You can't effectively fight a deck like Jund with bans. Its a good stuff deck, it's just a pile of cards that are all good. You can take just about any card of Jund into a vacuum and still go "yeah, that's a solid card." As we already saw with the Bloodbraid Elf ban, given time and new cards entering the pool, Jund will just reach a critical density of good stuff to be right back on top. And this time around, there isn't a good card to choose that doesn't show up elsewhere like with Bloodbraid Elf, so many of Jund's cards are now staples of other decks.
If you want to bring Jund to a more reasonable level, then something needs to be unbanned or printed in an upcoming set that will either create some new, powerful synergy or to give a different set of colors enough good stuff to compete. Other decks simply need to be brought up to Jund's level, not ban something every three to twelve months to make sure there aren't too many good BGx cards. Storm used to give it a run for its money, but pumping combo is dangerous if they want to maintain more ways to interact with them as well as the turn 4 rule. Affinity shows that fast, synergistic aggressive decks can beat Jund. Tron shows that being able to go bigger, faster can beat Jund. So what we should be asking is, what does the format need from a unban/new printing to make new decks that can attack the format similarly to Tron and Affinity? Hate Bears seems like it should have a solid Jund matchup, what could be added to make that deck better against the rest of the meta?
What if wizards planned this all along? What if they really planned to create shells in Modern for good stuff decks? If this is your plan, you can't magically make several shells in 1 release of cards. What if they have started with the BG shell because it's almost complete and the next shells will be on the next sets? It's more diverse if we have some sort of BG shell and splash for a third color depending on the meta. UW control shell and splash a third color if needed. In this scenario, we don't just have Jund but the whole BGx shell. We don't just have UWR but the whole UWx shell. It will be some sort of Good Stuff Shells (fair decks) vs Linear decks (Combo and other unfair decks). In Legacy, these shells keep the format from being too degenerate.
I would like DRS to see a ban, I honestly would. Yet what effect would this have on the metagame? Here are some questions I asked myself the moment I imagined Modern without DRS.
...
Does nothing disrupt Tron at an efficient speed?
DRS really doesn't do this, so I doubt that there would be much of an effect on Tron other than it getting a little worse due to BGx getting worse.
How does Snapcaster Mage's position change in this metagame?
It becomes better, but Ooze would probably stop it from changing that much.
So please, can you explain why it didn't warp the format between BBE ban and Ooze printing?
Not saying that Ooze should be banned over DRS. But it was Ooze entrance on the scene that put GBx on the top again.
If DRS was not printed, and then we had a Jund with BBE + Abrupt + Ooze, the result would be the same. DRS is not specifically what made GBx go over the top. If it was alone the offender, i will ask the same think i just asked for the other guy: "can you explain why it didn't warp the format before Ooze printing?"
Some people associates "GBx ascenssin" only to DRS, but it was not only DRS, Jund skyrockted because BOTH abrupt and DRS were added. And i belive that Abrupt had more to do with it than DRS at the start, since Abrupt punched Delver tempo, a deck that could deal with Jund before., directly on the face. DRS consolitated the position, but alone it couldn't do that. GBx is a goodstuff deck, it doesn't matter what you take out, the effect on itself will not be so signficant. So if a ban was to ever be considered, you should look not for the cards that power the deck, but the cards that hinder most the opponents. Abrupt and Ooze are the ones with most impact on how your opponents should build their decks to fight against GBx.
You misunderstood what I am saying. I think DRS should be banned now. BBE was a good ban. But I think we need another. I think that DRS is what made BGx so powerful that it needed thee first ban. And if DRS was removed this time, BGx would be back to normal levels of power. Ooze and Decay are both 2 ofs. They are not the main cards of BGx. And they are not what is powering the deck. They will just be replaced with whatever comes along next. But DRS is the most pushed creature in Magic. I highly doubt that they will ever make something with that much utility for 1 mana again. It is what allows BGx to consistently get explosive second turns while hating on the graveyard, acting as a more efficient Grim Lavamancer, and gaining life to offset Bob's drawback. If it is removed, BGx won't have a card to replace it. If Decay is removed, blue decks will get a little better, but they will just switch to Maelstrom Pulse. If Scooze is removed, it will only take 1 more card to push BGx over the edge again. DRS is powerful enough that it will take multiple pushed cards to make BGx dominant again. And that is why it should be banned.
You can't effectively fight a deck like Jund with bans. Its a good stuff deck, it's just a pile of cards that are all good. You can take just about any card of Jund into a vacuum and still go "yeah, that's a solid card." As we already saw with the Bloodbraid Elf ban, given time and new cards entering the pool, Jund will just reach a critical density of good stuff to be right back on top. And this time around, there isn't a good card to choose that doesn't show up elsewhere like with Bloodbraid Elf, so many of Jund's cards are now staples of other decks.
If you want to bring Jund to a more reasonable level, then something needs to be unbanned or printed in an upcoming set that will either create some new, powerful synergy or to give a different set of colors enough good stuff to compete. Other decks simply need to be brought up to Jund's level, not ban something every three to twelve months to make sure there aren't too many good BGx cards. Storm used to give it a run for its money, but pumping combo is dangerous if they want to maintain more ways to interact with them as well as the turn 4 rule. Affinity shows that fast, synergistic aggressive decks can beat Jund. Tron shows that being able to go bigger, faster can beat Jund. So what we should be asking is, what does the format need from a unban/new printing to make new decks that can attack the format similarly to Tron and Affinity? Hate Bears seems like it should have a solid Jund matchup, what could be added to make that deck better against the rest of the meta?
What if wizards planned this all along? What if they really planned to create shells in Modern for good stuff decks? If this is your plan, you can't magically make several shells in 1 release of cards. What if they have started with the BG shell because it's almost complete and the next shells will be on the next sets? It's more diverse if we have some sort of BG shell and splash for a third color depending on the meta. UW control shell and splash a third color if needed. In this scenario, we don't just have Jund but the whole BGx shell. We don't just have UWR but the whole UWx shell. It will be some sort of Good Stuff Shells (fair decks) vs Linear decks (Combo and other unfair decks).
That would be incredibly stupid on their part then. They wouldn't deliberately make one shell better than every other for a year.
You can't effectively fight a deck like Jund with bans. Its a good stuff deck, it's just a pile of cards that are all good. You can take just about any card of Jund into a vacuum and still go "yeah, that's a solid card." As we already saw with the Bloodbraid Elf ban, given time and new cards entering the pool, Jund will just reach a critical density of good stuff to be right back on top. And this time around, there isn't a good card to choose that doesn't show up elsewhere like with Bloodbraid Elf, so many of Jund's cards are now staples of other decks.
If you want to bring Jund to a more reasonable level, then something needs to be unbanned or printed in an upcoming set that will either create some new, powerful synergy or to give a different set of colors enough good stuff to compete. Other decks simply need to be brought up to Jund's level, not ban something every three to twelve months to make sure there aren't too many good BGx cards. Storm used to give it a run for its money, but pumping combo is dangerous if they want to maintain more ways to interact with them as well as the turn 4 rule. Affinity shows that fast, synergistic aggressive decks can beat Jund. Tron shows that being able to go bigger, faster can beat Jund. So what we should be asking is, what does the format need from a unban/new printing to make new decks that can attack the format similarly to Tron and Affinity? Hate Bears seems like it should have a solid Jund matchup, what could be added to make that deck better against the rest of the meta?
This basically says make more powerful cards available and the problem will be solved. Why do we need overpowered cards? I guess some like to play the game on easy mode....
the obvious conclussion of new power answering old power is less viable new cards entering the format. Why not just print fair cards?
EDIT: I'm not sure B/G should be targeted for a ban but I do know DRS is overpowered and that alone should be enough to get him tossed.
DRS and Decay entered at the exact same time so we can't know which one caused more problems. Both of them fixed bad matchups for the deck, and both of them overall improved its quality.
That is my point, People attack DRS blindly as the scourge of modern. But is DRS really the problem?
You misunderstood what I am saying. I think DRS should be banned now. BBE was a good ban. But I think we need another. I think that DRS is what made BGx so powerful that it needed thee first ban. And if DRS was removed this time, BGx would be back to normal levels of power. .
No i didn't, DRS is not the culprit, so why should be it the card banned?
Couldn't it be Ooze? Liliana? Bob? Goyf? The point is that no card of the current GBx shell screams "bannable".
Ok, let's suppose they kill DRS and bring GBx down again.
What if in the next set we get another goodstuff card?
Will wizard ban ANOTHER card to bring GBx down again?
Unless Wizards stop printing good cards, wich i suppose is something no one here wants, this will never ends, every good value card will make GBx jump to the top over and over until all the shell is banned.
This ban spree will not stop as long bans are used to fix that. What is needed to deal with GBx is reasons to not play GBx that don't involve bans.
And there is two viable possible solutions:
- unbans to make some other decks better
- new cards that punish greedy mana and/or good cards that don't fit goodstuff.deck
That is my point, People attack DRS blindly as the scourge of modern. But is DRS really the problem?
Indeed. The problem with answers such as counters is that you need to have the right answer at the right time. With Decay, you can topdeck the answer after the threat has already hit the table, and whatever it is--creature, enchantment, artifact, planeswalker, whatever--you can get rid of it, provided it's cheap, which most threats are. Even more ridiculous than that is that your answer is also immune to other answers.
But this is the goodstuff.dec quandary. Each card in the deck, considered in isolation, verges on overpowered.
That is my point, People attack DRS blindly as the scourge of modern. But is DRS really the problem?
No i didn't, DRS is not the culprit, so why should be it the card banned?
Couldn't it be Ooze? Liliana? Bob? Goyf? The point is that no card of the current GBx shell screams "bannable".
Ok, let's suppose they kill DRS and bring GBx down again.
What if in the next set we get another goodstuff card?
Will wizard ban ANOTHER card to bring GBx down again?
Unless Wizards stop printing good cards, wich i suppose is something no one here wants, this will never ends, every good value card will make GBx jump to the top over and over until all the shell is banned.
This ban spree will not stop as long bans are used to fix that. What is needed to deal with GBx is reasons to not play GBx that don't involve bans.
And there is two viable possible solutions:
- unbans to make some other decks better
- new cards that punish greedy mana and/or good cards that don't fit goodstuff.deck
I agree, but there is no good solution then. If we have to wait for new cards, we will have to deal with a BGx dominated meta for a year, which I think nobody here wants. Unbanning cards is great, but what will stop BGx and not violate the Turn 4 rule? GGT does nothing at all in the format. Bitterblossom will not make Fae strong enough to combat BGx. Sword of the Meek is stopped by Ooze, discard, and Decay. Nacatl makes Zoo a little more playable but it won't change the meta enough to knock down BGx. Ponder and Preordain are good, but every deck that they help has a bad BGx matchup, and in most cases this wouldn't change if either of them were unbanned. Seething Song breaks the turn 4 rule and makes matches determine on sideboard cards, which Wizards has said that they don't want. Have I missed anything that could come off? Because looking at these cards, there is no unban that would stop BGx. Printing new cards will make us wait many months of playing in a format dominated by one shell. Bans are merely temporary fixes against goodstuff decks. So what can Wizards do? I sthere any way for them to stop BGx hegemony?
You can't effectively fight a deck like Jund with bans. Its a good stuff deck, it's just a pile of cards that are all good.
If this were true, then why did Jund shoot from average to "the best" when DRS was printed? Jund IS a pile of the best cards, but do you really think those best cards have replacements? Cards like Bob, Goyf, Shaman, and Liliana have zero replacements in the game. There is a reason why every "best" gbx midrange plays those 4 cards, and Shaman is the most ubiquitous of the 4. And once again, nobody wants to completely annihilate Jund from the metagame in the same way they killed off eggs. People are just requesting that it be brought down a notch, which is far from a lofty request given how much it's warping the format.
DRS and Decay entered at the exact same time so we can't know which one caused more problems. Both of them fixed bad matchups for the deck, and both of them overall improved its quality. I also don't really understand why BBE is even being discussed here. I think everyone agrees that BBE is a fine ban that should not be overturned. Ooze clearly broke the camel's back on the deck, but that isn't necessarily the fault of Ooze. It just might be because yet another BGx card got added on top of the already crazy BGx shell. If DRS/Decay/Lilly weren't around, maybe Scooze would be fine in the deck. Who knows? We certainly don't. That's why I said that, at this point, it's all just rhetorical and theoretical argument about which card should get banned.
One sees play as a 4x, and the other sees play as 2x. I get the power of decay, but good removal only acts as a power check against tempo strategies. Shaman on the other hand is too much of an enabler along with also being a hatebear itself. Anybody who is unbiased could clearly see this. Besides, shaman is just as big of an issue for delver decks as abrupt decay is. Delver decks now have to tap out turn 1 to kill shamans. The shaman also aborbs bolts, comes down before permission becomes relevant, and stops snapcaster from flashing back burn spells. Tempo in modern has never been that good at protecting it's threats, and it likely never will be without land disruption & force of will to protect delvers from removal. Besides, lightning bolt is just as good of a removal spell against delver as decay is in modern since it can hit the delver a turn earlier. Another very relevant issue is that Jund's curve got way lower than it used to be. They barely play any 3 mana creatures these days, which makes any permission strategy almost pointless as the majority of modern permission costs the same, or more than Jund's threats / answers do.
So please, can you explain why it didn't warp the format between BBE ban and Ooze printing?
Not saying that Ooze should be banned over DRS. But it was Ooze entrance on the scene that put GBx on the top again.
Actually, it's funny that you say that since 1/2 of the top 16 of GP San Diego played deathrite shaman. Only 1-2 of those decks were jund decks, which shows how universally powerful and ubiquitous shaman really is.
At GP Portland 6 out of the top 16 decks were playing deathrite shaman. This is also in a format where Eggs was legal, which was highly favored against Jund.
Another thing to keep in mind is that a large portion of the jund players wrote it off post BBE ban, so this was during a period where many players didn't do a ton to attempt playing it. With that said, jund was still placing very well on MTGO. As I discussed in my earlier post, scooze was simply the straw that broke the camel's back.
Another thing to mention - I would rather *not* ban deathrite shaman. But if wizards refuses to unban reasonable cards to give other archetypes a chance, any competitive player will be left with playing BGx, or one of the 3 decks in the format that have a strong matchup against it without being dogs to the rest of the field (tron, affinity, pod).
If they refuse to unban any other cards, they will need to ban shaman as it's the primary offender in GBx decks, which have pushed tons of archetypes out of the format. It also has started to become ubiquitous at the 1 mana spot, where almost any deck can add it to simply make their decks better. The sad thing is, it's not a wasted resource even in controlling decks since the best an opponent can do is trade evenly with lightning bolt which is a net even tempo trade.
In a lot of ways, shaman acts similar to Green Sun's zenith in that it's a turn 1 mana dork that isn't a bad topdeck later on in games unlike cards such as birds of paradise or noble hierarch.
Creatures that can offer a huge tempo boost of being able to go from 1 mana to 3 mana on turn 2 should have drawbacks that make that risk of jumping from 1 to 3 a legitimate concern. This is the biggest weaknesses mana dork into 3-drop strategies have always had, but with shaman, this weakness is nonexistant.
there is no good FAST solution. The meta is not as bad as it was the BBE+DRS meta. Ignore BGx and we have a fairly diverse meta. I would rather deal with this meta a bit longer if that means getting a more solid solution for the current issue. A quick fix that will broke easily will make no good.
If this were true, then why did Jund shoot from average to "the best" when DRS was printed?
But your statement is not completely true.
Jund didn't "shoot from average to "the best" when DRS was printed". Jund shoot from average to "the best" when BOTH DRS and Abrupt was printed. There is a huge difference, a difference most people seems to ignore.
And i was just arguing about this few post above. People simply forget that abrupt was added to jund pool at the same time as DRS and put all responsability on the jund's rise on DRS.
Jund is a pile of the best cards, but do you really think those best cards have replacements? Cards like Bob, Goyf, Shaman, and Liliana have zero replacements in the game. There is a reason why every "best" gbx midrange plays those 4 cards, and Shaman is the most ubiquitous of the 4.
Yet, BBE didn't have any replacement, but the simply addition of another value card (Ooze), on a totally different role, made GBx a beast again.
So i suppose it doesn't really matter if the card will replace it completely, as long there is a vacant room, any cheap and value card can get in.
Actually, it's funny that you say that since 1/2 of the top 16 of GP San Diego played deathrite shaman. None of these were Jund / GBx decks, but they were all deathrite shaman decks.
To ban DRS for this reason, then Wizards will need to ban Ligthning Bolt first. Yes, DRS is the second most played non-land card in the format... So what? Is it now an offense?
DRS is a VERY powerful card, overpowered, BUT modern have MANY overpowered cards, many of which are more powerful than DRS. To punish DRS just for being very powerful seems totally off considering modern cardpool.
But if wizards refuses to unban reasonable cards to give other archetypes a chance, any competitive player will be left with playing BGx, or one of the 3 decks in the format that have a strong matchup against it without being dogs to the rest of the field (tron, affinity, pod).
And is unban the only way to give other archetypes card to compete? A ban now is a bad solution.
A ban now will feel exactly like Seething Song ban: it seemed a good solution at the time, but now with Ooze to keep Past in Flames and Pyromancer Ascenssion, we woudln't need a Seething Song ban.
The problem of GBx will not be solved by a ban, only new cards will be able to solve that, and when those cards arrive, if we have a ban now, we will probably feel like "with that new card available, [BANNEDCARD] wouldn't probably need to be banned".
With less Abrupt Decays in the recent list of BGx decks, is it possible for Shackles making a comeback? I see some UR Fae lists in the MTGO dailies. This is also evident that Abrupt Decay have more impact on how Tempo and Control builds their deck. I change my stand on which to ban (Abrupt Decay vs Deathrite Shaman) if ever there will be bannings. Killing fair decks out of the meta is bad, so Abrupt can go. GY strategies are still thriving (Living End, Pod, Grisel) so Deathrite is fine.
I don't understand the talk about banning Abrupt Decay.
Card doesn't do much in a number of matchups and is being almost completely cut from Jund lists (or being played as a max of 1-2 copies). On the other hand, there is no GBx shell list that doesn't start with 4x Deathrite Shaman.
Abrupt Decay is not something that is hindering Delver decks - that should be contributed to no Ponder/Preordain in the format and Electrolyze seeing lots of play which is traditionally excellent against any kind of Faerie like 1-2 toughness creatures.
Abrupt Decay hurts blue based decks. Blue decks drop things and then protect them with counter spells. If a blue deck can not protect those things with counter spells, blue has been weakened.
Those saying its time to start running shakles because Jund is running 2 decays, how long do you think that would last if you started running shackles? Exactly why decay should be out of the format.
Quote from W0lf90 »
Best way to 'fix' Jund is unban cards that hurt it.
As a jund player i want seething song, ancestrial visions, preordain and nactl off the ban list. Storm and Zoo are decks that the meta needs back imo. Plus preordain would help lots of decks from storm to twin to delver.
You can unban all those and Jund will still be dominate. The only thing that hurts Jund is speed. AV is slow as a glacier, preordain helps consistency, but not speed. Kitty would hurt aggro more then help it. SS is a consistency card more then speed, but it does speed up Storm a bit. Consistently enough to break the turn 4 rule.
That is my point, People attack DRS blindly as the scourge of modern. But is DRS really the problem?
No i didn't, DRS is not the culprit, so why should be it the card banned?
Couldn't it be Ooze? Liliana? Bob? Goyf? The point is that no card of the current GBx shell screams "bannable".
Ok, let's suppose they kill DRS and bring GBx down again.
What if in the next set we get another goodstuff card?
Will wizard ban ANOTHER card to bring GBx down again?
Unless Wizards stop printing good cards, wich i suppose is something no one here wants, this will never ends, every good value card will make GBx jump to the top over and over until all the shell is banned.
This ban spree will not stop as long bans are used to fix that. What is needed to deal with GBx is reasons to not play GBx that don't involve bans.
And there is two viable possible solutions:
- unbans to make some other decks better
- new cards that punish greedy mana and/or good cards that don't fit goodstuff.deck
so the solution is bring back to life decks that predate on bg/x
Edit: So, the only way to hurt b/g is a fast deck, but the decks arent alowed to win before the bg deck gains full power. A little problematic
Please don't ban deathrite I trade for them every chance I get
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"No one may threaten or commit violence ('aggress') against another man's person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another. In short, no violence may be employed against a nonaggressor. Here is the fundamental rule from which can be deduced the entire corpus of libertarian theory." - Murray Rothbard, Cited from "War, Peace, and the State"
So nactl speeds up aggro and makes zoo viable and preordain and song make storm more consistant (fast)...
Your point?
Kitty doesnt speed up aggro. It makes zoo maybe as fast as Affinity, maybe. They need a specific starting hand to accomplish it.
Consistency does not always equate speed. But if it does speed up a solid turn 4 deck, that means its breaking the turn 4 rule.
My point is, you can unban all those cards and it wont put a dent in the GBx decks. You can unban all but about 10 cards on the list and it wont effect the GBx deck in the least.
Now rid the format of the turn 4 rule, and the GBx decks are in trouble, but that goes against what and how the format was created. Some would be thrilled, others would walk away.
Now rid the format of the turn 4 rule, and the GBx decks are in trouble, but that goes against what and how the format was created. Some would be thrilled, others would walk away.
No matter what happens, its a lose, lose scenario. People want WoTC to deal with BGx and I'm sure many Jund players wouldn't appreciate a second round of bans. Furthermore, there are some who are genuinely interested in the overall health of the format, while others are looking out for their interests.
I'm honest, I have my own bias in the situation, but I understand WoTC has a difficulty handily this without causing a huge backlash.
There is the option of allowing something on power level with Jund into the format via unbans, the card I am looking at is Chrome Mox, yes it may allow twin to consistently win on turn 3 (that is a big may), but it speeds up control to handle Jund.
I am not saying I have tested Mox and my conclusions can be incorrect about its impact
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget I stream!
There is the option of allowing something on power level with Jund into the format via unbans, the card I am looking at is Chrome Mox, yes it may allow twin to consistently win on turn 3 (that is a big may), but it speeds up control to handle Jund.
I am not saying I have tested Mox and my conclusions can be incorrect about its impact
If chrome mox only effected one deck or a handful, I would agree. But since its colorless, it can effect all deck, and its fast free mana which would speed up the decks that does use it.
I'd rather see the continuation of printing pushed aggro cards (like BTE, for example) to allow aggro to survive in this format rather than an unban of kitty - one encourages a wide range of colours whereas kitty pushes Naya Zoo and nothing else can really compare.
Yeah, because the diversity of aggro has totally shot up since Nacatl was banned.
Aggro decks always have, and always will splash for what they need unless they're extremely synergistic aggro decks like Affinity. Any standard creature-based aggro deck eventually just becomes some variation of zoo if they're not pure Burn, or pure Affinity. Nacatl's presence here is no different than the presence of something such as Experiment one except all zoo decks would play Nacatl. Burn wouldn't play it nor would affinity.
But your statement is not completely true.
Jund didn't "shoot from average to "the best" when DRS was printed". Jund shoot from average to "the best" when BOTH DRS and Abrupt was printed. There is a huge difference, a difference most people seems to ignore.
No, actually nobody forgets this, they just realize that abrupt decay does way less for GBx in modern than shaman does. It's not that complicated... decay didn't help Jund become better in any matchups it wasn't previously good in. Do you really think Jund would be a dog to tempo decks if it weren't for their 2-of decays? Lightning Bolts, Lilianas, terminates, and pulses are more than capable of dealing with just about any permanent that could be thrown at you, especially with shaman offsetting life loss and helping to play around permission much easier.
Yet, BBE didn't have any replacement, but the simply addition of another value card (Ooze), on a totally different role, made GBx a beast again.
So i suppose it doesn't really matter if the card will replace it completely, as long there is a vacant room, any cheap and value card can get in.
Well.. yeah, that's the point. Watering down jund so it's not tier 0 is the goal here. Are we supposed to just let a deck run wild over the format just because they *might* be able to print a card that can make it more powerful in the future? That's like saying they should never ban anything from storm combo because the may print a new ritual in the future that's playable in it. That's terrible logic no matter how you look at it.
To ban DRS for this reason, then Wizards will need to ban Ligthning Bolt first. Yes, DRS is the second most played non-land card in the format... So what? Is it now an offense?
I never said they need to ban DRS because it sees lots of play. I'm saying they should ban DRS because it's format warping and overpowers midrange decks. I was simply replying to your argument that DRS doesn't need to be banned because GBx saw little play before ooze. While this was true, the primary problem card in GBx was still warping the format regardless of whether it was in Jund or not.
DRS is a VERY powerful card, overpowered, BUT modern have MANY overpowered cards, many of which are more powerful than DRS. To punish DRS just for being very powerful seems totally off considering modern cardpool.
You punish DRS because it's warping the format together with GBx decks, and pushing most other strategies out of the format. When you combine that with it's overall power, it's a pretty clear-cut solution. If you want a 4 deck format, then by all means, pray for new cards to be printed that can somehow keep Jund in check, but that's also wishful thinking and pure speculation.
Otherwise, we have 3 options.
1. Unban cards to power up other decks in the meta against Jund / GBx (I favor this).
2. Ban Deathrite shaman to power down GBx decks, giving other decks a chance in the format.
3. Keep things as are, and play with a 4 deck meta (tron, affinity, pod, jund).
And is unban the only way to give other archetypes card to compete? A ban now is a bad solution.
A ban now will feel exactly like Seething Song ban: it seemed a good solution at the time, but now with Ooze to keep Past in Flames and Pyromancer Ascenssion, we woudln't need a Seething Song ban.
The problem of GBx will not be solved by a ban, only new cards will be able to solve that, and when those cards arrive, if we have a ban now, we will probably feel like "with that new card available, [BANNEDCARD] wouldn't probably need to be banned".
So your solution to the problem is to let the meta stagnate entirely and warp even further around GBx, and then hope that answers to jund are randomly printed in upcoming sets? What happens if they don't print anything that's particularly strong against GBx (which is pretty likely).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find me online - I'm on Cockatrice * Tag - Badd B - Or on MTGO - Tag - Cbus05
I don't understand the talk about banning Abrupt Decay.
Card doesn't do much in a number of matchups and is being almost completely cut from Jund lists (or being played as a max of 1-2 copies). On the other hand, there is no GBx shell list that doesn't start with 4x Deathrite Shaman.
Abrupt Decay is not something that is hindering Delver decks - that should be contributed to no Ponder/Preordain in the format and Electrolyze seeing lots of play which is traditionally excellent against any kind of Faerie like 1-2 toughness creatures.
Historically, a midrange, grindy deck like GB will have some angle that you can attack them from - you cast Gifts Ungiven and combo loam, crucible of worlds, Academy Ruins, and a cycling land, and grind them out with that, or you're a burn deck, and they're just a bit too slow, or you stick a card like Shackles, Threads, or Sower, and protect it, or suspend Ancestral Visions, or combo them out too quickly for just their discard to stop you.
I'm playing devil's advocate here in making the argument for banning AD, but basically, GB gets to cover basically ALL of their bases right now. They have Thoughtseize to answer troubling cards early, they have Abrupt Decay to clean up anything you sneak through.
DRS/Ooze cover them on the GY angle.
Goyf/Ooze/DRS make being aggressive against them a very hard job to pull off - yea, Affinity can, but it's doing it by being a deck that some people view as "combo" or "almost combo" in terms of being able to ignore your interaction and using synergy, not one particular creature to kill you.
Thoughtseize, Lil, and Bob make it hard to outgrind them.
Combo bans have made it hard to simply blow past them - we're not really supposed to be doing that now, which helps a deck that has that weakness!
So, let's stick a problem permanent - be it Shackles, Ensnaring Bridge (in burn I guess?), Pithing Needle for one of their Gy haters or PWer, Threads of Disloyalty, shoot how about Luminarch Ascension, and defending our life for a few turns?
All answered, generally in an uncounterable way, by Abrupt Decay.
I'd still rather see DRS or Ooze (or something else or nothing, or unban a combo card) go, but I can see a logical argument for taking away Abrupt Decay.
I consider DRS to be as bannable as GSZ. Just look at the justification for GSZ and tell me that it doesn't remind you of DRS:
On turn one, this can give the acceleration of a Llanowar Elves by getting a Dryad Arbor. On later turns, it can get a large creature or a one-of "toolbox" creature such as Gaddock Teeg. While this is interesting, it is also too efficient. If one intends to build a deck that has turn-one accelerants, Green Sun's Zenith is a great choice. If one wants to more access to utility green creatures, Green Sun's Zenith is a great choice. If one wants to more reliably get a large green creature, such as a Primeval Titan, onto the battlefield, Green Sun's Zenith is a great choice. However, this ends up with fewer different decks being played in practice, as Green Sun's Zenith is such a good choice that there are fewer green decks that do anything else. The DCI hopes that banning Green Sun's Zenith increases diversity among Modern green decks.
- DRS does not tutor mana dorks. It IS a mana dork.
- DRS does not tutor utility. It IS utility (grave hate, life gain, reach).
The only thing that DRS doesn't have is the ability to turn into a Primeval Titan-sized beater. However, that usage of GSZ was only relevant in RG 12Post, which is banned. No other (competitive) deck plays Primeval Titan, so 95% of the time GSZ would just be used for grabbing a Dryad Arbor/utility creature.
I consider DRS to be as bannable as GSZ. Just look at the justification for GSZ and tell me that it doesn't remind you of DRS:
- DRS does not tutor mana dorks. It IS a mana dork.
- DRS does not tutor utility. It IS utility (grave hate, life gain, reach).
The only thing that DRS doesn't have is the ability to turn into a Primeval Titan-sized beater. However, that usage of GSZ was only relevant in RG 12Post, which is banned. No other (competitive) deck plays Primeval Titan, so 95% of the time GSZ would just be used for grabbing a Dryad Arbor/utility creature.
Yeah, I agree with this entirely, I actually mentioned something similar a few posts back. This hadn't really occurred to me until recently, but it really is very similar to GSZ. Probably not QUITE as powerful, but that's not saying much since GSZ is an incredibly powerful card.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find me online - I'm on Cockatrice * Tag - Badd B - Or on MTGO - Tag - Cbus05
If you want to bring Jund to a more reasonable level, then something needs to be unbanned or printed in an upcoming set that will either create some new, powerful synergy or to give a different set of colors enough good stuff to compete. Other decks simply need to be brought up to Jund's level, not ban something every three to twelve months to make sure there aren't too many good BGx cards. Storm used to give it a run for its money, but pumping combo is dangerous if they want to maintain more ways to interact with them as well as the turn 4 rule. Affinity shows that fast, synergistic aggressive decks can beat Jund. Tron shows that being able to go bigger, faster can beat Jund. So what we should be asking is, what does the format need from a unban/new printing to make new decks that can attack the format similarly to Tron and Affinity? Hate Bears seems like it should have a solid Jund matchup, what could be added to make that deck better against the rest of the meta?
UWR Midrange
BRG Jund
BG Rock
UR Storm
The Philippine Modern Community
RGWUB MTG Modern Philippines
You misunderstood what I am saying. I think DRS should be banned now. BBE was a good ban. But I think we need another. I think that DRS is what made BGx so powerful that it needed thee first ban. And if DRS was removed this time, BGx would be back to normal levels of power. Ooze and Decay are both 2 ofs. They are not the main cards of BGx. And they are not what is powering the deck. They will just be replaced with whatever comes along next. But DRS is the most pushed creature in Magic. I highly doubt that they will ever make something with that much utility for 1 mana again. It is what allows BGx to consistently get explosive second turns while hating on the graveyard, acting as a more efficient Grim Lavamancer, and gaining life to offset Bob's drawback. If it is removed, BGx won't have a card to replace it. If Decay is removed, blue decks will get a little better, but they will just switch to Maelstrom Pulse. If Scooze is removed, it will only take 1 more card to push BGx over the edge again. DRS is powerful enough that it will take multiple pushed cards to make BGx dominant again. And that is why it should be banned.
Hatebears needs more 1 CMC Hatebears.
That would be incredibly stupid on their part then. They wouldn't deliberately make one shell better than every other for a year.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
This basically says make more powerful cards available and the problem will be solved. Why do we need overpowered cards? I guess some like to play the game on easy mode....
the obvious conclussion of new power answering old power is less viable new cards entering the format. Why not just print fair cards?
EDIT: I'm not sure B/G should be targeted for a ban but I do know DRS is overpowered and that alone should be enough to get him tossed.
calling liberals loons=not okay
The standard to which the forum moderators apply the rules here.
That is my point, People attack DRS blindly as the scourge of modern. But is DRS really the problem?
No i didn't, DRS is not the culprit, so why should be it the card banned?
Couldn't it be Ooze? Liliana? Bob? Goyf? The point is that no card of the current GBx shell screams "bannable".
Ok, let's suppose they kill DRS and bring GBx down again.
What if in the next set we get another goodstuff card?
Will wizard ban ANOTHER card to bring GBx down again?
Unless Wizards stop printing good cards, wich i suppose is something no one here wants, this will never ends, every good value card will make GBx jump to the top over and over until all the shell is banned.
This ban spree will not stop as long bans are used to fix that. What is needed to deal with GBx is reasons to not play GBx that don't involve bans.
And there is two viable possible solutions:
- unbans to make some other decks better
- new cards that punish greedy mana and/or good cards that don't fit goodstuff.deck
But this is the goodstuff.dec quandary. Each card in the deck, considered in isolation, verges on overpowered.
I agree, but there is no good solution then. If we have to wait for new cards, we will have to deal with a BGx dominated meta for a year, which I think nobody here wants. Unbanning cards is great, but what will stop BGx and not violate the Turn 4 rule? GGT does nothing at all in the format. Bitterblossom will not make Fae strong enough to combat BGx. Sword of the Meek is stopped by Ooze, discard, and Decay. Nacatl makes Zoo a little more playable but it won't change the meta enough to knock down BGx. Ponder and Preordain are good, but every deck that they help has a bad BGx matchup, and in most cases this wouldn't change if either of them were unbanned. Seething Song breaks the turn 4 rule and makes matches determine on sideboard cards, which Wizards has said that they don't want. Have I missed anything that could come off? Because looking at these cards, there is no unban that would stop BGx. Printing new cards will make us wait many months of playing in a format dominated by one shell. Bans are merely temporary fixes against goodstuff decks. So what can Wizards do? I sthere any way for them to stop BGx hegemony?
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
If this were true, then why did Jund shoot from average to "the best" when DRS was printed? Jund IS a pile of the best cards, but do you really think those best cards have replacements? Cards like Bob, Goyf, Shaman, and Liliana have zero replacements in the game. There is a reason why every "best" gbx midrange plays those 4 cards, and Shaman is the most ubiquitous of the 4. And once again, nobody wants to completely annihilate Jund from the metagame in the same way they killed off eggs. People are just requesting that it be brought down a notch, which is far from a lofty request given how much it's warping the format.
One sees play as a 4x, and the other sees play as 2x. I get the power of decay, but good removal only acts as a power check against tempo strategies. Shaman on the other hand is too much of an enabler along with also being a hatebear itself. Anybody who is unbiased could clearly see this. Besides, shaman is just as big of an issue for delver decks as abrupt decay is. Delver decks now have to tap out turn 1 to kill shamans. The shaman also aborbs bolts, comes down before permission becomes relevant, and stops snapcaster from flashing back burn spells. Tempo in modern has never been that good at protecting it's threats, and it likely never will be without land disruption & force of will to protect delvers from removal. Besides, lightning bolt is just as good of a removal spell against delver as decay is in modern since it can hit the delver a turn earlier. Another very relevant issue is that Jund's curve got way lower than it used to be. They barely play any 3 mana creatures these days, which makes any permission strategy almost pointless as the majority of modern permission costs the same, or more than Jund's threats / answers do.
Actually, it's funny that you say that since 1/2 of the top 16 of GP San Diego played deathrite shaman. Only 1-2 of those decks were jund decks, which shows how universally powerful and ubiquitous shaman really is.
At GP Portland 6 out of the top 16 decks were playing deathrite shaman. This is also in a format where Eggs was legal, which was highly favored against Jund.
Another thing to keep in mind is that a large portion of the jund players wrote it off post BBE ban, so this was during a period where many players didn't do a ton to attempt playing it. With that said, jund was still placing very well on MTGO. As I discussed in my earlier post, scooze was simply the straw that broke the camel's back.
Another thing to mention - I would rather *not* ban deathrite shaman. But if wizards refuses to unban reasonable cards to give other archetypes a chance, any competitive player will be left with playing BGx, or one of the 3 decks in the format that have a strong matchup against it without being dogs to the rest of the field (tron, affinity, pod).
If they refuse to unban any other cards, they will need to ban shaman as it's the primary offender in GBx decks, which have pushed tons of archetypes out of the format. It also has started to become ubiquitous at the 1 mana spot, where almost any deck can add it to simply make their decks better. The sad thing is, it's not a wasted resource even in controlling decks since the best an opponent can do is trade evenly with lightning bolt which is a net even tempo trade.
In a lot of ways, shaman acts similar to Green Sun's zenith in that it's a turn 1 mana dork that isn't a bad topdeck later on in games unlike cards such as birds of paradise or noble hierarch.
Creatures that can offer a huge tempo boost of being able to go from 1 mana to 3 mana on turn 2 should have drawbacks that make that risk of jumping from 1 to 3 a legitimate concern. This is the biggest weaknesses mana dork into 3-drop strategies have always had, but with shaman, this weakness is nonexistant.
How can you say this when it includes arguably the most powerful, efficient and versatile one drops ever printed?
calling liberals loons=not okay
The standard to which the forum moderators apply the rules here.
But your statement is not completely true.
Jund didn't "shoot from average to "the best" when DRS was printed". Jund shoot from average to "the best" when BOTH DRS and Abrupt was printed. There is a huge difference, a difference most people seems to ignore.
And i was just arguing about this few post above. People simply forget that abrupt was added to jund pool at the same time as DRS and put all responsability on the jund's rise on DRS.
Yet, BBE didn't have any replacement, but the simply addition of another value card (Ooze), on a totally different role, made GBx a beast again.
So i suppose it doesn't really matter if the card will replace it completely, as long there is a vacant room, any cheap and value card can get in.
To ban DRS for this reason, then Wizards will need to ban Ligthning Bolt first. Yes, DRS is the second most played non-land card in the format... So what? Is it now an offense?
DRS is a VERY powerful card, overpowered, BUT modern have MANY overpowered cards, many of which are more powerful than DRS. To punish DRS just for being very powerful seems totally off considering modern cardpool.
And is unban the only way to give other archetypes card to compete? A ban now is a bad solution.
A ban now will feel exactly like Seething Song ban: it seemed a good solution at the time, but now with Ooze to keep Past in Flames and Pyromancer Ascenssion, we woudln't need a Seething Song ban.
The problem of GBx will not be solved by a ban, only new cards will be able to solve that, and when those cards arrive, if we have a ban now, we will probably feel like "with that new card available, [BANNEDCARD] wouldn't probably need to be banned".
UWR Midrange
BRG Jund
BG Rock
UR Storm
The Philippine Modern Community
RGWUB MTG Modern Philippines
Abrupt Decay hurts blue based decks. Blue decks drop things and then protect them with counter spells. If a blue deck can not protect those things with counter spells, blue has been weakened.
Those saying its time to start running shakles because Jund is running 2 decays, how long do you think that would last if you started running shackles? Exactly why decay should be out of the format.
You can unban all those and Jund will still be dominate. The only thing that hurts Jund is speed. AV is slow as a glacier, preordain helps consistency, but not speed. Kitty would hurt aggro more then help it. SS is a consistency card more then speed, but it does speed up Storm a bit. Consistently enough to break the turn 4 rule.
so the solution is bring back to life decks that predate on bg/x
Edit: So, the only way to hurt b/g is a fast deck, but the decks arent alowed to win before the bg deck gains full power. A little problematic
Kitty doesnt speed up aggro. It makes zoo maybe as fast as Affinity, maybe. They need a specific starting hand to accomplish it.
Consistency does not always equate speed. But if it does speed up a solid turn 4 deck, that means its breaking the turn 4 rule.
My point is, you can unban all those cards and it wont put a dent in the GBx decks. You can unban all but about 10 cards on the list and it wont effect the GBx deck in the least.
Now rid the format of the turn 4 rule, and the GBx decks are in trouble, but that goes against what and how the format was created. Some would be thrilled, others would walk away.
No matter what happens, its a lose, lose scenario. People want WoTC to deal with BGx and I'm sure many Jund players wouldn't appreciate a second round of bans. Furthermore, there are some who are genuinely interested in the overall health of the format, while others are looking out for their interests.
I'm honest, I have my own bias in the situation, but I understand WoTC has a difficulty handily this without causing a huge backlash.
I am not saying I have tested Mox and my conclusions can be incorrect about its impact
Paper: WUR Waffle Control, RG and U Tron
MTGO: U Tron, BRG Living End, B Infect
Testing Modern on MTGO and helping to craft decks on a Budget
I stream!
Hermit Druid Combo:
If chrome mox only effected one deck or a handful, I would agree. But since its colorless, it can effect all deck, and its fast free mana which would speed up the decks that does use it.
Yeah, because the diversity of aggro has totally shot up since Nacatl was banned.
Aggro decks always have, and always will splash for what they need unless they're extremely synergistic aggro decks like Affinity. Any standard creature-based aggro deck eventually just becomes some variation of zoo if they're not pure Burn, or pure Affinity. Nacatl's presence here is no different than the presence of something such as Experiment one except all zoo decks would play Nacatl. Burn wouldn't play it nor would affinity.
No, actually nobody forgets this, they just realize that abrupt decay does way less for GBx in modern than shaman does. It's not that complicated... decay didn't help Jund become better in any matchups it wasn't previously good in. Do you really think Jund would be a dog to tempo decks if it weren't for their 2-of decays? Lightning Bolts, Lilianas, terminates, and pulses are more than capable of dealing with just about any permanent that could be thrown at you, especially with shaman offsetting life loss and helping to play around permission much easier.
Well.. yeah, that's the point. Watering down jund so it's not tier 0 is the goal here. Are we supposed to just let a deck run wild over the format just because they *might* be able to print a card that can make it more powerful in the future? That's like saying they should never ban anything from storm combo because the may print a new ritual in the future that's playable in it. That's terrible logic no matter how you look at it.
I never said they need to ban DRS because it sees lots of play. I'm saying they should ban DRS because it's format warping and overpowers midrange decks. I was simply replying to your argument that DRS doesn't need to be banned because GBx saw little play before ooze. While this was true, the primary problem card in GBx was still warping the format regardless of whether it was in Jund or not.
You punish DRS because it's warping the format together with GBx decks, and pushing most other strategies out of the format. When you combine that with it's overall power, it's a pretty clear-cut solution. If you want a 4 deck format, then by all means, pray for new cards to be printed that can somehow keep Jund in check, but that's also wishful thinking and pure speculation.
Otherwise, we have 3 options.
1. Unban cards to power up other decks in the meta against Jund / GBx (I favor this).
2. Ban Deathrite shaman to power down GBx decks, giving other decks a chance in the format.
3. Keep things as are, and play with a 4 deck meta (tron, affinity, pod, jund).
So your solution to the problem is to let the meta stagnate entirely and warp even further around GBx, and then hope that answers to jund are randomly printed in upcoming sets? What happens if they don't print anything that's particularly strong against GBx (which is pretty likely).
Historically, a midrange, grindy deck like GB will have some angle that you can attack them from - you cast Gifts Ungiven and combo loam, crucible of worlds, Academy Ruins, and a cycling land, and grind them out with that, or you're a burn deck, and they're just a bit too slow, or you stick a card like Shackles, Threads, or Sower, and protect it, or suspend Ancestral Visions, or combo them out too quickly for just their discard to stop you.
I'm playing devil's advocate here in making the argument for banning AD, but basically, GB gets to cover basically ALL of their bases right now. They have Thoughtseize to answer troubling cards early, they have Abrupt Decay to clean up anything you sneak through.
DRS/Ooze cover them on the GY angle.
Goyf/Ooze/DRS make being aggressive against them a very hard job to pull off - yea, Affinity can, but it's doing it by being a deck that some people view as "combo" or "almost combo" in terms of being able to ignore your interaction and using synergy, not one particular creature to kill you.
Thoughtseize, Lil, and Bob make it hard to outgrind them.
Combo bans have made it hard to simply blow past them - we're not really supposed to be doing that now, which helps a deck that has that weakness!
So, let's stick a problem permanent - be it Shackles, Ensnaring Bridge (in burn I guess?), Pithing Needle for one of their Gy haters or PWer, Threads of Disloyalty, shoot how about Luminarch Ascension, and defending our life for a few turns?
All answered, generally in an uncounterable way, by Abrupt Decay.
I'd still rather see DRS or Ooze (or something else or nothing, or unban a combo card) go, but I can see a logical argument for taking away Abrupt Decay.
- DRS does not tutor mana dorks. It IS a mana dork.
- DRS does not tutor utility. It IS utility (grave hate, life gain, reach).
The only thing that DRS doesn't have is the ability to turn into a Primeval Titan-sized beater. However, that usage of GSZ was only relevant in RG 12Post, which is banned. No other (competitive) deck plays Primeval Titan, so 95% of the time GSZ would just be used for grabbing a Dryad Arbor/utility creature.
|
|
Big Johnny.
Yeah, I agree with this entirely, I actually mentioned something similar a few posts back. This hadn't really occurred to me until recently, but it really is very similar to GSZ. Probably not QUITE as powerful, but that's not saying much since GSZ is an incredibly powerful card.
Kind of - they couldn't all run the same 4-5 one-of utility guys and T1 Arbor each game.