If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.
Tier is a measurement of both power and how common it is. A rogue deck that is well positioned against the field such as the situation Scapeshift found itself in a couple months back isn't a tier 1 deck (but since then Scapeshift has definitely been moving in that direction). Similarly a deck that is poorly positioned against the field but is popular like Soul Sisters or Burn also isn't a tier 1 deck. To be tier 1 it needs to be both powerful and widely played. The tier 1 status is basically a reflection of decks which are good and you will face in a tournament. Not everything in proven is tier 1, but there isn't a tier 1 deck that's not in proven. On the other hand established is in my opinion a pretty good reflection of tier 1.5 which is a good spot for a deck to be as well. Tier 1.5 decks are usually quite powerful as well but aren't so common that you're guaranteed to see them in a tournament.
If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.
Tier is a measurement of both power and how common it is. A rogue deck that is well positioned against the field such as the situation Scapeshift found itself in a couple months back isn't a tier 1 deck (but since then Scapeshift has definitely been moving in that direction). Similarly a deck that is poorly positioned against the field but is popular like Soul Sisters or Burn also isn't a tier 1 deck. To be tier 1 it needs to be both powerful and widely played. The tier 1 status is basically a reflection of decks which are good and you will face in a tournament. Not everything in proven is tier 1, but there isn't a tier 1 deck that's not in proven. On the other hand established is in my opinion a pretty good reflection of tier 1.5 which is a good spot for a deck to be as well. Tier 1.5 decks are usually quite powerful as well but aren't so common that you're guaranteed to see them in a tournament.
Oh I know, my main complaint is that people like to slap a .5 on decks they personally don't like lol
You're right. I don't keep up with MTGO events. I specifically said major events. I felt like I was making that pretty clear. And no, I do not consider online results to be indicative in any way of the actual meta. Take a look at Pro Tour's, Grand Prix's, and the Bazaar of Moxen for further proof of that. As for Prison in Legacy, it's certainly put up better results than Storm in Modern over the past year, winning the Bazaar of Moxen, a couple SCG Opens, and Top 8'ing several more times (G/r Lands, Jund Depths, and 4c Loam, specifically), but it's not really a worthwhile comparison.
A much better way to compare the diversity between the formats is to give SCG's Modern events 6 months, and compare the variety of Top 8 - 16 finishes in those events to the Sunday Legacy Opens. Up to this point, Legacy development has heavily outpaced Modern based on the sheer volume of competitive events that we have each year. By having an equal number of events with comparable player pools, I believe we'll begin see a more realistic picture of the Modern meta. However, at present, archetypal variety is not a keystone of the Modern experience. It's getting better, but it's still a long ways from where it could be.
You want to NOT count MTGO results? Fine. Go look at that spreadsheet again, it has paper tournament results as well. Or go to any GP coverage page, click on Day 2 and look at the meta. I mean obviously it's not exactly the same as a SCG Open T8 (and of course, you would be willing to let that slide, like how you let "complete absence" slide, right?), but the players have to make it through the same number of rounds, so I would say it is comparable.
Where does Storm sit? 3rd and 6th most played deck that Day 2ed for 2 GPs.
edit: if you're telling me that Lands/Depths/Loam has anything more than a "smattering of finishes", you're lying to me, and to yourself. I'm going to call you out on your hypocrisy now: you say some prison deck randomly makes T8s at SCG Opens, so they are legit. Then when AN and Storm get similar accomplishments like PTQ T8s or 8-2 in the Modern section of the PT, no, those results are flukes, "a smattering of finishes", they don't count. Riiiiight.
The criteria is fine as is. One thing that might be relevant is the number of first placings the deck has. Is there a tier 1 deck that has never won a ptq or larger event?
I'm not letting anything slide. I'm working under the basic assumption that not every word someone says should be taken at its most literal. For what it's worth, nothing you said contradicts the premise that those decks aren't legitimate options in the current meta. According to your spreadsheet, Ad Nauseam has 0 Top 8 finishes at a major event, as does 8-Rack. Storm has 2 Top 8's, as opposed to the 1 I quoted, so I did miss one somewhere.
Look at the decks at the top of your "Meta - Major T8/T16" and "Meta - Large Paper T8". Those events include all the big ones (Worlds, Pro Tours, Grand Prix's) as well as PTQs and big local events. Here's the totals:
These are your numbers, and by including the extra events you want to count, they're even worse by percentage than what I had previously stated. If you still think that the results of the Big 5 are comparable to the decks you proferred for Modern variety, then I guess you got me.
I'm not letting anything slide. I'm working under the basic assumption that not every word someone says should be taken at its most literal. For what it's worth, nothing you said contradicts the premise that those decks aren't legitimate options in the current meta. According to your spreadsheet, Ad Nauseam has 0 Top 8 finishes at a major event, as does 8-Rack. Storm has 2 Top 8's, as opposed to the 1 I quoted, so I did miss one somewhere.
Look at the decks at the top of your "Meta - Major T8/T16" and "Meta - Large Paper T8". Those events include all the big ones (Worlds, Pro Tours, Grand Prix's) as well as PTQs and big local events. Here's the totals:
These are your numbers, and by including the extra events you want to count, they're even worse by percentage than what I had previously stated. If you still think that the results of the Big 5 are comparable to the decks you proferred for Modern variety, then I guess you got me.
I will not deny that there are both major differences and interesting similarities between the MTGO and the Paper metagames. Some decks are solidly tier 1 on MTGO, with tons of finishes and a lot of success (Storm, UR Delver, Burn, and GW Death and Taxes). But once you get to paper, you don't see those decks nearly as much. Storm is sort of an exception to this because it enjoyed a lot of success earlier in the year, but the other three definitely don't see the same kind of play. Paper magic sees a lot more Jund, Kiki Pod, and UWR control/midrange than you see online.
From a tier perspective, both sets of metagames need to be considered. There are a few reasons for this. The first is that new players might be looking for information that is relevant to MTGO and/or to paper; we don't know what they want! So we give them information that is relevant across the digital divide. That is why a deck cannot just have online success to be in Proven, but also why online success is one possible criteria for getting there. The second is that both domains inform each other. People test decks on MTGO before bringing them to big events. People bring decks to the daily queues after seeing them rock a GP. Describing an entire metagame while ignoring an entire segment of that metagame is sloppy, at best, and deceptive, at worst.
Finally, I think that people overestimate the effect that MTGO has on a deck's classification. Under our current 2+ criteria, even if we completely eliminated the MTGO component, only ONE deck would be moved down to Established: RG Tron! For reference, MTGO is the (1) criteria on our list, and here is what our Proven organization would look like if we abolished MTGO as a consideration:
Affinity (2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (2,3,4,5)
BG Rock (4,5)
Jund (2,4,5)
Scapeshift (2,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (2,3,4)
Merfolk (2,4)
RUG Twin (2,3,5)
Kiki Pod (2,3)
Bogles (2,4)
What if we did the same thing under the 3+ criteria (The hypothetical stricter criteria?).
Affinity (2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (2,3,4,5)
Jund (2,4,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (2,3,4)
RUG Twin (2,3,5)
Storm is still there, but BG Rock and Scapeshift are gone. That is actually a little weird; I would definitely argue that BG Rock is a "Better" deck than Storm, which is itself at least as good as Scapeshift. They are all at least as viable as one another, and yet in eliminating MTGO as a consideration, we have excluded two obvious "Proven" archetypes and kept one that is fairly fringe in most player's minds.
All of this goes to reaffirm that we should consider MTGO data in classifying decks. That's not to say we should overweight the data! This might be an issue with having a cutoff of 2+ criteria instead of the more "accurate" 3+ criteria that I would like to see. But whether it's a 2+ or 3+ cutoff, MTGO still needs to be a piece of that because MTGO is a piece of our metagame.
I'm not letting anything slide. I'm working under the basic assumption that not every word someone says should be taken at its most literal. For what it's worth, nothing you said contradicts the premise that those decks aren't legitimate options in the current meta. According to your spreadsheet, Ad Nauseam has 0 Top 8 finishes at a major event, as does 8-Rack. Storm has 2 Top 8's, as opposed to the 1 I quoted, so I did miss one somewhere.
Look at the decks at the top of your "Meta - Major T8/T16" and "Meta - Large Paper T8". Those events include all the big ones (Worlds, Pro Tours, Grand Prix's) as well as PTQs and big local events. Here's the totals:
These are your numbers, and by including the extra events you want to count, they're even worse by percentage than what I had previously stated. If you still think that the results of the Big 5 are comparable to the decks you proferred for Modern variety, then I guess you got me.
Look, this isn't about how high on the tier list Storm or AN are. It's about your claim that the prison decks in Legacy that you listed are better than those two in Modern.
From mtgtop8, for the whole of 2014, including MTGO decks because there isn't a way to filter those out (just make whatever adjustments for MTGO events that you think are appropriate):
Delver variants: 156 (=56+56+44)
BUG Aggro/Midrange: 142
UW Miracles: 110
Stoneblade: 87
Death and Taxes: 68
Show and Tell: 68
And here you are, telling me that prison in Legacy has "put up better results" than Storm and Ad Nauseam in Modern. Sure. Like I said, you are lying to yourself and to me. Of course I kind of expect that since you play Legacy more than Modern (if at all), so you'll overstate the accomplishments of the tier 2 decks of Legacy while understating those of Modern.
P.S. At least we agree on one thing, 8 Rack is not a deck.
Where are you getting this notion that I somehow pitted Legacy Prison against Modern Storm? If you look back to my first comment in this thread:
'There were 10 different Legacy decks in the Top 16 yesterday, if we're being generous with distinctions. There were 10 different Modern decks in the Top 16 yesterday, again, if we're being generous with distinctions. When I say generous, I mean that I'm willing to differentiate between Jund and Junk in Modern, RUG and BUG Delver in Legacy, etc. Of those 32 decks across both formats, there were countless overlappings of Stoneforge Mystics, Delvers, Birthing Pods, Splinter Twins, Tarmogoyfs, etc.
Of course I kind of expect that since you play Legacy more than Modern (if at all), so you'll overstate the accomplishments of the tier 2 decks of Legacy while understating those of Modern.
The first half of your comment is an assumption. The second half is the exact opposite of what I've already said in this thread:
' I understand the desire to defend Modern, but it's as disingenuous to offer these decks as legitimate contenders as it is for Legacy players to say Pox and Landstill are important meta staples.'
Does it sound like I'm standing up for Legacy?
I'm not the one that initiated that comparison. You've missed the forest for the trees. I'm merely stating that Modern has a diversity problem. At the top end, Legacy has one too. I thought I was pretty clear about that in my initial comments. Then again, you seem hell bent on picking a fight that I had no interest in picking, so it doesn't surprise me that you skipped right past it. Making ad hominem attacks on another format does nothing to solve the problems within Modern. Neither does citing win-nothing decks as examples of archetypal diversity. That's the only point I've tried to make, and it has nothing to do with Legacy.
As for this fixation you have on Prison vs. Storm, my only point in that comparison was that Prison decks had, in fact, won several major tournaments this year. To my knowledge, Storm has barely Top 8'd. That statement is still true. But again, that has next to nothing to do with my broader point. I said as much the first time it came up yesterday:
'As for Prison in Legacy, it's certainly put up better results than Storm in Modern over the past year, winning the Bazaar of Moxen, a couple SCG Opens, and Top 8'ing several more times (G/r Lands, Jund Depths, and 4c Loam, specifically), but it's not really a worthwhile comparison.'
If that's your big "gotcha" in this thread, then you and I are operating on entirely different axes in respect to this discussion.
What holds Lands back as an archetype is a combination of play style and cost. Legacy decks can be absent from meta games as a result. The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale is reaching value numbers that will eventually make it worth more than some modern decks by itself.
MUD is a good deck, it's just underplayed, because of how it plays and player perception plays a part here, I believe.
That said, I play modern sometimes, and it gets old because in my area the diversity is limited. I travel for Legacy and won't drop from Legacy to play Modern. However, modern could appear to be as diverse as legacy but less interesting things happen in my opinion.
SCG July 28th 110 people, which seems about right with Boston going on. The top 8 was pretty diverse with Rock, U/R Delver, Jund, Affinity, Merfolk, Junk, Scapeshift, and Gifts-rites. 9-16 was 3 Affinity decks, 2 twin decks, Storm, R/G Tron and UWR flash.
SCG July 28th 110 people, which seems about right with Boston going on. The top 8 was pretty diverse with Rock, U/R Delver, Jund, Affinity, Merfolk, Junk, Scapeshift, and Gifts-rites. 9-16 was 3 Affinity decks, 2 twin decks, Storm, R/G Tron and UWR flash.
I played gifts this weekend, finishing 25th in the super series, I and the Sioux falls ptq winner that I talked to who won with 4c gifts both have 'meh' feelings about Iona, which has more to do with the ideal shell and how sideboarding plays out for the deck.
Iona doesn't lock out ANY deck absolutely except burn and merfolk (mostly)--which doesn't really earn her a spot main in most lists--its just doesn't make sense. Gifts is playing a tough game in a turn 4 format because its end game spell doesn't just win like twins or pods does. Even hive mind combo and mill get flack for not ending the game the same turn the combo goes off and gifts is a far slower win than either of those. At best you gifts EOT their turn 3, and reanimate or go for a big raven's crime lock on your main--which usually 3/4 turns away from the actual win. The deck is clunky and needs the right draws to get where it needs to be to win, doesn't mull well, and can't really afford to draw a fattie in the opening seven. Iona goes to the side by a wide margin.
Some lists cut her completely from the side too--the grave hate out of most decks makes most unburial rites plans a bit of a prayer. Vrba won without her, and I reintroduced her into my side this weekend after learning that burn was out in force and predicting a lot of early merfolk players. It ended up locking one twin player out game 2, but I had to name red--giving him multiple possible blue outs, which isn't ideal. It is just the worst though when that damned scavenging ooze jund player has a single G open and you can't gifts EOT without the abrupt decay/path to get rid of the ubiquitous-deathrite-replacement-gifts-killer. I should also mention that the correct gifts package against BGx is usually batterskull/academy ruins/grave titan/unburial rites (4 solid castable on that upcoming mainphase with the land in your hand threats--not iona on black).
UW tron gifts and UWR gifts is a different story, but for the 4c in question, thats the troof.
I would love to main her because I just like the card itself and is she is the best at what she does, but in 4c gifts--a deck who's closest thing to card draw outside of that namesake 4 mana tutor is a singleton dredge 3, drawing a fattie or two or the unburial rites in your opening seven is basically the same thing as a mull to 4-5, and it happens a lot.
Storm isn't a true player in Modern. Scapeshift isn't creatureless.
4th turn for fast combo, ha. Get some big boy mana accel, cantrips, and counter spells and you might approach an adult format.
The absence of any style would be a shame, whether it's my personal style or not.
1. Storm has seen mixed results this year. During PT Valencia in February, it had some great showings and finishes. 2 of the top 16 highest-scoring Modern decks were Storm. One of those Storm players also made T8 in the overall event. It's true that PTs sometimes see slightly different metagames (Bogles was a FORCE at Valencia but hasn't really replicated that success since in 2014), but you can't just dismiss those finishes out of hand. People weren't prepared for it, didn't respect it, and Storm showed them who was boss. Since then, Storm has remained a regular presence on MTGO, both in 4 round dailies and in premiers. But it has not seen the same sort of paper success since Valencia. Does that make it a bad deck? Not really. It just makes it a deck that you would only want to play under certain circumstances. It's viable, but not a Melira Pod style powerhouse.
2. Two things about fast combo. The first is that Modern doesn't really have the card base to support ultra-fast combo. It doesn't have the heavy hitter mana acceleration to enable it, the broken cantrips/filters to find it, and the powerful police cards to make that all fair. It's fine if people don't like that, just as it's fine if people don't like the different power level of ANY format, whether Standard, Legacy, or Vintage. But if someone doesn't like those foundational rules, then I would agree that Modern probably isn't the best format for that person.
That said, there are still some broken things going on in Modern. Griselbrand and Infect are extremely fast and really punish those players who can't or choose not to interact with them. Speedy combo is there, it's just in a different form than you would see in a different format.
Yeah, I've seen top 8s. The most recent one for a big Legacy tourney was Death & Taxes, Canadian Thresh, Omni-Tell, Team America, Esperblade, Lands, Burn, Jund. The most recent one for a big Modern tourney was The Rock, Jund, Infect, Affinity, Affinity, Infect, The Rock, Blue Moon.
This isn't a great comparison because of the tournament sizes. The most recent SCG Open in Kansas City had only 256 players. That's about 1/10th of the 2500 at GP Boston/Worcester. Bigger events are obviously going to have a different sort of deck distribution at the top because of the different ways that decks negotiate larger events with more rounds.
A much better comparison would be something like PTQ Riccione in Italy. With 221 players and a lower round count, it's a much more comparable event to the Legacy Open. The Top 8 there also had the kind of diversity you would expect at smaller events:
1. Merfolk
2. Blue Moon
3. BG Rock
4. Infect
5. UR Twin
6. Jund
7. UR Twin
8. Time Walk
Sure, some of those decks are similar, but no more similar than the 3 RUG Delver, 1 BUG Delver, and 1 Shardless BUG that we saw in the T8 of SCG Baltimore.
Modern definitely doesn't have every single archetype represented in equal proportions. And it definitely has places to grow, both in its card pool and in its deck development. But overall, the format is still quite diverse and is definitely undoing some of the earlier issues caused by hamhanded bans and a really dismal marketing setup.
I played gifts this weekend, finishing 25th in the super series, I and the Sioux falls ptq winner that I talked to who won with 4c gifts both have 'meh' feelings about Iona, which has more to do with the ideal shell and how sideboarding plays out for the deck.
Iona doesn't lock out ANY deck absolutely except burn and merfolk (mostly)--which doesn't really earn her a spot main in most lists--its just doesn't make sense.
Once resolved on black, she cannot be removed by Jund or The Rock, with the exception of an already present Liliana. I've been on the receiving end of a Turn 2-3 Iona in Legacy more times than I care to count, but that's a big difference from a Turn 5 Iona of course. I'm not sure whether Junk plays Path to Exile. The top lists I've seen do not, so she could be good there as well.
That said, I'm no Gifts expert, and the reasoning you give for not going for Iona makes perfect sense.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
I mean yeah, if I could nail her the board turn 2-3 with any consistency I'd run her main--and there would be gifts in the top 8 next GP easy.
You are right that it locks out Jund/k/x, but it hasn't been common that they don't have liliana, hate, or ooze somewhere before I can gifts for the rites combo safely--especially under hand disruption and probably using a removal spell for something else already if I'm not holding a gifts or two--I'd rather gifts for unburial and three castable hard to deal with threats against GBx.
Tier is a measurement of both power and how common it is. A rogue deck that is well positioned against the field such as the situation Scapeshift found itself in a couple months back isn't a tier 1 deck (but since then Scapeshift has definitely been moving in that direction). Similarly a deck that is poorly positioned against the field but is popular like Soul Sisters or Burn also isn't a tier 1 deck. To be tier 1 it needs to be both powerful and widely played. The tier 1 status is basically a reflection of decks which are good and you will face in a tournament. Not everything in proven is tier 1, but there isn't a tier 1 deck that's not in proven. On the other hand established is in my opinion a pretty good reflection of tier 1.5 which is a good spot for a deck to be as well. Tier 1.5 decks are usually quite powerful as well but aren't so common that you're guaranteed to see them in a tournament.
Oh I know, my main complaint is that people like to slap a .5 on decks they personally don't like lol
You want to NOT count MTGO results? Fine. Go look at that spreadsheet again, it has paper tournament results as well. Or go to any GP coverage page, click on Day 2 and look at the meta. I mean obviously it's not exactly the same as a SCG Open T8 (and of course, you would be willing to let that slide, like how you let "complete absence" slide, right?), but the players have to make it through the same number of rounds, so I would say it is comparable.
Where does Storm sit? 3rd and 6th most played deck that Day 2ed for 2 GPs.
edit: if you're telling me that Lands/Depths/Loam has anything more than a "smattering of finishes", you're lying to me, and to yourself. I'm going to call you out on your hypocrisy now: you say some prison deck randomly makes T8s at SCG Opens, so they are legit. Then when AN and Storm get similar accomplishments like PTQ T8s or 8-2 in the Modern section of the PT, no, those results are flukes, "a smattering of finishes", they don't count. Riiiiight.
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
Look at the decks at the top of your "Meta - Major T8/T16" and "Meta - Large Paper T8". Those events include all the big ones (Worlds, Pro Tours, Grand Prix's) as well as PTQs and big local events. Here's the totals:
Pod varients: 103
Twin varients: 100
B/G/x varients: 108
Affinity: 73
U/W/x varients (non-Twin): 73
Storm: 16
Ad Nauseam: 14
8-Rack: 3
These are your numbers, and by including the extra events you want to count, they're even worse by percentage than what I had previously stated. If you still think that the results of the Big 5 are comparable to the decks you proferred for Modern variety, then I guess you got me.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
I will not deny that there are both major differences and interesting similarities between the MTGO and the Paper metagames. Some decks are solidly tier 1 on MTGO, with tons of finishes and a lot of success (Storm, UR Delver, Burn, and GW Death and Taxes). But once you get to paper, you don't see those decks nearly as much. Storm is sort of an exception to this because it enjoyed a lot of success earlier in the year, but the other three definitely don't see the same kind of play. Paper magic sees a lot more Jund, Kiki Pod, and UWR control/midrange than you see online.
From a tier perspective, both sets of metagames need to be considered. There are a few reasons for this. The first is that new players might be looking for information that is relevant to MTGO and/or to paper; we don't know what they want! So we give them information that is relevant across the digital divide. That is why a deck cannot just have online success to be in Proven, but also why online success is one possible criteria for getting there. The second is that both domains inform each other. People test decks on MTGO before bringing them to big events. People bring decks to the daily queues after seeing them rock a GP. Describing an entire metagame while ignoring an entire segment of that metagame is sloppy, at best, and deceptive, at worst.
Finally, I think that people overestimate the effect that MTGO has on a deck's classification. Under our current 2+ criteria, even if we completely eliminated the MTGO component, only ONE deck would be moved down to Established: RG Tron! For reference, MTGO is the (1) criteria on our list, and here is what our Proven organization would look like if we abolished MTGO as a consideration:
Affinity (2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (2,3,4,5)
BG Rock (4,5)
Jund (2,4,5)
Scapeshift (2,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (2,3,4)
Merfolk (2,4)
RUG Twin (2,3,5)
Kiki Pod (2,3)
Bogles (2,4)
What if we did the same thing under the 3+ criteria (The hypothetical stricter criteria?).
Affinity (2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (2,3,4,5)
Jund (2,4,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (2,3,4)
RUG Twin (2,3,5)
Storm is still there, but BG Rock and Scapeshift are gone. That is actually a little weird; I would definitely argue that BG Rock is a "Better" deck than Storm, which is itself at least as good as Scapeshift. They are all at least as viable as one another, and yet in eliminating MTGO as a consideration, we have excluded two obvious "Proven" archetypes and kept one that is fairly fringe in most player's minds.
All of this goes to reaffirm that we should consider MTGO data in classifying decks. That's not to say we should overweight the data! This might be an issue with having a cutoff of 2+ criteria instead of the more "accurate" 3+ criteria that I would like to see. But whether it's a 2+ or 3+ cutoff, MTGO still needs to be a piece of that because MTGO is a piece of our metagame.
Look, this isn't about how high on the tier list Storm or AN are. It's about your claim that the prison decks in Legacy that you listed are better than those two in Modern.
From mtgtop8, for the whole of 2014, including MTGO decks because there isn't a way to filter those out (just make whatever adjustments for MTGO events that you think are appropriate):
Delver variants: 156 (=56+56+44)
BUG Aggro/Midrange: 142
UW Miracles: 110
Stoneblade: 87
Death and Taxes: 68
Show and Tell: 68
MUD: 13
Lands: 9
Aggro Loam: 8 (this includes Jund Depths)
And here you are, telling me that prison in Legacy has "put up better results" than Storm and Ad Nauseam in Modern. Sure. Like I said, you are lying to yourself and to me. Of course I kind of expect that since you play Legacy more than Modern (if at all), so you'll overstate the accomplishments of the tier 2 decks of Legacy while understating those of Modern.
P.S. At least we agree on one thing, 8 Rack is not a deck.
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
'There were 10 different Legacy decks in the Top 16 yesterday, if we're being generous with distinctions. There were 10 different Modern decks in the Top 16 yesterday, again, if we're being generous with distinctions. When I say generous, I mean that I'm willing to differentiate between Jund and Junk in Modern, RUG and BUG Delver in Legacy, etc. Of those 32 decks across both formats, there were countless overlappings of Stoneforge Mystics, Delvers, Birthing Pods, Splinter Twins, Tarmogoyfs, etc.
Then there's this:
The first half of your comment is an assumption. The second half is the exact opposite of what I've already said in this thread:
' I understand the desire to defend Modern, but it's as disingenuous to offer these decks as legitimate contenders as it is for Legacy players to say Pox and Landstill are important meta staples.'
Does it sound like I'm standing up for Legacy?
I'm not the one that initiated that comparison. You've missed the forest for the trees. I'm merely stating that Modern has a diversity problem. At the top end, Legacy has one too. I thought I was pretty clear about that in my initial comments. Then again, you seem hell bent on picking a fight that I had no interest in picking, so it doesn't surprise me that you skipped right past it. Making ad hominem attacks on another format does nothing to solve the problems within Modern. Neither does citing win-nothing decks as examples of archetypal diversity. That's the only point I've tried to make, and it has nothing to do with Legacy.
As for this fixation you have on Prison vs. Storm, my only point in that comparison was that Prison decks had, in fact, won several major tournaments this year. To my knowledge, Storm has barely Top 8'd. That statement is still true. But again, that has next to nothing to do with my broader point. I said as much the first time it came up yesterday:
'As for Prison in Legacy, it's certainly put up better results than Storm in Modern over the past year, winning the Bazaar of Moxen, a couple SCG Opens, and Top 8'ing several more times (G/r Lands, Jund Depths, and 4c Loam, specifically), but it's not really a worthwhile comparison.'
If that's your big "gotcha" in this thread, then you and I are operating on entirely different axes in respect to this discussion.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
So is MUD or Lands a "relevant" deck in Legacy?
If yes: on the basis of results, Storm has just as many, so why is Storm not "relevant"?
If no: why did you bring those up as examples?
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
MUD is a good deck, it's just underplayed, because of how it plays and player perception plays a part here, I believe.
That said, I play modern sometimes, and it gets old because in my area the diversity is limited. I travel for Legacy and won't drop from Legacy to play Modern. However, modern could appear to be as diverse as legacy but less interesting things happen in my opinion.
Big Thanks to Xeno for sig art <3.
Information found here.
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&t[C1]=28&start_date=07/26/2014&end_date=07/27/2014
Thank you KT for the sticky, I apologize I forgot about this thread.
Iona being only in the sideboard of that Gifts deck is interesting.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
http://themeadery.org/articles/winners-circle-the-gift-that-keeps-on-ungiving
Iona doesn't lock out ANY deck absolutely except burn and merfolk (mostly)--which doesn't really earn her a spot main in most lists--its just doesn't make sense. Gifts is playing a tough game in a turn 4 format because its end game spell doesn't just win like twins or pods does. Even hive mind combo and mill get flack for not ending the game the same turn the combo goes off and gifts is a far slower win than either of those. At best you gifts EOT their turn 3, and reanimate or go for a big raven's crime lock on your main--which usually 3/4 turns away from the actual win. The deck is clunky and needs the right draws to get where it needs to be to win, doesn't mull well, and can't really afford to draw a fattie in the opening seven. Iona goes to the side by a wide margin.
Some lists cut her completely from the side too--the grave hate out of most decks makes most unburial rites plans a bit of a prayer. Vrba won without her, and I reintroduced her into my side this weekend after learning that burn was out in force and predicting a lot of early merfolk players. It ended up locking one twin player out game 2, but I had to name red--giving him multiple possible blue outs, which isn't ideal. It is just the worst though when that damned scavenging ooze jund player has a single G open and you can't gifts EOT without the abrupt decay/path to get rid of the ubiquitous-deathrite-replacement-gifts-killer. I should also mention that the correct gifts package against BGx is usually batterskull/academy ruins/grave titan/unburial rites (4 solid castable on that upcoming mainphase with the land in your hand threats--not iona on black).
UW tron gifts and UWR gifts is a different story, but for the 4c in question, thats the troof.
That makes sense, especially when you can't cast Iona. I play UW tron and since its reasonable to cast her at times, she's fine in the main.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
1. Storm has seen mixed results this year. During PT Valencia in February, it had some great showings and finishes. 2 of the top 16 highest-scoring Modern decks were Storm. One of those Storm players also made T8 in the overall event. It's true that PTs sometimes see slightly different metagames (Bogles was a FORCE at Valencia but hasn't really replicated that success since in 2014), but you can't just dismiss those finishes out of hand. People weren't prepared for it, didn't respect it, and Storm showed them who was boss. Since then, Storm has remained a regular presence on MTGO, both in 4 round dailies and in premiers. But it has not seen the same sort of paper success since Valencia. Does that make it a bad deck? Not really. It just makes it a deck that you would only want to play under certain circumstances. It's viable, but not a Melira Pod style powerhouse.
2. Two things about fast combo. The first is that Modern doesn't really have the card base to support ultra-fast combo. It doesn't have the heavy hitter mana acceleration to enable it, the broken cantrips/filters to find it, and the powerful police cards to make that all fair. It's fine if people don't like that, just as it's fine if people don't like the different power level of ANY format, whether Standard, Legacy, or Vintage. But if someone doesn't like those foundational rules, then I would agree that Modern probably isn't the best format for that person.
That said, there are still some broken things going on in Modern. Griselbrand and Infect are extremely fast and really punish those players who can't or choose not to interact with them. Speedy combo is there, it's just in a different form than you would see in a different format.
This isn't a great comparison because of the tournament sizes. The most recent SCG Open in Kansas City had only 256 players. That's about 1/10th of the 2500 at GP Boston/Worcester. Bigger events are obviously going to have a different sort of deck distribution at the top because of the different ways that decks negotiate larger events with more rounds.
A much better comparison would be something like PTQ Riccione in Italy. With 221 players and a lower round count, it's a much more comparable event to the Legacy Open. The Top 8 there also had the kind of diversity you would expect at smaller events:
1. Merfolk
2. Blue Moon
3. BG Rock
4. Infect
5. UR Twin
6. Jund
7. UR Twin
8. Time Walk
Sure, some of those decks are similar, but no more similar than the 3 RUG Delver, 1 BUG Delver, and 1 Shardless BUG that we saw in the T8 of SCG Baltimore.
Modern definitely doesn't have every single archetype represented in equal proportions. And it definitely has places to grow, both in its card pool and in its deck development. But overall, the format is still quite diverse and is definitely undoing some of the earlier issues caused by hamhanded bans and a really dismal marketing setup.
Once resolved on black, she cannot be removed by Jund or The Rock, with the exception of an already present Liliana. I've been on the receiving end of a Turn 2-3 Iona in Legacy more times than I care to count, but that's a big difference from a Turn 5 Iona of course. I'm not sure whether Junk plays Path to Exile. The top lists I've seen do not, so she could be good there as well.
That said, I'm no Gifts expert, and the reasoning you give for not going for Iona makes perfect sense.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
You are right that it locks out Jund/k/x, but it hasn't been common that they don't have liliana, hate, or ooze somewhere before I can gifts for the rites combo safely--especially under hand disruption and probably using a removal spell for something else already if I'm not holding a gifts or two--I'd rather gifts for unburial and three castable hard to deal with threats against GBx.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator