmoth Nexus. It has essentially conspired to keep Wrath of God from being playable. On the other hand, Plating relies heavily on having lots of artifact lands in play, and does nothing without a creature to equip it to. There is no particular need to ban it, unless Wizards desires to return Affinity to the days of 10 counterspells and 4 Broodstars.
Are you both crazy? Try playing Affinity without Cranial Plating and see how medicore the deck becomes. The fact is, it's a cheap way to Beserk your creatures- and at instant speed, no less. Imagine just for a second that there was a green spell called Super Giant Growth. It gave +2/+2 to a creature for each creature you control at instant speed, and it only costs GG to use. Wouldn't that make Stompy just freaking broken? That same arguement can be applied here. When your deck is 90% artifacts, wouldn't you run something that gives your creatures +1/+0 for each artifact you control?
What is even more amazing is the fact that even without the artifact lands, Plating will still be played post-bannings if it doesn't get banned. I feel you both missed the mark on just how crazy this card is and it's need for a banning.
5. Aether Vial needs to be removed from Type II
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
The Vial is just a decent card. It allows for aggro decks to drop their critters without the fear of a counterspell, but only to an extent. The reason that the Vial appears so powerful is because Affinity's best utility creatures cost 1 or 2 mana. Instant-speed Disciples and blockers may be annoying, but they are not associated with Affinity's power. The Vial actually tends to make Affinity play more controlling and somewhat slower often times too.
HKKID - Fiction
Aether Vial is a good utility spell, but not bannable. It provides an excellent method of accelerating out your 1 and 2 drops, but it is easily destroyed, and is not an aggressive threat by itself. Sure, instant speed critters are powerful, and all the more so if they are free. That's not grounds for a banning. Furthermore, Ravager as a whole is still insanely good without Aether Vial.
Wha?! Are you both serious? This card breaks the one most fundamental rule of Magic: that you must pay mana to cast creatures. By circumventing that cost, you just break open the playing field. What's even better is that there's no way to counter the creature and it can be played as an instant! How is that not broken?
The fact is, Vial makes Affinity too resilient, and allows Affinity to not sweat over counterspells and the ilk. Look at Extended after all. Life, Goblins, and Affinity all run Aether Vial, and all are Tier 1. How can you not see just how crazy the deck is for Standard?
Chad Ellis wrote an article about this a few days ago on SCG. I suggest you both read it to see how mistaken you both are on this 1cc Artifact.
Banning the artifact lands would do more than "neuter" or "bring Affinity down a notch"... Banning the artifact lands would make Affinity, as well as some other decks, completely UNPLAYABLE.
For that reason, I really don't want to see them banned.
Imagine if every land in your deck powered up your creatures, pinged your opponent, AND provided an additional 1 mana for certain cards. Wouldn't you play them? That's the case with the Artifact lands. You said it exactly in that they only are synergetic with Ravager, DotV, Frogmite, Myr Enforcer, and Thougtcast. But that's precisely why they should be banned- basic lands normally don't even begin to do that, and if they did, people would play decks with the cards that do it. Imagine if you will that there was a Green creature that, for just the cost of sacrificing a land, gave all of your creatures +1/+1 until end of turn. Broken, no? That's exactly what Arcbound Ravager is.
Overall though, a good job on your first article. I really liked it, despite my criticisms.
Ok, let's say Affinity gets nerfed. Tooth and Nail now runs roughshod over the format. Sure, there are some potential hosers in CHK and BOK, but I doubt WOTC would wreck Affinity just to create a new 800-pound gorilla in its place.
I think they'll whack (or at least, should whack) AEther Vial and Disciple. At that point, TNN has to follow to avoid filling Affinity's shoes a little too well.
This article did not fill me with joy
Why did HKKID say that banning Ravager would help solve the problem, then talk for two paragraphs about how it wouldn't?
Why does the art of Aether Vial with a question mark over it look like it was made into a .jpg in MS Paint?
Quote from Qwertah »
Banning the artifact lands would make Affinity, as well as some other decks, completely UNPLAYABLE.
Name a deck that this applies to the doesn't start with "KC" and end with "I, the deck that would completely dominate the fomat if Ravager is neutered without artifact lands being banned."
Ever notice that the background of Disciple of the Vault seems to read "kill it." You have to include the Disciple himself as the 2nd L, and there's some liberal interpretation of the first i, but could this be a subtle clue from R&D??? :tongue2:
There's no predicting what they'll do, because we only have subtle clues as to how aggressive the bannings will be and how careful they will be about not changing other deck archetypes. Decent first article for the site though.
Why does the art of Aether Vial with a question mark over it look like it was made into a .jpg in MS Paint?
The graphics will get better as time goes on.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
Wha?! Are you both serious? This card breaks the one most fundamental rule of Magic: that you must pay mana to cast creatures. By circumventing that cost, you just break open the playing field. What's even better is that there's no way to counter the creature and it can be played as an instant! How is that not broken?
The fact is, Vial makes Affinity too resilient, and allows Affinity to not sweat over counterspells and the ilk. Look at Extended after all. Life, Goblins, and Affinity all run Aether Vial, and all are Tier 1. How can you not see just how crazy the deck is for Standard?
Chad Ellis wrote an article about this a few days ago on SCG. I suggest you both read it to see how mistaken you both are on this 1cc Artifact.
Yes it breaks the rules of aggro, but it's also refreshing to find aggro has a way to go around control. Rules are meant to be broken, provided that they dont degenerate.
Gives control one helluva game, but that's what people who wants to go aggro desires, not the other way round. Yes, control tends to get the short end of the staff these days, but as with mana denial, nobody likes to play against people who says no to every thing you cast, especially in t2 where you have a smaller card pool to deal with.
It's fine to me in other decks that ran from 1-2 creatures to 20-30 of 'em, but it's definitely not good when affinity abuses it as a fact that it fuels affinity, acts as ravager food, and 1 more point for the disciple.
Ahh.
While other decks simply use them to churn creatures out faster, the problem with vial in affinity is that it uses vial in more ways than 1 compared to them other decks. Removing the vial wont hurt affinity much, because the roots of the problem are still there. People still ran affinity without vial to certain success, but in removing vial, it's gonna screw up the chances for other decks trying to race up affinity.
But we dont went decks to be able to race up to affinity.. if more decks were at that speed.. its just not healthy for the format.. We need to slow raffinity down.. And the only way to slow it down is killing the artilands.. But that would do more then kill it, it would destroy it complete and utter..
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Einstein »
Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -how passionately I hate them!
Quote from Nietzsche »
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
[thread=41221][my extendo sig][/thread] [thread=56664][moderator helpdesk][/thread] [Pen and Paper Inn]
Just add me on msn if you have any questions or just want to talk
Yet, Cranial Plating is only "great" when the opponent has BB open, as otherwise, you can block their attacker...
Wee covered about everything I feel about AEther Vial... It's a good card, but only extremely good with cards like Meddling Mage (Which, i remind you, is already great to begin with).
As for Tooth and Nail, the deck won't be as bad as people think... If Affinity is neutered successfully, the format will slow way down. If that happens, cards like Sowing Salt and Eradicate won't be too slow anymore... not to mention, counters. Tooth and Nail might be good post-bannings, but it is no where near, and never will be near, the power level of Affinity as it is now.
Agreed, by killing the artilands will completely destroy it. It's also generally agreed the fireball of affinity in the form of the 'll cleric that's degenerate.
Fast beatings is the, in my opinion, the main characteristic of affinity. Artilands fuel this, but they also work as pump for plating and the fireball. There will be alot of thought going into this. How will they make sure that the artilands do what they are initially intended to do, to just simply fuel affinity and reward players for take a risk to run a deck based on artifacts that faces a myraid of hate available. Affinity should be a risky deck to play, not the other way round.
Are you both crazy? Try playing Affinity without Cranial Plating and see how medicore the deck becomes.
Well, I can't speak for Butte Blues, but my pshrink tells me I'm special and keeps me motivated. As for saying affinity without plating is bad... Why don't you try playing it without disciple of the vault :p.
The fact is, it's a cheap way to Beserk your creatures- and at instant speed, no less. Imagine just for a second that there was a green spell called Super Giant Growth. It gave +2/+2 to a creature for each creature you control at instant speed, and it only costs GG to use. Wouldn't that make Stompy just freaking broken? That same arguement can be applied here. When your deck is 90% artifacts, wouldn't you run something that gives your creatures +1/+0 for each artifact you control?
Well no it wouldn't. Because in the current format, stompy is absolutely horrible. There are also FAR more methods of dealing with an artifact than an instant...
What is even more amazing is the fact that even without the artifact lands, Plating will still be played post-bannings if it doesn't get banned.
If we're assuming that affinity is even viable without the artifact lands, then I guess we could assume plating is getting used. But lets not make silly arguments, because without artifact lands the entire concept of affinity just doesn't work.
Wha?! Are you both serious? This card breaks the one most fundamental rule of Magic: that you must pay mana to cast creatures. By circumventing that cost, you just break open the playing field. What's even better is that there's no way to counter the creature and it can be played as an instant! How is that not broken?
The fact is, Vial makes Affinity too resilient, and allows Affinity to not sweat over counterspells and the ilk. Look at Extended after all. Life, Goblins, and Affinity all run Aether Vial, and all are Tier 1. How can you not see just how crazy the deck is for Standard?
Did I ever say aether vial was a bad card? Nope. Did Butte? Nope. We just expressed an opinion that it was good, but not bannable. That's the same opinion I have of several cards in the format, such as Eternal Witness, and Sundering Titan. Cards don't get banned for being good, they get banned for destorting an entire format.
Quote from kingkobweb »
Why did HKKID say that banning Ravager would help solve the problem, then talk for two paragraphs about how it wouldn't?
I only spent 1 paragraph saying it wouldn't. If the question was "banning ravager will fix the problem" then I would have replied fiction. I think banning ravager is a part of one possible fix, I don't think it's a fix all by itself.
I was told today that this kid on my team called 911 twice this morning and hung up both times. They called back and his dad answered. The reason the kid called 911? He got an erection and didn't know what to do. I wish I was making this up.
I did enjoy your article, I think it was the first time I actually read something you posted Will
Now, I'll give you all my 2 cents, because its 1 am here and I am bored out of my skull:
What happens if _____ gets banned:
If Ravager goes...Atog takes its spot...no more modular craziness, but it still combos with DotV.
If DotV gets the boot like it should of when skullclamp got booted, then affinity will become a pure aggro deck, most likely Shrapnel Blast will once again be used to provide the final last hit. But, even with DotV gone, there can still be turn 3-4 kills....sooooo
If Ravager and DotV go, no more modular, no more unstoppable life loss stacking funess, and 2 major voids for affinity to fill. So far, this hurts the most.
Banning Plating...is ummm...not gonna happen, and if it does, people need to be shot...
Banning Vial...is dumb...vial + MM is nice, just like IS + Orim's Chant is nice. In T2, you can't have any broken things like that, so no reason to ban vial. Also, if DotV goes like it should, then vial is just a fun combo trick for bringing out ornithopers to block.
and now...the star of our show....artifact lands....
And its been stated by everyone and their whole extended family, but what makes affinity the powerhouse of free crap are these lands. What happens if they get the boot, well, affinity dies. Affinity only has darksteel citadel and a few other crap cards from mirrodin to work with. Sure, this takes out KCI and casual cogs...but who cares, its a shakey combo deck and a casual deck that are going out with the most broken deck...I think that is the sacrifce that needs to be made to bring T2 back to a more diverse meta. Sure other decks will take tiny hits, like Big Red won't have Great Furnace to sac to Shrapnel Blast anymore and otehr little things like that, but its needed.
And if Witness or TaN or both get banned...I'll hitt R&D with a bus...now we don't want that to happen....
And so I have most likely state what has been said in this and in other threads, but w/e I personally thing Ravager and DotV will take the bans. Then, Affinity will run atog and S blast or something like that. Sure it won't be the same, but it will still get free creatures, and free draw and things like that. And you'll still have big plated ornithopers and so on. The deck will stil lbe around. And you could also have Broodstars again and things like that so...blah...just get rid of the stupid lands, stupid wizards...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't mind my posts, they are probably just a product of gang violence
I really dont want to see the Artifact lands go. Im against ravager I would love more then anything to see it die, but decks like KCI and other affinity based decks are fun to play.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Votan for my Avvy and banner.:symg:
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
An Article by ButteBlues18 and HKKID
Late last week, an exciting article was brought to the public by Wizards of the Coast. Some view the changes as hasty and irrational, but the masses have been clamoring for changes since before States. The only problem is, the masses cannot decide on which cards need banned. Join HKKID and I as we take you through each of the possible choices for banning and why they should (and shouldn't) be banned.
Here's a snippet of the article for those of you who missed the link:
So, we know something is going to happen, but what? Here's what we think about some of the "recommended" choices provided by members of the site.
1. Banning Arcbound Ravager will help solve the problem
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
Arcbound Ravager, while a very good card, is not at all responsible for the dominance of Affinity in Type II. All Arcbound Ravager does is provide a more resilient Atog effect. Banning the Ravager wouldn't accomplish anything in the long run, and Atog would just become a more important piece of the deck. Ravager is definitely a good card, but it is not the source of the problems with Affinity, and it shouldn't be banned.
The most powerful part of Affinity is easily the overall synergy the cards have with each other. Arcbound Ravager is very synergistic, but is far from being broken.
HKKID - Fact.
Arcbound Ravager is cheap to cast, and gets BIG really fast. He also tends to force your opponent to have an abundance of blockers, or the Ravager counters get moved to the one creature that didn't get blocked. There is also the nice Disciple of the Vault combination kill.
However banning Ravager by himself won't fix the problem at all. Atog is already used in most Affinity decks. Look at the similarites between the two: Atog costs 2 mana, provides an excellent sac outlet for Disciple of the Vault, and MUST be blocked every time he swings. You lose the ability to move the modular counters everywhere, but make up for it with an immunity to Oxidize.
2. Banning Disciple of the Vault is better for the environment overall
ButteBlues18 - Fact
Disciple of the Vault is comparible to Psychatog in terms of general power. Now remember that Psychatog cost 1UB whereas the twisted little Cleric costs a measly B.
Aggro decks are historically known to forego using alternate win conditions in favor of their choice route of fast creatures that hit efficiently. The problem with Disciple of the Vault is that it defies the norm for aggro. Affinity has an alternate win condition that is almost uncounterable and doesn't even require them to attack you. This is plain wrong, as Affinity still has no trouble killing you by attacking. Disciple of the Vault is at the top of the list of cards I believe need banning.
HKKID - Fact
Disciple of the Vault is an absolute powerhouse. The question is always one of order. Versus an aggro deck, the Atog or Ravager goes first, and is followed by a Disciple. The combination kill can then occur in response to whatever sort of unpleasant creature removal your opponent has planned.
Against control, it's a good idea to cast the Disciple first, which lets you go off in response to your Ravager getting Oxidized! Simply put, there is no good method for dealing with a Disciple of the Vault. A 1/1 for B should not be a game breaking creature who is impossible to deal with. That's almost exactly what Disciple of the Vault is. He's above even artifact lands on my list of ban targets.
3. Frogmite and Myr Enforcer NEED to go
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
Quite simply, banning Frogmite and Myr Enforcer in an effort to neuter Affinity would be like trying to castrate a bull with toenail clippers.
The two cards are costed correctly and are smaller than some of the other creatures in Magic's history that came out for a lower cost. (ie. Blastoderm)
HKKID - Fiction
Frogmite is a good, aggressively priced 2/2. Hardly any more broken than Isamaru, Hound of Konda. Even at 3 mana, Myr Enforcer is just an aggressively priced vanilla 4/4 who dies to just about any gang-block or removal spell. I would actually be significantly more worried about Somber Hoverguard and his ability to dodge Oxidize and Viridian Shaman than I would be either Frogmite or Enforcer.
4. Cranial Plating is an issue that needs taken care of
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
The football helmet is definitely something you need to watch out for, especially when paired with Ornithopters or Somber Hoverguards. However, it is not as big of a threat as many people say. Does it increase the speed of some of the kills Affinity delivers? Oh yeah. But is this card the reason for Affinity's dominance on the metagame? No.
That's the true question. Why would anyone want to ban Cranial Plating if it isn't the problem with Affinity? Who knows?
HKKID - Neither
Cranial Plating is definitely a powerful card, especially in conjunction with Blinkmoth Nexus. It has essentially conspired to keep Wrath of God from being playable. On the other hand, Plating relies heavily on having lots of artifact lands in play, and does nothing without a creature to equip it to. There is no particular need to ban it, unless Wizards desires to return Affinity to the days of 10 counterspells and 4 Broodstars.
5. Aether Vial needs to be removed from Type II
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
The Vial is just a decent card. It allows for aggro decks to drop their critters without the fear of a counterspell, but only to an extent. The reason that the Vial appears so powerful is because Affinity's best utility creatures cost 1 or 2 mana. Instant-speed Disciples and blockers may be annoying, but they are not associated with Affinity's power. The Vial actually tends to make Affinity play more controlling and somewhat slower often times too.
HKKID - Fiction
Aether Vial is a good utility spell, but not bannable. It provides an excellent method of accelerating out your 1 and 2 drops, but it is easily destroyed, and is not an aggressive threat by itself. Sure, instant speed critters are powerful, and all the more so if they are free. That's not grounds for a banning. Furthermore, Ravager as a whole is still insanely good without Aether Vial.
6. Eternal Witness is too good
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
Everyone has a card that they just hate. For me, it's definitely the twisted little Cleric, but for some reason, people have lately begun to get angry with one of my favorite staples, Eternal Witness. Why would they do such a thing?
The only answer I can find is that they aren't angry with the Shaman at all. They are angry at green's apparent dominance of the metagame. Currently, 3 of the top 4 decks in Type II use green as a main (or their only) color. Each and every one of these decks is playing 4 Eternal Witness.
We've had good cards in the past, but why all the uproar now? Eternal Witness is one of the few powerful cards in Magic's history that doesn't have to be in a certain style of deck. She can fit in any deck running more than one or two Forests.
Eternal Witness is very powerful, but honestly, she's not extremely powerful, and thus, shouldn't be banned.
HKKID - Fiction
Eternal Witness is a horrible beatdown creature, a poor win condition, and a bad chump blocker. Sure she's played in every deck with green, but so are Viridian Shaman, Sakura Tribe Elder, and Oxidize. These cards are the reason people play green in the fist place! Having a good or powerful ability is not grounds for banning a creature. Creatures get banned because the deck that revolves around them is distorting the entire format.
7. Tooth and Nail needs to be banned
ButteBlues18 - Fiction
*Giggles are heard in the background*
I just can't stop laughing... Tooth and Nail is one of the least "broken" cards in history! The only reason the card sees play is that the Urza lands were reprinted in 8th! Tooth and Nail shouldn't be anywhere near this list.
HKKID - Fiction
I'm not sure how this even made our question list. The absurdity of banning a 9-mana sorcery is beyond comprehension. Even when playing against a Tooth and Nail deck, everybody knows the correct play is to cast Cranial Extraction naming Sundering Titan first. Tooth and Nail isn't the most dangerous spell, even in the deck that bears its name!
8. The Artifact Lands are too good
ButteBlues18 - Neither
The artifact lands are good cards in conjunction with the Affinity mechanic, but other than that, they are mediocre basic lands. Except for cases in Extended (like Teen Titans), the artifact lands are mainly used for their relative power in conjunction with the Affinity mechanic, Disciple of the Vault, and Arcbound Ravager.
Banning the artifact lands would do more than "neuter" or "bring Affinity down a notch"... Banning the artifact lands would make Affinity, as well as some other decks, completely UNPLAYABLE.
For that reason, I really don't want to see them banned.
HKKID - Fact
The surefire way to neuter the power of Affinity is to ban the artifact lands. Every single one of the Ravager cards discussed above, and even some of the ones we havent (such as Thoughtcast), rely on having lots of artifacts in play. Without the lands to provide that steady source of artifacts, the deck falls apart. This does have the "unpleasant" side effect of "killing" decks like KCI, however that deck has not had a serious impact on the standard metagame since Onslaught Block rotated.
One possible solution to the artifact lands which has been seeing a lot of discussion is making them Legendary. This does seem to make sense from a flavor perspective. After all, how many Great Furnaces can there possibly be? It also blends nicely with the Legend heavy Kamigawa block. Unfortunately, while this may be good from a Type 2 perspective, it's bad for Magic overall.
A mass errata would effect the artifact lands in all formats. In Extended, Ravager Affinity is a powerful, but not excessively powerful, deck. Recently a RBU Goblin Welder-based artifact reanimator deck has been showing up as well. You'll never guess what artifacts it uses to feed the Welder.
The artifact lands are insanely broken in Standard. But once they get into the larger cardpools of Extended and beyond, they are comparable to basic lands that die to an Energy Flux.
9. What Needs to be Banned, and in What Order?
ButteBlues18 -
Worth banning
Disciple of the Vault and Arcbound Ravager
Debatable
Artifact Lands
Don't touch them
Cranial Plating, Aether Vial, Tooth and Nail, and Eternal Witness
As much as I still believe that Arcbound Ravager isn't the key piece to stop in Affinity, the only cards I can honestly see the DCI banning are the Disciple and the Ravager. The artifact lands are only a true threat with Disciple of the Vault around anyways. They also belong to many different decks, not just Affinity.
Cranial Plating, Aether Vial, Tooth and Nail, and Eternal Witness are playable cards, but if the DCI would be insane enough to ban them, I'd eat the moldy stuff in my refrigerator.
HKKID -
1: Artifact Lands
2: Disciple of the Vault and Arcbound Ravager
3: Disciple of the Vault
Banning Disciple of the Vault and Arcbound Ravager is a nice 1-2 punch to the defining deck of Type 2. It does not kill the possiblity of an "Affinity" variety deck being played, however it does make it much more likely that the deck will turn into a Ornithopter - Cranial Plating sort of countermagic based Affinity deck rather than the aggro-combo monstrosity we have now. It also rather pleasantly leaves artifact lands in the format, so that if red wants to play Great Furnace (to feed to Shrapnel Blast) they could be used as they were originally intended to.
Banning just Disciple of the Vault is still a significant blow to Affinity. Without having the ability to "combo out" of a bad position, the artifact deck loses a good deal of its explosive power. However, it does remain a very fast deck, and will likely remain a force in the T2 metagame.
In summary
We hope you have a wonderful Valentine's Day. Expect to see us writing fairly often about Type 2 (as well as other formats), and you can be sure to see an overview on the changes to Type 2 as soon as we get the announcement on March 1st.
See you then!
-Will (ButteBlues18)
-Travis (HKKID)
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
[thread=41221][my extendo sig][/thread] [thread=56664][moderator helpdesk][/thread] [Pen and Paper Inn]
Just add me on msn if you have any questions or just want to talk
The Wizards article specifically says they want to fix their mistake; not obliterate it...
Though, regardless of the "splash damage", banning the artifact lands would be effective...
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
[thread=41221][my extendo sig][/thread] [thread=56664][moderator helpdesk][/thread] [Pen and Paper Inn]
Just add me on msn if you have any questions or just want to talk
They aren't overly competitive, but the bannings will have an effect on casual players too...
I mean, would watching Affinity completely die off be fun? Kind of ;). But if we nuke some casual decks that the casual players enjoy in the process, Wizards is hurting two "formats" at once in Type II: the competitive and the casual.
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
That's why you see thinks like Snakes and Rats at FNM... The people piloting them sure aren't competitive players, but they still play at the tournament to socialize and such, but I digress.
As effective as it would be, banning the artifact lands would cause more trouble than its worth, and I haven't been convinced otherwise...
Of course, you might get a different side from HKKID
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
Banning the artifact lands destroys it.
There's a difference.
EDIT - Belgareth: Ah, but do you not miss the days of Sarnia Affinity, when it was a slow and clunky deck, being far from broken?
Yes, I'm tired of Affinity, but rather than make it worse than White Weenie (by removing the artifact lands), why not instead, make it as terrible as White Weenie (by pulling the Disciple and Ravager)?
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
Now where's the next article? Twinkee wants it now!!
On the note of the bannings, I would like to see Disciple and mabye Ravager banned. While artifact lands would kill it, it would also hurt other decks which is not a good thing.
By kingcobweb and Goblinboy.
Official Elitist of [thread=40859][RBS][/thread]
Are you both crazy? Try playing Affinity without Cranial Plating and see how medicore the deck becomes. The fact is, it's a cheap way to Beserk your creatures- and at instant speed, no less. Imagine just for a second that there was a green spell called Super Giant Growth. It gave +2/+2 to a creature for each creature you control at instant speed, and it only costs GG to use. Wouldn't that make Stompy just freaking broken? That same arguement can be applied here. When your deck is 90% artifacts, wouldn't you run something that gives your creatures +1/+0 for each artifact you control?
What is even more amazing is the fact that even without the artifact lands, Plating will still be played post-bannings if it doesn't get banned. I feel you both missed the mark on just how crazy this card is and it's need for a banning.
Wha?! Are you both serious? This card breaks the one most fundamental rule of Magic: that you must pay mana to cast creatures. By circumventing that cost, you just break open the playing field. What's even better is that there's no way to counter the creature and it can be played as an instant! How is that not broken?
The fact is, Vial makes Affinity too resilient, and allows Affinity to not sweat over counterspells and the ilk. Look at Extended after all. Life, Goblins, and Affinity all run Aether Vial, and all are Tier 1. How can you not see just how crazy the deck is for Standard?
Chad Ellis wrote an article about this a few days ago on SCG. I suggest you both read it to see how mistaken you both are on this 1cc Artifact.
Imagine if every land in your deck powered up your creatures, pinged your opponent, AND provided an additional 1 mana for certain cards. Wouldn't you play them? That's the case with the Artifact lands. You said it exactly in that they only are synergetic with Ravager, DotV, Frogmite, Myr Enforcer, and Thougtcast. But that's precisely why they should be banned- basic lands normally don't even begin to do that, and if they did, people would play decks with the cards that do it. Imagine if you will that there was a Green creature that, for just the cost of sacrificing a land, gave all of your creatures +1/+1 until end of turn. Broken, no? That's exactly what Arcbound Ravager is.
Overall though, a good job on your first article. I really liked it, despite my criticisms.
I think they'll whack (or at least, should whack) AEther Vial and Disciple. At that point, TNN has to follow to avoid filling Affinity's shoes a little too well.
My Eternal Cube on CubeTutor| |My Reject Rare Cube on CubeTutor| |My Peasant Cube on CubeTutor
I used to write for MTGS, including Cranial Insertion and cube articles. Good on you if you can find those after the upgrade.
Why did HKKID say that banning Ravager would help solve the problem, then talk for two paragraphs about how it wouldn't?
Why does the art of Aether Vial with a question mark over it look like it was made into a .jpg in MS Paint?
Name a deck that this applies to the doesn't start with "KC" and end with "I, the deck that would completely dominate the fomat if Ravager is neutered without artifact lands being banned."
There's no predicting what they'll do, because we only have subtle clues as to how aggressive the bannings will be and how careful they will be about not changing other deck archetypes. Decent first article for the site though.
Cranial plating would be my choice to get the boot and the artifact lands as well I believe really need to get the boot and fast.
And I don't agree with even thinking of banning witness. Its good but not that great. I say deal with the source first such as Toot and nail.
Ben
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=2544
Motl Refs
Thanks to Zoob for the great Avatar:p
The graphics will get better as time goes on.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
Yes it breaks the rules of aggro, but it's also refreshing to find aggro has a way to go around control. Rules are meant to be broken, provided that they dont degenerate.
Gives control one helluva game, but that's what people who wants to go aggro desires, not the other way round. Yes, control tends to get the short end of the staff these days, but as with mana denial, nobody likes to play against people who says no to every thing you cast, especially in t2 where you have a smaller card pool to deal with.
It's fine to me in other decks that ran from 1-2 creatures to 20-30 of 'em, but it's definitely not good when affinity abuses it as a fact that it fuels affinity, acts as ravager food, and 1 more point for the disciple.
Ahh.
While other decks simply use them to churn creatures out faster, the problem with vial in affinity is that it uses vial in more ways than 1 compared to them other decks. Removing the vial wont hurt affinity much, because the roots of the problem are still there. People still ran affinity without vial to certain success, but in removing vial, it's gonna screw up the chances for other decks trying to race up affinity.
<Qzilla> losing to girls at magic is such a high
[thread=41221][my extendo sig][/thread] [thread=56664][moderator helpdesk][/thread] [Pen and Paper Inn]
Just add me on msn if you have any questions or just want to talk
Arguments against my opinions on Cranial Plating:
Yet, Cranial Plating is only "great" when the opponent has BB open, as otherwise, you can block their attacker...
Wee covered about everything I feel about AEther Vial... It's a good card, but only extremely good with cards like Meddling Mage (Which, i remind you, is already great to begin with).
As for Tooth and Nail, the deck won't be as bad as people think... If Affinity is neutered successfully, the format will slow way down. If that happens, cards like Sowing Salt and Eradicate won't be too slow anymore... not to mention, counters. Tooth and Nail might be good post-bannings, but it is no where near, and never will be near, the power level of Affinity as it is now.
[KalmWave] [Last.FM]
Ubuntu Linux
Fast beatings is the, in my opinion, the main characteristic of affinity. Artilands fuel this, but they also work as pump for plating and the fireball. There will be alot of thought going into this. How will they make sure that the artilands do what they are initially intended to do, to just simply fuel affinity and reward players for take a risk to run a deck based on artifacts that faces a myraid of hate available. Affinity should be a risky deck to play, not the other way round.
<Qzilla> losing to girls at magic is such a high
Well, I can't speak for Butte Blues, but my pshrink tells me I'm special and keeps me motivated. As for saying affinity without plating is bad... Why don't you try playing it without disciple of the vault :p.
Well no it wouldn't. Because in the current format, stompy is absolutely horrible. There are also FAR more methods of dealing with an artifact than an instant...
If we're assuming that affinity is even viable without the artifact lands, then I guess we could assume plating is getting used. But lets not make silly arguments, because without artifact lands the entire concept of affinity just doesn't work.
Did I ever say aether vial was a bad card? Nope. Did Butte? Nope. We just expressed an opinion that it was good, but not bannable. That's the same opinion I have of several cards in the format, such as Eternal Witness, and Sundering Titan. Cards don't get banned for being good, they get banned for destorting an entire format.
I only spent 1 paragraph saying it wouldn't. If the question was "banning ravager will fix the problem" then I would have replied fiction. I think banning ravager is a part of one possible fix, I don't think it's a fix all by itself.
Mafia Stats
I did enjoy your article, I think it was the first time I actually read something you posted Will
Now, I'll give you all my 2 cents, because its 1 am here and I am bored out of my skull:
What happens if _____ gets banned:
If Ravager goes...Atog takes its spot...no more modular craziness, but it still combos with DotV.
If DotV gets the boot like it should of when skullclamp got booted, then affinity will become a pure aggro deck, most likely Shrapnel Blast will once again be used to provide the final last hit. But, even with DotV gone, there can still be turn 3-4 kills....sooooo
If Ravager and DotV go, no more modular, no more unstoppable life loss stacking funess, and 2 major voids for affinity to fill. So far, this hurts the most.
Banning Plating...is ummm...not gonna happen, and if it does, people need to be shot...
Banning Vial...is dumb...vial + MM is nice, just like IS + Orim's Chant is nice. In T2, you can't have any broken things like that, so no reason to ban vial. Also, if DotV goes like it should, then vial is just a fun combo trick for bringing out ornithopers to block.
and now...the star of our show....artifact lands....
And its been stated by everyone and their whole extended family, but what makes affinity the powerhouse of free crap are these lands. What happens if they get the boot, well, affinity dies. Affinity only has darksteel citadel and a few other crap cards from mirrodin to work with. Sure, this takes out KCI and casual cogs...but who cares, its a shakey combo deck and a casual deck that are going out with the most broken deck...I think that is the sacrifce that needs to be made to bring T2 back to a more diverse meta. Sure other decks will take tiny hits, like Big Red won't have Great Furnace to sac to Shrapnel Blast anymore and otehr little things like that, but its needed.
And if Witness or TaN or both get banned...I'll hitt R&D with a bus...now we don't want that to happen....
And so I have most likely state what has been said in this and in other threads, but w/e I personally thing Ravager and DotV will take the bans. Then, Affinity will run atog and S blast or something like that. Sure it won't be the same, but it will still get free creatures, and free draw and things like that. And you'll still have big plated ornithopers and so on. The deck will stil lbe around. And you could also have Broodstars again and things like that so...blah...just get rid of the stupid lands, stupid wizards...