Well, my point here is that Paladin's main weakness (aside from removal) is....not being played. No deck can be banworthy when it's only represented in the double digits all around the world =P I need to start pushing tournaments more now that I have time, because Paladin can consistently break the turn 4 rule literally in half, with 4-8 tutors (depending on Spoils/Plunge/Muddle variant), but needs representation. It has the same removal-weakness as Shoal, and the same space maindeck for answers to that (around 6-8 slots for Muddle, Spellskite, Leyline, Pact), just need the numbers =D
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Slowly breaking.
Any more of this, and Team Troll will be more than just a name.
Well, my point here is that Paladin's main weakness (aside from removal) is....not being played. No deck can be banworthy when it's only represented in the double digits all around the world =P I need to start pushing tournaments more now that I have time, because Paladin can consistently break the turn 4 rule literally in half, with 4-8 tutors (depending on Spoils/Plunge/Muddle variant), but needs representation. It has the same removal-weakness as Shoal, and the same space maindeck for answers to that (around 6-8 slots for Muddle, Spellskite, Leyline, Pact), just need the numbers =D
I've done a bunch of testing with that deck (as you know! g0g0 cheeri0s), and it's not even close to Shoal. Shoal was a frighteningly compact and redundant combo. 8 creatures to win the game (Inkmoth/Agent), 4 Shoal to pump, and 5 cards to pitch to Shoal. That's a lot of space left over for tutors, countermagic, filter, etc. And as we both know from modifying cheeri0s, we have to jam in so many engine pieces that the rest of the deck doesn't that kind of have room for answers.
Shoal was also much scarier because you never fizzle, you almost always have mana up for protection, your manabase is much more consistent, and you have a lot more room for interaction. Hell, Sam Black had 9 counterspells in the damn maindeck, on top of 14 filter spells that were never dead draws (Ponder/Preordain/Peer/Probe). Decks like that need to stay out of this format until we have the quality of policing cards that can handle it. Or, if those policing cards are too high quality for Modern, crap like Shoal an stay away forever.
But stuff like Paladin? Griselbrand? Infect? Keep those glass cannons coming. They are much more fragile, much more vulnerable to disruption, and overall much healthier for the format.
Caleb Durward does videos over at Channelfireball.com that playtests banned Modern cards. He recently did a video on Stoneforge Mystic.
It was a small sample size and some of the decks were not Tier 1, but it seemed like the card could be okay. I've definitely seen players do more powerful things by turn 3. (My opponent tonight had 2 6/6 flying lifelink creatures by turn 3. Damn you Serra Ascendants and Martyr of Sands.) Whenever I play vs. Amulet, it seems like he is trying to go off by turn 3.
I don't think Combo for the most part cares about Stoneforge Mystic. Control probably doesn't care about it too much, although it can get annoying in long, "attrition" type games. Aggro gets worked over by Batterskull, but honestly they should have some sort of creature removal to slow it down. Aggro is already in a ad place anyway, so I don't think Stoneforge Mystic will do much more. Maybe it will be the final nail? (like Standard before) But I will say that having Stoneforge Mystic in the format would open up different possiblities in decks.
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Caleb Durward does videos over at Channelfireball.com that playtests banned Modern cards. He recently did a video on Stoneforge Mystic.
It was a small sample size and some of the decks were not Tier 1, but it seemed like the card could be okay. I've definitely seen players do more powerful things by turn 3. (My opponent tonight had 2 6/6 flying lifelink creatures by turn 3. Damn you Serra Ascendants and Martyr of Sands.) Whenever I play vs. Amulet, it seems like he is trying to go off by turn 3.
I don't think Combo for the most part cares about Stoneforge Mystic. Control probably doesn't care about it too much, although it can get annoying in long, "attrition" type games. Aggro gets worked over by Batterskull, but honestly they should have some sort of creature removal to slow it down. Aggro is already in a ad place anyway, so I don't think Stoneforge Mystic will do much more. Maybe it will be the final nail? (like Standard before) But I will say that having Stoneforge Mystic in the format would open up different possiblities in decks.
Combo doesn't really care about Stoneforge which is mostly true. However control cares very much about it. Modern doesn't have a lot of card draw in its control decks and card that will always two for one someone is very powerful. I'm not saying it will insta gib control decks the moment it is played, but they play only so many answers and both halves of this card must be answered quickly.
Aggro and midrange are probably weaker to the card in general. T3 Batterskull against Wild Nacatl is very one sided and in midrange being able to tutor up lifelinking vigilance or unblockability/card advantage is huge.
SFM is sort of like Jace, the Mind Sculptor in that their brokenness is somewhat subtle. Yes they can be answered and yes the game will go on after they drop, but most of the time the game is really over.
Caleb Durward does videos over at Channelfireball.com that playtests banned Modern cards. He recently did a video on Stoneforge Mystic.
It was a small sample size and some of the decks were not Tier 1, but it seemed like the card could be okay. I've definitely seen players do more powerful things by turn 3. (My opponent tonight had 2 6/6 flying lifelink creatures by turn 3. Damn you Serra Ascendants and Martyr of Sands.) Whenever I play vs. Amulet, it seems like he is trying to go off by turn 3.
I don't think Combo for the most part cares about Stoneforge Mystic. Control probably doesn't care about it too much, although it can get annoying in long, "attrition" type games. Aggro gets worked over by Batterskull, but honestly they should have some sort of creature removal to slow it down. Aggro is already in a ad place anyway, so I don't think Stoneforge Mystic will do much more. Maybe it will be the final nail? (like Standard before) But I will say that having Stoneforge Mystic in the format would open up different possiblities in decks.
My thoughts is that most of the time his partner doesn't know whats is doing, i know that is very hard playing right even just one deck in modern but like the first Pod game awww...
Honestly i don't think that these are valid testing videos.
- L
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
Yeah the Pod game was pretty odd. I don't think I've ever seen a Pod player play nothing for the first 2 turns, then drop Pod on turn 3. The GW Hatebears opponent made a few questionable plays, but played pretty closely to what most people may face in an opponent. Same for the Burn opponent, who seemed like an experienced Burn pilot.
I will definitely admit that the videos are not the most valid. But, I do think it shows Stoneforge Mystic a bit. Being able to tutor up Swords and Batterskulll is very powerful in Modern, but it didn't seem broken. The main problem is that it hurts Aggro so much and I don't think that Aggro can recover from the poor state that it's in right now. Maybe it will just force Aggro to have some sort of creature removal so that Stoneforge Mystic is just a minor inconvenience while beating down?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Yeah the Pod game was pretty odd. I don't think I've ever seen a Pod player play nothing for the first 2 turns, then drop Pod on turn 3. The GW Hatebears opponent made a few questionable plays, but played pretty closely to what most people may face in an opponent. Same for the Burn opponent, who seemed like an experienced Burn pilot.
I will definitely admit that the videos are not the most valid. But, I do think it shows Stoneforge Mystic a bit. Being able to tutor up Swords and Batterskulll is very powerful in Modern, but it didn't seem broken. The main problem is that it hurts Aggro so much and I don't think that Aggro can recover from the poor state that it's in right now. Maybe it will just force Aggro to have some sort of creature removal so that Stoneforge Mystic is just a minor inconvenience while beating down?
I haven't done any serious SFM testing, but I just want to bring up that point I mentioned in the previous thread. Card evaluation is inherently difficult because there are so many variables to account for. But it's even harder with cards on the banlist because they have so much stigma surrounding them on top of the usual challenges with card evaluation. Historically, we (and many MTG community members / article authors / pro players) have dramatically overestimated the impact of bans and unbans. Introducing Valakut, Bitterblossom, and Nacatl did not destroy the format. The death of Seething Song, BBE, and DRS did not also mean the demise of their staple decks. So the collective track record with ban/unban evaluation is so poor that I am not inclined to trust it in the future.
Previously, I had suggests that all testing be done in that one B&R testing thread. That never really worked out and we always had very little traffic there. So I think it's actually better to just do testing here so at least people are seeing it and able to participate in the process. Then we could try to be more accurate in our historically inaccurate predictions.
Yeah the Pod game was pretty odd. I don't think I've ever seen a Pod player play nothing for the first 2 turns, then drop Pod on turn 3. The GW Hatebears opponent made a few questionable plays, but played pretty closely to what most people may face in an opponent. Same for the Burn opponent, who seemed like an experienced Burn pilot.
I will definitely admit that the videos are not the most valid. But, I do think it shows Stoneforge Mystic a bit. Being able to tutor up Swords and Batterskulll is very powerful in Modern, but it didn't seem broken. The main problem is that it hurts Aggro so much and I don't think that Aggro can recover from the poor state that it's in right now. Maybe it will just force Aggro to have some sort of creature removal so that Stoneforge Mystic is just a minor inconvenience while beating down?
I haven't done any serious SFM testing, but I just want to bring up that point I mentioned in the previous thread. Card evaluation is inherently difficult because there are so many variables to account for. But it's even harder with cards on the banlist because they have so much stigma surrounding them on top of the usual challenges with card evaluation. Historically, we (and many MTG community members / article authors / pro players) have dramatically overestimated the impact of bans and unbans. Introducing Valakut, Bitterblossom, and Nacatl did not destroy the format. The death of Seething Song, BBE, and DRS did not also mean the demise of their staple decks. So the collective track record with ban/unban evaluation is so poor that I am not inclined to trust it in the future.
Previously, I had suggests that all testing be done in that one B&R testing thread. That never really worked out and we always had very little traffic there. So I think it's actually better to just do testing here so at least people are seeing it and able to participate in the process. Then we could try to be more accurate in our historically inaccurate predictions.
This is true. I know that Stoneforge Mystic has a stigma attached that it "hurt" a lot of people in it's former Standard until it was banned LATE in the Standard season right before it would rotate anyway. I have no hard feelings because Aggro and Burn are probably the last 2 archetypes I'd play. But I understand that many of those type players would have hard feelings and if SfM was brought back, it would probably rekindle those unless it was just a "worthless" card in Modern. However, another way to look at it is that Modern has more tools to combat stuff like Stoneforge Mystic, so it's their chance at redemption.
I will admit that I was wrong about the impact of Bitterblossom being unbanned in Modern. I felt like it would have a much bigger impact. Anyway, I don't think that Stoneforge Mystic or stuff like Glimpse of Nature that Caleb tested are even in consideration to be unbanned just yet.
I honestly don't know what Wizards can do to aid Aggro in Modern. Some people suggested printing stronger creatures in Standard, but I don't think this is a good answer because it just warps Standard more. The main reason why I play Modern is because I'm getting tired of creature battles and combat in general. Modern is a place to escape that and the reason why I love Modern and Legacy to a larger extent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Yeah the Pod game was pretty odd. I don't think I've ever seen a Pod player play nothing for the first 2 turns, then drop Pod on turn 3. The GW Hatebears opponent made a few questionable plays, but played pretty closely to what most people may face in an opponent. Same for the Burn opponent, who seemed like an experienced Burn pilot.
I will definitely admit that the videos are not the most valid. But, I do think it shows Stoneforge Mystic a bit. Being able to tutor up Swords and Batterskulll is very powerful in Modern, but it didn't seem broken. The main problem is that it hurts Aggro so much and I don't think that Aggro can recover from the poor state that it's in right now. Maybe it will just force Aggro to have some sort of creature removal so that Stoneforge Mystic is just a minor inconvenience while beating down?
I haven't done any serious SFM testing, but I just want to bring up that point I mentioned in the previous thread. Card evaluation is inherently difficult because there are so many variables to account for. But it's even harder with cards on the banlist because they have so much stigma surrounding them on top of the usual challenges with card evaluation. Historically, we (and many MTG community members / article authors / pro players) have dramatically overestimated the impact of bans and unbans. Introducing Valakut, Bitterblossom, and Nacatl did not destroy the format. The death of Seething Song, BBE, and DRS did not also mean the demise of their staple decks. So the collective track record with ban/unban evaluation is so poor that I am not inclined to trust it in the future.
Previously, I had suggests that all testing be done in that one B&R testing thread. That never really worked out and we always had very little traffic there. So I think it's actually better to just do testing here so at least people are seeing it and able to participate in the process. Then we could try to be more accurate in our historically inaccurate predictions.
This is true. I know that Stoneforge Mystic has a stigma attached that it "hurt" a lot of people in it's former Standard until it was banned LATE in the Standard season right before it would rotate anyway. I have no hard feelings because Aggro and Burn are probably the last 2 archetypes I'd play. But I understand that many of those type players would have hard feelings and if SfM was brought back, it would probably rekindle those unless it was just a "worthless" card in Modern. However, another way to look at it is that Modern has more tools to combat stuff like Stoneforge Mystic, so it's their chance at redemption.
I will admit that I was wrong about the impact of Bitterblossom being unbanned in Modern. I felt like it would have a much bigger impact. Anyway, I don't think that Stoneforge Mystic or stuff like Glimpse of Nature that Caleb tested are even in consideration to be unbanned just yet.
I honestly don't know what Wizards can do to aid Aggro in Modern. Some people suggested printing stronger creatures in Standard, but I don't think this is a good answer because it just warps Standard more. The main reason why I play Modern is because I'm getting tired of creature battles and combat in general. Modern is a place to escape that and the reason why I love Modern and Legacy to a larger extent.
To be honest I think they cant do anything to help aggro. I mean they wont print something stronger than Wild Nacatl.
It's the inherent trait of aggro decks to have little interaction what makes them bad. Turning dudes sideways just doesnt work in a sea full of combo.
I honestly believe the reason why aggro doesn't do well in Modern is because Wizards is trying to print powerhouse creatures all the time instead of printing creatures that have incredibly synergy amongst themselves (kinda like affinity). Wizards could print some Modern playable Goblins in order to make the tribe a thing in Modern, and build upon the already existing Goblins in Modern - but for whatever reason, they won't.
There's a reason why these tribes/creature based decks actually survive in Legacy (Merfolk, Goblins, Elves, etc) and it's because of the raw synergy they have among themselves instead of their raw power (they aren't all 3/3's for 1 mana).
Regarding Goblins, I think something as simple as reprinting Goblin Piledriver would push Goblins to Tier 1.5. I don't mean a modified version; I mean the actual Goblin Piledriver. Perhaps something similar to Goblin Matron and Goblin Ringleader? Maybe Goblin Warchief?
The way you described it reminds me of Death and Taxes. The creatures are not mainly beatdown creatures, but tools to slow the opponent while advancing their board. But many people don't call Death and Taxes "Aggro." I know the creatures don't have synergy with each other, but they do have come into play abilities.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
You would think that Control would thrive in a Combo/Midrange metagame. The problem is that these Combo decks and Midrange decks are simply too powerful. You can't just simply say that Control beats Jund or Scapeshift. Even a Combo like Twin doesn't necessarily lose to Control any more than 50%. The Rock/Paper/Scissors is slightly messed up.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I think it speaks volume that the aggro decks in Legacy either play disruption of their own like counterspells(Merfolk) or are basically combo decks themselves in disguise(Elves).
Like I said I just don't think it's viable to just play the best cheap creatures and expect to get there. That only really works in Standard and even there you have to constantly face decks with a billion removal spells and/or Sylvan Caryatid/Courser of Kruphix.
You need something else to compete and that is where basically all aggro decks in Modern fail. Affinity is the fastest one and it has way more line of plays available than other aggro decks but you can beat them if you use one of the dozen hate cards that hose them on top of removal.
I think the Modern format is diverse enough and powerful enough that there are very few cards that truly deserve to be on the banned list. SFM would likely cause a big ruckus, cause a temporary meta shift and then blend in with the rest of the format. I mean Modern is a format of powerful cards. If its not strong, its not here.
Talking with some guys for Monday night Modern and one of the guys had an idea that I could get behind. In September, after Modern season, unban SFM, AV, JTMS, SotM, Glimpse, GGT, Jitte, BBE, ponder and preordain, and use the SCG events to weed out what needs to be banned for good. It would be wide scale testing and if Wotc felt a card helped a deck break their criteria for the format its gone for good. Granted, there is still going to be groups that will argue what is good and bad for the format, but the player base would get some wide scale testing and actually see the effects of some of the cards on the format. As long as it was out of 'season' I wouldnt have a problem.
Talking with some guys for Monday night Modern and one of the guys had an idea that I could get behind. In September, after Modern season, unban SFM, AV, JTMS, SotM, Glimpse, GGT, Jitte, BBE, ponder and preordain, and use the SCG events to weed out what needs to be banned for good. It would be wide scale testing and if Wotc felt a card helped a deck break their criteria for the format its gone for good. Granted, there is still going to be groups that will argue what is good and bad for the format, but the player base would get some wide scale testing and actually see the effects of some of the cards on the format. As long as it was out of 'season' I wouldnt have a problem.
Considering this entire format seems to revolve around lightning bolt is thier any chance it meets the ban criteria of stagnation? Has wizards every directly addressed bolt?
Considering this entire format seems to revolve around lightning bolt is thier any chance it meets the ban criteria of stagnation? Has wizards every directly addressed bolt?
There is a better chance that Wizards unbans Hypergenesis than there is a chance they ban Lightning Bolt. I know that people like to shake up the conversation with some new ideas, especially given that we have produced a Nordic saga of ban discourse since the format's birth. But I think it's a much more interesting and productive use of our time (waste of our time?) to talk about SFM, JTMS, or any of the truly controversial bans on the list.
Here's the thing with Bolt. Although there might be some acceptable theoretical reasons to look at it (it does push out a huge range of creatures), it's just too polarizing. Nothing says "arbitrary format" like a Modern with Affinity and Infect but no Bolt. I know that it's easy to overestimate a ban's impact on a format, or just estimate it badly, but Bolt's banning would just make us look bad. Wizards is only just getting out of the ban first, ask questions later mentality. And that's good for the format and for the players. Banning Bolt, or any of the other so-called "oppressive" cards like Goyf/Thoughtseize/Decay, just destroys that.
Talking with some guys for Monday night Modern and one of the guys had an idea that I could get behind. In September, after Modern season, unban SFM, AV, JTMS, SotM, Glimpse, GGT, Jitte, BBE, ponder and preordain, and use the SCG events to weed out what needs to be banned for good. It would be wide scale testing and if Wotc felt a card helped a deck break their criteria for the format its gone for good. Granted, there is still going to be groups that will argue what is good and bad for the format, but the player base would get some wide scale testing and actually see the effects of some of the cards on the format. As long as it was out of 'season' I wouldnt have a problem.
As Galerion said, that would not end well. Cards have to be unbanned 1 or 2 at a time to determine their impact on the format. Otherwise you often can't identify what the problem card was.
As Galerion said, that would not end well. Cards have to be unbanned 1 or 2 at a time to determine their impact on the format. Otherwise you often can't identify what the problem card was.
This is absolutely right (Galerion too). You can't isolate problems if everything gets released from the list at once. It's even worse when you consider that many cards on the list directly feed off others (JTMS/SFM come to mind), so we could never tell what was really causing problems. It would be like the New York City crime drop of the 90s. We know that crime fell but there are at least a dozen persuasive reasons as to why, and it's extremely difficult to separate them. If taking a bunch of cards off the banlist broke the format, any one of them could be responsible, just as any combination of them (or their effects on the metagame!) could also be to blame.
It is much better to unban, and test, cards individually then in one giant statistical mess.
The problem with waiting is they only release or ban every 3 months. If we are going to get only a card or 2 every 3 months, its going to take years and thousands of new cards released on top of testing for those cards on the list. Why not show that Caw Blade in Modern as it is now is bad (or good how ever it turns out), why not show how powerful combo elves are in the format just to name a couple decks that would be full power. At least it would show some how powerful some cards are and how damaging some are. It would also show how a few are not as bad as Wotc (and some of the player base) thinks they are.
To me it would be better to do it in one lump unban and have a short period of old wild west Modern, then take years and all the speculation and arguing over this card or that card. The way its set up now, the player base is going to be arguing for some time.
The problem with waiting is they only release or ban every 3 months. If we are going to get only a card or 2 every 3 months, its going to take years and thousands of new cards released on top of testing for those cards on the list. Why not show that Caw Blade in Modern as it is now is bad (or good how ever it turns out), why not show how powerful combo elves are in the format just to name a couple decks that would be full power. At least it would show some how powerful some cards are and how damaging some are. It would also show how a few are not as bad as Wotc (and some of the player base) thinks they are.
To me it would be better to do it in one lump unban and have a short period of old wild west Modern, then take years and all the speculation and arguing over this card or that card. The way its set up now, the player base is going to be arguing for some time.
Wouldn't it be easier for WOTC to just run separate tournaments where everything is legal to see what happens without messing with the actual format?
The problem with waiting is they only release or ban every 3 months. If we are going to get only a card or 2 every 3 months, its going to take years and thousands of new cards released on top of testing for those cards on the list. Why not show that Caw Blade in Modern as it is now is bad (or good how ever it turns out), why not show how powerful combo elves are in the format just to name a couple decks that would be full power. At least it would show some how powerful some cards are and how damaging some are. It would also show how a few are not as bad as Wotc (and some of the player base) thinks they are.
To me it would be better to do it in one lump unban and have a short period of old wild west Modern, then take years and all the speculation and arguing over this card or that card. The way its set up now, the player base is going to be arguing for some time.
Wouldn't it be easier for WOTC to just run separate tournaments where everything is legal to see what happens without messing with the actual format?
Some would still say it wasnt a large enough sample size. Wotc did test before ever announcing the format and there are many who disagree with the original ban list. Wotc having to ban cards after the first large event they had of the format shows how small the testing actually was. The only way to satisfy the masses is to screw with the format in the off season to show how certain cards effect the format.
Any more of this, and Team Troll will be more than just a name.
I know where you post.
I've done a bunch of testing with that deck (as you know! g0g0 cheeri0s), and it's not even close to Shoal. Shoal was a frighteningly compact and redundant combo. 8 creatures to win the game (Inkmoth/Agent), 4 Shoal to pump, and 5 cards to pitch to Shoal. That's a lot of space left over for tutors, countermagic, filter, etc. And as we both know from modifying cheeri0s, we have to jam in so many engine pieces that the rest of the deck doesn't that kind of have room for answers.
Shoal was also much scarier because you never fizzle, you almost always have mana up for protection, your manabase is much more consistent, and you have a lot more room for interaction. Hell, Sam Black had 9 counterspells in the damn maindeck, on top of 14 filter spells that were never dead draws (Ponder/Preordain/Peer/Probe). Decks like that need to stay out of this format until we have the quality of policing cards that can handle it. Or, if those policing cards are too high quality for Modern, crap like Shoal an stay away forever.
But stuff like Paladin? Griselbrand? Infect? Keep those glass cannons coming. They are much more fragile, much more vulnerable to disruption, and overall much healthier for the format.
It was a small sample size and some of the decks were not Tier 1, but it seemed like the card could be okay. I've definitely seen players do more powerful things by turn 3. (My opponent tonight had 2 6/6 flying lifelink creatures by turn 3. Damn you Serra Ascendants and Martyr of Sands.) Whenever I play vs. Amulet, it seems like he is trying to go off by turn 3.
I don't think Combo for the most part cares about Stoneforge Mystic. Control probably doesn't care about it too much, although it can get annoying in long, "attrition" type games. Aggro gets worked over by Batterskull, but honestly they should have some sort of creature removal to slow it down. Aggro is already in a ad place anyway, so I don't think Stoneforge Mystic will do much more. Maybe it will be the final nail? (like Standard before) But I will say that having Stoneforge Mystic in the format would open up different possiblities in decks.
Please share your thoughts. Here's the link.
http://www.channelfireball.com/videos/the-banned-series-stoneforge-mystic/
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Combo doesn't really care about Stoneforge which is mostly true. However control cares very much about it. Modern doesn't have a lot of card draw in its control decks and card that will always two for one someone is very powerful. I'm not saying it will insta gib control decks the moment it is played, but they play only so many answers and both halves of this card must be answered quickly.
Aggro and midrange are probably weaker to the card in general. T3 Batterskull against Wild Nacatl is very one sided and in midrange being able to tutor up lifelinking vigilance or unblockability/card advantage is huge.
SFM is sort of like Jace, the Mind Sculptor in that their brokenness is somewhat subtle. Yes they can be answered and yes the game will go on after they drop, but most of the time the game is really over.
My thoughts is that most of the time his partner doesn't know whats is doing, i know that is very hard playing right even just one deck in modern but like the first Pod game awww...
Honestly i don't think that these are valid testing videos.
- L
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
I will definitely admit that the videos are not the most valid. But, I do think it shows Stoneforge Mystic a bit. Being able to tutor up Swords and Batterskulll is very powerful in Modern, but it didn't seem broken. The main problem is that it hurts Aggro so much and I don't think that Aggro can recover from the poor state that it's in right now. Maybe it will just force Aggro to have some sort of creature removal so that Stoneforge Mystic is just a minor inconvenience while beating down?
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)I haven't done any serious SFM testing, but I just want to bring up that point I mentioned in the previous thread. Card evaluation is inherently difficult because there are so many variables to account for. But it's even harder with cards on the banlist because they have so much stigma surrounding them on top of the usual challenges with card evaluation. Historically, we (and many MTG community members / article authors / pro players) have dramatically overestimated the impact of bans and unbans. Introducing Valakut, Bitterblossom, and Nacatl did not destroy the format. The death of Seething Song, BBE, and DRS did not also mean the demise of their staple decks. So the collective track record with ban/unban evaluation is so poor that I am not inclined to trust it in the future.
Previously, I had suggests that all testing be done in that one B&R testing thread. That never really worked out and we always had very little traffic there. So I think it's actually better to just do testing here so at least people are seeing it and able to participate in the process. Then we could try to be more accurate in our historically inaccurate predictions.
This is true. I know that Stoneforge Mystic has a stigma attached that it "hurt" a lot of people in it's former Standard until it was banned LATE in the Standard season right before it would rotate anyway. I have no hard feelings because Aggro and Burn are probably the last 2 archetypes I'd play. But I understand that many of those type players would have hard feelings and if SfM was brought back, it would probably rekindle those unless it was just a "worthless" card in Modern. However, another way to look at it is that Modern has more tools to combat stuff like Stoneforge Mystic, so it's their chance at redemption.
I will admit that I was wrong about the impact of Bitterblossom being unbanned in Modern. I felt like it would have a much bigger impact. Anyway, I don't think that Stoneforge Mystic or stuff like Glimpse of Nature that Caleb tested are even in consideration to be unbanned just yet.
I honestly don't know what Wizards can do to aid Aggro in Modern. Some people suggested printing stronger creatures in Standard, but I don't think this is a good answer because it just warps Standard more. The main reason why I play Modern is because I'm getting tired of creature battles and combat in general. Modern is a place to escape that and the reason why I love Modern and Legacy to a larger extent.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)To be honest I think they cant do anything to help aggro. I mean they wont print something stronger than Wild Nacatl.
It's the inherent trait of aggro decks to have little interaction what makes them bad. Turning dudes sideways just doesnt work in a sea full of combo.
There's a reason why these tribes/creature based decks actually survive in Legacy (Merfolk, Goblins, Elves, etc) and it's because of the raw synergy they have among themselves instead of their raw power (they aren't all 3/3's for 1 mana).
The way you described it reminds me of Death and Taxes. The creatures are not mainly beatdown creatures, but tools to slow the opponent while advancing their board. But many people don't call Death and Taxes "Aggro." I know the creatures don't have synergy with each other, but they do have come into play abilities.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Like I said I just don't think it's viable to just play the best cheap creatures and expect to get there. That only really works in Standard and even there you have to constantly face decks with a billion removal spells and/or Sylvan Caryatid/Courser of Kruphix.
You need something else to compete and that is where basically all aggro decks in Modern fail. Affinity is the fastest one and it has way more line of plays available than other aggro decks but you can beat them if you use one of the dozen hate cards that hose them on top of removal.
I think the Modern format is diverse enough and powerful enough that there are very few cards that truly deserve to be on the banned list. SFM would likely cause a big ruckus, cause a temporary meta shift and then blend in with the rest of the format. I mean Modern is a format of powerful cards. If its not strong, its not here.
They would have to be unbanned one at a time though to see the true effect of the cards. I mean Umezawa's Jitte, Stoneforge Mystic, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Ancestral Vision, Ponder/Preordain all would end up in the same deck. We know how that would end up.
Damia http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=410191
DDFT Legacyhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=505247
Domain Zoo http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10212429#post10212429
There is a better chance that Wizards unbans Hypergenesis than there is a chance they ban Lightning Bolt. I know that people like to shake up the conversation with some new ideas, especially given that we have produced a Nordic saga of ban discourse since the format's birth. But I think it's a much more interesting and productive use of our time (waste of our time?) to talk about SFM, JTMS, or any of the truly controversial bans on the list.
Here's the thing with Bolt. Although there might be some acceptable theoretical reasons to look at it (it does push out a huge range of creatures), it's just too polarizing. Nothing says "arbitrary format" like a Modern with Affinity and Infect but no Bolt. I know that it's easy to overestimate a ban's impact on a format, or just estimate it badly, but Bolt's banning would just make us look bad. Wizards is only just getting out of the ban first, ask questions later mentality. And that's good for the format and for the players. Banning Bolt, or any of the other so-called "oppressive" cards like Goyf/Thoughtseize/Decay, just destroys that.
As Galerion said, that would not end well. Cards have to be unbanned 1 or 2 at a time to determine their impact on the format. Otherwise you often can't identify what the problem card was.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
This is absolutely right (Galerion too). You can't isolate problems if everything gets released from the list at once. It's even worse when you consider that many cards on the list directly feed off others (JTMS/SFM come to mind), so we could never tell what was really causing problems. It would be like the New York City crime drop of the 90s. We know that crime fell but there are at least a dozen persuasive reasons as to why, and it's extremely difficult to separate them. If taking a bunch of cards off the banlist broke the format, any one of them could be responsible, just as any combination of them (or their effects on the metagame!) could also be to blame.
It is much better to unban, and test, cards individually then in one giant statistical mess.
To me it would be better to do it in one lump unban and have a short period of old wild west Modern, then take years and all the speculation and arguing over this card or that card. The way its set up now, the player base is going to be arguing for some time.
Wouldn't it be easier for WOTC to just run separate tournaments where everything is legal to see what happens without messing with the actual format?
Some would still say it wasnt a large enough sample size. Wotc did test before ever announcing the format and there are many who disagree with the original ban list. Wotc having to ban cards after the first large event they had of the format shows how small the testing actually was. The only way to satisfy the masses is to screw with the format in the off season to show how certain cards effect the format.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash