After playing for a while, to me, it seems that these two archetypes are just a pile of expensive rare and mythics, but with little synergies. The only one is the restoration angel flicking Thragtusk in Bant.
In the previous standard, at least Delver is revolved around one theme - protect delver and continue attacking, and wolf run is also revolved around one theme - get Titan asap and go for the win. In this standard, Zombies also have the traditional tribal fast aggro theme with some internal synergies.
So, it seems that a pile of on-color expensive good cards can make a tier 1 deck on its own without a clear plan or theme. Does it mean that the rares and mythics in this standard are way too good?!
This isn't just a standard problem. Jund in Modern is essentially the same thing: a pile of good stuff cards. Also, WotC tries to cut down on combo in standard, which contributes to this effect.
The bant control decks are designed like a lot of control decks: early stalling, card advantage, board control through sweepers, and then big powerful spells to take over the later game. It looks like there is no synergy, but the deck is designed to do the same thing every game.
I do think as standard evolves and decks become more refined, this "good stuff" mentality will wane.
The way you describe bant control makes it sound like the Rock.
Jund is closer to that. It runs alot of powerful 1 for 1 removal and then has a high end with really powerful 2 (or more) for 1 cards. It is on the high end of midrange, with early plays and threats big enough to be meaningful when top decked late, but it has real issues against true control unless it draws some bullets specifically for them.
Bant is closer to the old Mirari's wake deck. You sit around and gain life and control the board and then hit your powerful "I win" cards. Mirari's used wake to power out a massive amount of instant speed 2/2s and Bant control uses planeswalkers to buy time to hit miracle entreats or angels of serenity.
Jund wants to 1-for-1 you while it draws into 2-for-1 creatures, that then generate more 1-for-1s; very straightforward, very powerful and very consistent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I write for Channel Fireball now! Read my CFB articles here. Read my Dies to Removal articles here. Read the definitive Red Deck Wins Primer here.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
I'm not quite sure that control decks in the past had much more synergy than now. Sure, there was Squadron Hawk + JaceTMS, Sun Titan + Jace Beleren / Tectonic Edge, and the like years ago.
Also, Azorious Charm [lifelink mode] plus Entreat the Angels / RestoAngel+Thrag is a beating.
The anti-Good stuff mentality doesn't work in Constructed competitive formats. I don't know where players are getting this idea, if not for EDH breeding this mentality.
Most aggro or midrange decks aren't about anything but good cards jammed together anyhow, with little regard to synergy. You think mono-red Goblins' synergy is mindblowing? Or anything Pod decks did?
Again, if you want to play obscure, terrible cards that work well in only narrow decks - play combo. Not many other decks can play Mana Bloom with a straight face like Epic Experiment. Same goes with Increasing Devotion or Increasing Vengeance in that deck.
if i'm understanding you correctly you'd rather play (or play against) delver than jund or bant? just because these decks run lots of mythics and rares doesn't mean its just the 60 best cards in the format.
I, personally would much rather see t2 farseek t3 jace, t4 thragtusk than t2 flip and mana leak in standard.
I have to say I do kind of get your thinking.. I personally am not attracted to playing Jund or Bant although I don't mind too much playing against it.
Delver had a lot of internal synergy and that got even more interesting after M13 with talrands and Dyrads.
Pod forced you to build around it.
the meta game is really interesting even if the deck building is less so, I also agree that it being early on is part of the reason people are just craming the best cards together and calling it a deck.
Are the rares and mythics too powerful? Yes, I think they are. I remember trying to work out what deck to play when my beloved Scar rotated out and I couldn't find anything since every archetype essentially had a core of very expensive cards and the deck didn't work without them. WotC has managed to fix the meta in standard it is no longer 1 deck dominating but they haven't fixed the card dependance of the decks. Thragtusk, Giest or Jace decks then Zombies out on their own.
It isn't about using bad cards zombies is an example of a deck running on syngery, the cards in zombies aren't used in a lot of other decks (at least not the rares) only falkenrath aristocrat
I think I would like to see more of a separation in what cards decks use. I find it sad to see the U/W humans deck running Giest of saint traft just because it is by far the best creature in those colours
A lot of the issues you are describing are just a result of the small card pool. It's very hard to make "acceptable alternative" cards for certain deck slots when you are working with only 5 sets worth of cards. That's why thragtusk and centaur healer are everywhere, and it's also why these decks feel interchangeable.
With that said, all 5 colors are seeing healthy presence in the competitive meta, which is usually all R&D can ask for.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In the previous standard, at least Delver is revolved around one theme - protect delver and continue attacking, and wolf run is also revolved around one theme - get Titan asap and go for the win. In this standard, Zombies also have the traditional tribal fast aggro theme with some internal synergies.
So, it seems that a pile of on-color expensive good cards can make a tier 1 deck on its own without a clear plan or theme. Does it mean that the rares and mythics in this standard are way too good?!
The bant control decks are designed like a lot of control decks: early stalling, card advantage, board control through sweepers, and then big powerful spells to take over the later game. It looks like there is no synergy, but the deck is designed to do the same thing every game.
I do think as standard evolves and decks become more refined, this "good stuff" mentality will wane.
Jund is closer to that. It runs alot of powerful 1 for 1 removal and then has a high end with really powerful 2 (or more) for 1 cards. It is on the high end of midrange, with early plays and threats big enough to be meaningful when top decked late, but it has real issues against true control unless it draws some bullets specifically for them.
Bant is closer to the old Mirari's wake deck. You sit around and gain life and control the board and then hit your powerful "I win" cards. Mirari's used wake to power out a massive amount of instant speed 2/2s and Bant control uses planeswalkers to buy time to hit miracle entreats or angels of serenity.
=
"Sup dawg! I herd u like mountains so I equipped a mountain on your mountain so your can swing with land while you swing with land!"
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
Also, Azorious Charm [lifelink mode] plus Entreat the Angels / RestoAngel+Thrag is a beating.
The anti-Good stuff mentality doesn't work in Constructed competitive formats. I don't know where players are getting this idea, if not for EDH breeding this mentality.
Most aggro or midrange decks aren't about anything but good cards jammed together anyhow, with little regard to synergy. You think mono-red Goblins' synergy is mindblowing? Or anything Pod decks did?
Again, if you want to play obscure, terrible cards that work well in only narrow decks - play combo. Not many other decks can play Mana Bloom with a straight face like Epic Experiment. Same goes with Increasing Devotion or Increasing Vengeance in that deck.
I, personally would much rather see t2 farseek t3 jace, t4 thragtusk than t2 flip and mana leak in standard.
I like beating expensive decks with cheap ones. take at look at the GW humans deck from the weekend. turn 3 thragtusk no problem silverblade palladin + champion of the parish + faiths shield gg.
Delver had a lot of internal synergy and that got even more interesting after M13 with talrands and Dyrads.
Pod forced you to build around it.
the meta game is really interesting even if the deck building is less so, I also agree that it being early on is part of the reason people are just craming the best cards together and calling it a deck.
Are the rares and mythics too powerful? Yes, I think they are. I remember trying to work out what deck to play when my beloved Scar rotated out and I couldn't find anything since every archetype essentially had a core of very expensive cards and the deck didn't work without them. WotC has managed to fix the meta in standard it is no longer 1 deck dominating but they haven't fixed the card dependance of the decks. Thragtusk, Giest or Jace decks then Zombies out on their own.
It isn't about using bad cards zombies is an example of a deck running on syngery, the cards in zombies aren't used in a lot of other decks (at least not the rares) only falkenrath aristocrat
I think I would like to see more of a separation in what cards decks use. I find it sad to see the U/W humans deck running Giest of saint traft just because it is by far the best creature in those colours
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
With that said, all 5 colors are seeing healthy presence in the competitive meta, which is usually all R&D can ask for.