Bloom has counters and bad match ups for sure. A lot of people that complain about it just see a combo deck in the top 8 of something and call BS without piloting it or researching all the times it hasn't won and why. There were a bunch of people calling for Ensnaring Bridge to be banned because of Lantern Control without any idea how hard that deck actually is to use or considering any of it's match ups.
Summer bloom seems like the best ban target if that deck is a problem, which I do not think is the case. If anything, the deck just needs a little speed taken away. Summer bloom is where the really speedy draws come from, and I don't think the deck would just stop working if they had to play explore instead of summer bloom. Slower yes, but still a thing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I wonder if anyone's ever done a huge amount of goldfish testing with the deck (when I say huge, I mean hundreds of games) and kept track of what its terminal turn was on each game to give more objective data.
I have played hundreds of games with Bloom Titan. I have owned the deck ever since Mathias Hunt did well at a GP with it. I also played it for 1 month, so probably around 40-50 games there. I play tested with it ever since I have owned it and since most cards don't need to be switched with other decks and I actually have multiple play sets of stuff like Prime Time, it's been mostly together. My estimation is probably maybe 200-300 games play tested at least. My estimation at the goldfish turn win would be around turn 4. Granted up until 2 weeks ago, I did have the deck apart for 2 months.
I will probably be playing it at FNM from now on unless I want to keep playing other "fun stuff" like Slivers, Possibility Storm, or Loam Pox.
Well, my question wasn't so much about the average turn of victory. I have no doubt that that's turn 4 or later, even when goldfishing. I was wondering if anyone had taken it, goldfished it an extremely high number of times, and kept track of exactly how many pre-turn 4 kills there were (and on what turn they were). That would give more objective data as to how frequently it can do that, percentage-wise. I'm not talking about estimates here, I mean someone actually sitting down, goldfishing with it for a few hundred games, then keeping track of exactly what turn it won each game, then tallying them up and figuring out how many times of those games it won on turn 2, turn 3, turn 4, turn 5, etc. Average isn't particularly useful for that purpose.
Yeah I didn't do that for Bloom Titan. I have done it for Grishoalbrand in a few different matchups, but not Bloom Titan. (not goldfishing per se, but some of the matchups may as well have been goldfishing)
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)
Banning the pacts would be interesting. It's hard to argue with the notion that free spells cause degenerate play and Bloom would be a lot less annoying if players only had to fight it one way. I don't think it's going to happen, but it's an interesting notion.
It wouldn't completely kill the deck as a way of mega ramping something via a combo. The deck would just need to run a playset of Rampaging Baloths or something to fill in the hole which would be arguably much fairer. Alternatively they'd need to run Chord of Calling which is slower. I'd really welcome a deck like that as well, it would be interesting to see what cool bombs people would come up with.
Banning pacts makes no sense. If you ban pacts Bloom no longer needs Hive Mind, so you are essentially banning various cards (pacts) in order for Bloom to stop playing Hive Mind? Not to mention yu are also banning cards that are playable in other decks (pacts) while you could just ban Hive Mind which is only played in Bloom and by people trying to brew a hive Mind deck.
Banning Green Pact is the worst idea I have ever heard.
Guys, don't look for a ban where there is no need for one.
If Bloom Titan DOMINATES the format, I am with you, we will need a ban. But that wont happen because
1) the deck is NOT CONSISTENT and NOT GOOD enough to dominate the format.
2) There are various scenarios and matchups and during those scenarios/matchups the deck has a huge problem winning.
Everyone is throwing ideas out of thin air when NOONE has considered banning Simian Spirit Guide ( I have seen some posts of bill zagoudis and other people mentioning that a lot of pages earlier ).
You can first ban this card and then come back for more.
People need to calm down and think carefully, a thing that only a few people seem to be doing right now.
I get that the real problem of the deck is this:
It is not a tier 1 deck (in power level, i don't care about popularity), but some times 1 out of 10 for example, it gets broken/uninteractive/nearly impossible to be dealt with(spell snare can cut off the T2 kill all the time however-except if it is for Guide).
WHAT IF I AM the lucky one to be playing against this abominable thing?
Well, this is true. But if you do go by this thought, you MUST also ban Goryo's Vengeance possible Turn 2 / 3 kill(5 % possibility) , Storm's 0.05% possible T2-3 kill, Infect's possible turn 2 kill(5% possibility) and T3 kill(15% possibility-WOW!!!!), Affinity's turn 2 kill(2% possibility) and Turn 3 kill(10% possibility).
You must mention those things as well.
And do not hurry up saying that those decks are much more interactive. They are but only by a small margin.
bloom titan is currently proving its tier 1......popularity isnt the only thing that is considered when determining the tier of a deck. just look at modern nexus' criteria and it will all make sense to you. even without turn 2-3 wins the deck doesn't play magic and is still putting up results so obviously its a really good linear deck and banning simian spirit guide is a horrible idea most people arent even running them in bloom anymore for consistency reasons.
I honestly could see Wizards banning either Tolaria West or Summoner's Pact from Bloom, specifically because in Modern they don't like tools that give decks a high level of consistency, and those two cards are what let the deck search things up.
Also, here's a fun tip: if you want to make a Bloom player sad, cast Shadow of Doubt in response to his Summoner's Pact. Still has to pay the 4 mana or lose, doesn't get a damn thing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
There are a lot of decks that can essentially win turn 2 or outright win turn 3. Zombie Hunt can drop a Reliquary Tower turn 1, Treasure Hunt 90% of the deck turn 2 and drop 20 2/2 zombies in your turn 3 end step. That the thing about Modern with such a large card pool it's easy enough to pull all kinds of ridiculous crap. What stops it being completely overwhelming is the reliability of those decks. It's a combination of lack of consistency and the presence of counters.
Bloom has counters. If a deck has counters and many still feel it's too brutal the issue then becomes it's consistency. Targeting the consistency is the easiest way to make it reasonable without outright saying, no, you cannot play decks along these lines.
Point in case is Eggs. That deck still exists with Faith's Reward, Noxious Revival and Open the Vaults. It's still viable but not the large percent of the field deck it was when Second Sunrise was legal. They targeted Second Sunrise to lower it's consistency, they left Krark Clan Ironworks which is that decks Summer Bloom.
Bloom Titan is a sum of all these little synergies between it's cards. If you take out Amulet or Summer Bloom, there is no combo aspect anymore and I believe it would be too slow to be playable. Banning Tolaria West or Summoner's Pact would also kill the deck because there is no point in playing a ramp strategy that loses to Terminate. It's not like banning those cards would weaken the deck, it would just kill it, because the deck is clunky when things don't line up well. You can play a deck that sometimes gets clunky draws; you can't really play one that is always clunky. Hive Mind would hurt but could be actually replaceable, though whatever would replace it wouldn't fit as beautifuly into the deck as Hive Mind itself is.
By deck being dead I mean eggs or storm power level or even lower.
Hive Mind could definitely go. It's a card I feel Wizards are very unlikely to touch however as it sees no play outside of the deck and isn't a core component of the deck it's an adaptation. Summoner's Pact has potential to be degenerate in a number of decks.
As for the bolded portion, if you're playing against a Black / Red deck you could drop Sigarda turn 2. Suddenly no Thoughtseize, Liliana, can't remove it with Terminate etc. Freeing up card slots you could run any number of other bombs alongside the Titans. Potentially missing that guaranteed double interaction w/ Amulet and the Titan bringing in untapped Boros lands would tame it. Alternatively you could go away from all in and work on making the deck less linear. The deck being linear, consistent and able to win major tournaments is why people get annoyed with it.
In saying all that I'm not 100% convinced anything needs to go at all. I think the deck is really good and I admit I cringe a bit when I see top 8s with 3 Bloom Titan decks in it but I don't think the deck is completely broken to the point of needing bans.
Hive Mind makes a lot of sense, too. I just think the deck shouldn't be allowed to exist in its current form - with two separate win conditions that can come down turn 2-4 and have to be fought entirely different ways. Allowing the deck to exist but forcing the kill through a Titan makes it a lot easier for decks to fight back against it, essentially forcing players to keep mana up for the Path in turns 3-4, like we have to do with Splinter Twin already.
I don't know if Amulet is the ban-worthy scourge that some people think that it is, but I agree with the sentiment that if anything were to go from it the card ought to be Hive Mind.
The deck is powerful and consistent, and against an under-prepared meta a good pilot can clean up with it, but similar to decks like Infect it's turn 2-3 wins are much less consistent and can still be interacted with fairly easily if you're prepared. On top of that, a turn 2 Titan is pretty backbreaking but it isn't truly something that you can't come back from. Neither of those points are true of an early Hive Mind; an early Hive Mind plus pact is game over and the only common interaction that works is countermagic or discard. Only specific decks have access to those tools and even there if the Hive comes down on turn 2 the defender's window to interact is very narrow.
Bottom line, if you're helpless against a deck that can play a turn 2 creature in 1 of 10 games that's vulnerable to almost everything, shame on you. On the other hand MOST decks are helpless to a turn 2 Hive Pact, and that could become a real problem.
Bloom Titan is a sum of all these little synergies between it's cards. If you take out Amulet or Summer Bloom, there is no combo aspect anymore and I believe it would be too slow to be playable. Banning Tolaria West or Summoner's Pact would also kill the deck because there is no point in playing a ramp strategy that loses to Terminate. It's not like banning those cards would weaken the deck, it would just kill it, because the deck is clunky when things don't line up well. You can play a deck that sometimes gets clunky draws; you can't really play one that is always clunky. Hive Mind would hurt but could be actually replaceable, though whatever would replace it wouldn't fit as beautifuly into the deck as Hive Mind itself is.
By deck being dead I mean eggs or storm power level or even lower.
I'll agree with the rest, but I do disagree that "there is no combo aspect anymore" without Summer Bloom. You still have Azusa and can try Journey of Discovery. They are definitely weaker than Summer Bloom (cost more, only two extra lands) but you can still pull the stuff off, just a turn later. Turn 3 Primeval Titan frustrates people less than turn 2 Primeval Titan.
Note that I'm not arguing for bans. I certainly wouldn't be sad to see the deck go because it clobbers my deck so much, but it's hard for me to really justify a ban.
As for the bolded portion, if you're playing against a Black / Red deck you could drop Sigarda turn 2. Suddenly no Thoughtseize, Liliana, can't remove it with Terminate etc. Freeing up card slots you could run any number of other bombs alongside the Titans.
Ignoring the fact that "you could drop Sigarda turn 2" is already presuming something that's basically Magical Christmas Land (turn 2 Titan is already rather uncommon, but Sigarda has even more strict requirements in that there's fewer lands you can pull it off with and she's generally played as a 1-of), how the heck does it stop Thoughtseize? Thoughtseize is a turn 1 play so even this Magical Christmas Land scenario is stopped by Thoughtseize.
Amulet Bloom with Explore instead of Summer Bloom wouldn't be a deck.
You're right, but who would be playing Explore? The obvious "replacement" for Summer Bloom (beyond upping the Azusa count) is Journey of Discovery, not Explore.
- We all saw that the format can handle Amulet Bloom if it's prepared. When you pack your Ghost Quarters, Blood Moons, Tectonic Edge, Fulminator Mages, white card hate etc etc. this deck becomes mediocre if not bad.
- It is not that it won 2 GP's in a row or top8'd. It did not top 8 something for a LONG TIME or win something EVER. Even when the format was unprepared it lost to Birthing Pod.
- On top of that, I feel its meta share is reasonable and it is NOT a solid tier deck as Burn, Affinity, Jund, Junk etc are.
Amulet Bloom is certainly not bad decks if people packs hate for it. It's more manageable but not bad. It can play through all of these hate except for Blood Moon and a lot of time this hate (apart from Blood Moon) isn't enough to beat it.
The fact that it didn't top 8 anything for a long time and didn't win anything so far is pretty bad argument as it doesn't mean that decks isn't powerful. The reason for it's little top 8's is not that deck is bad or anything like that but that very little play it and even from those who do many don't know how to play deck correctly because it's just hard deck to play, even pros don't play it on the optimal level. If deck wa more popular and easier to play I'm sure it would show different results. The fact that it made a few top 8's even though just a few people play it and around 3 or even less made it into Day 2 at those tournaments on average tells enough.
These arguments are both myths.
Hayne piloted it many more piloted it and it is not that hard of a deck.
Why so little people play it then? Like you said it's not that hard of a deck to play and it's very powerful deck. With that said I would expect more of it and more high ranking results though those few lists that come to tournament usually does good.
I think what keeps players away is that they either fear the deck will get a ban, or that almost none of the cards are used in other decks (which is what keeps me from picking it up). That deters players from wanting to invest their time and money to get & learn the deck.
Some people don't play it because they THINK that it's a hard deck to play since it's quite different from most decks.
Bloom is perfectly fine. If it's hit with a ban it will be hivemind. It simply doesn't perform to the point necessary for a ban, and it's been long enough that the people saying it's not played because "it's difficult" or "people aren't familiar with it" or "it isn't fun to play" to justify it's low meta game numbers have been proven wrong. It just. Isn't. Broken.
Summer Bloom seems a more likely candidate. It would follow both the Rite and Song ban strategy. With the exception of Shoal, Wizards hasn't banned a win condition from a combo deck since before the inaugural PT Philly.
I cant comment on that. Its just less consistent than the decks you mention and turn 3 kills are significant less...Turn 2 kills are a joke with this deck really. Almost non existant and whoever argues against that just do not have any idea of the deck.
Any evidence for that? I actually don't know myself and have seen arguments on both sides. But I also haven't seen any evidence on either side, which suggests it's a bit of an open question.
You can use hypergeometric distribution to know the exact percentage certain combinations of cards will show up in an opening hand. From memory (I'm not going to do it again) I believe the most commonly cited Turn 2 hand construction is something near 5%. So 5 times out of 100 games with that particular hand you can go off on Turn 2. I'm not sure how many different Turn 2 hand constructions there are, but someone would have to complete the math from there.
Assuming there's only 1 hand construction that allows for a Turn 2 on the play win (there are more though), that's 5 out of 100 games. At a nine round event with a cut to Top 8 the MOST amount of games you'll play is 36 (12 total rounds if you make it to the finals, 3 games per round). So you get 1.8, let's round it up to 2, Turn 2 wins that day.
On the other hand, let's assume you play the LEAST number of games possible. All 9 rounds, you don't make top 8, and only 2 games per round. At 18 games, that's .9, or 1, Turn 2 win.
Of course, we all know that if you flip a coin 10 times you're not very likely to get exactly 5 heads and 5 tails, despite it being commonly known as a 50/50 proposition. The smaller the sample size the greater the likelihood for deviation from the norm in either direction.
People remember what they see, not probabilities. I have seen one Bloom player go off 2-3 times before turn 4 in a day, while someone else playing the exact same build of the exact same deck not go off once during that same day. The sample size of a single day of play is too small to be making decisions about a deck. The more data we get, the less it seems Bloom is as consistent as some say.
People remember what they see, not probabilities. I have seen one Bloom player go off 2-3 times before turn 4 in a day, while someone else playing the exact same build of the exact same deck not go off once during that same day. The sample size of a single day of play is too small to be making decisions about a deck. The more data we get, the less it seems Bloom is as consistent as some say.
Sure, when you expand it from "turn 2 on the play" to "before turn 4" the numbers go up considerably. There are many more hands constructions that can win on Turn 3 than can do so on Turn 2, and play/draw plays a factor as well.
And I added the bit about coin flips and 50/50 specifically because of your last point. Small sample sizes can get wildly different results.
But KTKen asked for evidence, so I gave him the means to find the actual numbers.
Another caveat - the hypergeometric distribution numbers assume no interaction.
Combo decks are fun to play against, in my opinion, as long as they're not broken. They are easy to interact with, but you have to have enough time to develop some kind of board presence to do that in Modern. I'm not sure any deck should be winning on turn 2 in Modern with any consistency (above some arbitrary number like 5% of the time). I'd go so far as to say ever, but that's probably impossible.
If anything will be banned from Amulet, it'll probably be either Summer Bloom or Amulet of Vigor. I would lean toward Bloom, so as not to destroy the deck entirely. Banning a win condition like Hive Mind is not consistent with prior bannings. The goal shouldn't be to ban the deck into unplayability, but just to bring it in line with the goals of the format. Give people 3+ turns to interact with it more consistently, and eliminate those really unfun (and unfair) turn 2 wins, as rare as they may be.
You can use hypergeometric distribution to know the exact percentage certain combinations of cards will show up in an opening hand. From memory (I'm not going to do it again) I believe the most commonly cited Turn 2 hand construction is something near 5%. So 5 times out of 100 games with that particular hand you can go off on Turn 2. I'm not sure how many different Turn 2 hand constructions there are, but someone would have to complete the math from there.
Assuming there's only 1 hand construction that allows for a Turn 2 on the play win (there are more though), that's 5 out of 100 games. At a nine round event with a cut to Top 8 the MOST amount of games you'll play is 36 (12 total rounds if you make it to the finals, 3 games per round). So you get 1.8, let's round it up to 2, Turn 2 wins that day.
On the other hand, let's assume you play the LEAST number of games possible. All 9 rounds, you don't make top 8, and only 2 games per round. At 18 games, that's .9, or 1, Turn 2 win.
Of course, we all know that if you flip a coin 10 times you're not very likely to get exactly 5 heads and 5 tails, despite it being commonly known as a 50/50 proposition. The smaller the sample size the greater the likelihood for deviation from the norm in either direction.
I like this method and have done similar constructions in the past, but it's hard with Bloom because of the cantrips. Stirrings and Visions adds a whole separate layer to the equation. So we need to consider both the hands that lead to turn two wins and also the hands that lead to other hands that lead to turn two wins. To some extent, these additional wins would get balanced out by hands disrupted through discard, removal, and countermagic, but that still doesn't answer the question as accurately as I would like.
What I'd really love to see is 100 Amulet Bloom goldfish games played out, ideally by 3-4 different players in 3-4 different tests. That would give us 3-4 independent runs of 100 games, and we could probably get a good idea about the win rate then. I'm currently working on an AV in Twin project though, so I don't have time myself to do this.
Speaking of Amulet Bloom, the deck's metagame percentage is up again in October. We're currently at about 5.6% with all the SCG States events tabulated. That will go up or down a bit as I finish out the October event data entry, but the end result is probably going to be Amulet Bloom around 6% at tier 1 status. Not sure if it can sustain those numbers into subsequent months, but that's where we are now.
So even by this site's narrow (in my opinion, but there are merits to that as well) definition of the tiers, Bloom is "top-tier," which is one of the elements required from WOTC's "pre-turn 4 rule" language.
From my perspective, that just leaves two questions:
- How do we define "consistently"? We can determine the statistical likelihood of goldfishing wins on certain turns, but that doesn't inform us unless we know what the threshold is.
- Does WOTC treat Turn 3 wins and Turn 2 wins equally? Does the level of scrutiny change? For instance (and using unreasonable numbers on purpose), if WOTC defines "consistently" as 60% of the time for Turn 3 wins, is it also 60% for Turn 2? Or is 40% on Turn 2 egregious enough?
- Does WOTC treat Turn 3 wins and Turn 2 wins equally? Does the level of scrutiny change? For instance (and using unreasonable numbers on purpose), if WOTC defines "consistently" as 60% of the time for Turn 3 wins, is it also 60% for Turn 2? Or is 40% on Turn 2 egregious enough?
The threshold is really tough to guess. Eggs was about 2% for a turn 2 win and just under 50% for a turn 3 on the draw and they didn't consider that too fast, though in Eggs case they had other reasons to ban so it being too fast is debatable.
I'd be really salty if they banned Amulet bloom as im currently in the process of building it. I guess if they ban it though I'll sell what I can and build RG Tron.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
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)Don't get too creative, just ban Hive Mind.
Current decks of choice:
Vintage: Shops.
Legacy: Lands.
Modern: Lantern.
bloom titan is currently proving its tier 1......popularity isnt the only thing that is considered when determining the tier of a deck. just look at modern nexus' criteria and it will all make sense to you. even without turn 2-3 wins the deck doesn't play magic and is still putting up results so obviously its a really good linear deck
decks playing:
none
Also, here's a fun tip: if you want to make a Bloom player sad, cast Shadow of Doubt in response to his Summoner's Pact. Still has to pay the 4 mana or lose, doesn't get a damn thing.
Bloom has counters. If a deck has counters and many still feel it's too brutal the issue then becomes it's consistency. Targeting the consistency is the easiest way to make it reasonable without outright saying, no, you cannot play decks along these lines.
Point in case is Eggs. That deck still exists with Faith's Reward, Noxious Revival and Open the Vaults. It's still viable but not the large percent of the field deck it was when Second Sunrise was legal. They targeted Second Sunrise to lower it's consistency, they left Krark Clan Ironworks which is that decks Summer Bloom.
Hive Mind could definitely go. It's a card I feel Wizards are very unlikely to touch however as it sees no play outside of the deck and isn't a core component of the deck it's an adaptation. Summoner's Pact has potential to be degenerate in a number of decks.
As for the bolded portion, if you're playing against a Black / Red deck you could drop Sigarda turn 2. Suddenly no Thoughtseize, Liliana, can't remove it with Terminate etc. Freeing up card slots you could run any number of other bombs alongside the Titans. Potentially missing that guaranteed double interaction w/ Amulet and the Titan bringing in untapped Boros lands would tame it. Alternatively you could go away from all in and work on making the deck less linear. The deck being linear, consistent and able to win major tournaments is why people get annoyed with it.
In saying all that I'm not 100% convinced anything needs to go at all. I think the deck is really good and I admit I cringe a bit when I see top 8s with 3 Bloom Titan decks in it but I don't think the deck is completely broken to the point of needing bans.
The deck is powerful and consistent, and against an under-prepared meta a good pilot can clean up with it, but similar to decks like Infect it's turn 2-3 wins are much less consistent and can still be interacted with fairly easily if you're prepared. On top of that, a turn 2 Titan is pretty backbreaking but it isn't truly something that you can't come back from. Neither of those points are true of an early Hive Mind; an early Hive Mind plus pact is game over and the only common interaction that works is countermagic or discard. Only specific decks have access to those tools and even there if the Hive comes down on turn 2 the defender's window to interact is very narrow.
Bottom line, if you're helpless against a deck that can play a turn 2 creature in 1 of 10 games that's vulnerable to almost everything, shame on you. On the other hand MOST decks are helpless to a turn 2 Hive Pact, and that could become a real problem.
Note that I'm not arguing for bans. I certainly wouldn't be sad to see the deck go because it clobbers my deck so much, but it's hard for me to really justify a ban.
Ignoring the fact that "you could drop Sigarda turn 2" is already presuming something that's basically Magical Christmas Land (turn 2 Titan is already rather uncommon, but Sigarda has even more strict requirements in that there's fewer lands you can pull it off with and she's generally played as a 1-of), how the heck does it stop Thoughtseize? Thoughtseize is a turn 1 play so even this Magical Christmas Land scenario is stopped by Thoughtseize.
I think what keeps players away is that they either fear the deck will get a ban, or that almost none of the cards are used in other decks (which is what keeps me from picking it up). That deters players from wanting to invest their time and money to get & learn the deck.
Some people don't play it because they THINK that it's a hard deck to play since it's quite different from most decks.
Assuming there's only 1 hand construction that allows for a Turn 2 on the play win (there are more though), that's 5 out of 100 games. At a nine round event with a cut to Top 8 the MOST amount of games you'll play is 36 (12 total rounds if you make it to the finals, 3 games per round). So you get 1.8, let's round it up to 2, Turn 2 wins that day.
On the other hand, let's assume you play the LEAST number of games possible. All 9 rounds, you don't make top 8, and only 2 games per round. At 18 games, that's .9, or 1, Turn 2 win.
Of course, we all know that if you flip a coin 10 times you're not very likely to get exactly 5 heads and 5 tails, despite it being commonly known as a 50/50 proposition. The smaller the sample size the greater the likelihood for deviation from the norm in either direction.
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
And I added the bit about coin flips and 50/50 specifically because of your last point. Small sample sizes can get wildly different results.
But KTKen asked for evidence, so I gave him the means to find the actual numbers.
Another caveat - the hypergeometric distribution numbers assume no interaction.
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
If anything will be banned from Amulet, it'll probably be either Summer Bloom or Amulet of Vigor. I would lean toward Bloom, so as not to destroy the deck entirely. Banning a win condition like Hive Mind is not consistent with prior bannings. The goal shouldn't be to ban the deck into unplayability, but just to bring it in line with the goals of the format. Give people 3+ turns to interact with it more consistently, and eliminate those really unfun (and unfair) turn 2 wins, as rare as they may be.
CG
I like this method and have done similar constructions in the past, but it's hard with Bloom because of the cantrips. Stirrings and Visions adds a whole separate layer to the equation. So we need to consider both the hands that lead to turn two wins and also the hands that lead to other hands that lead to turn two wins. To some extent, these additional wins would get balanced out by hands disrupted through discard, removal, and countermagic, but that still doesn't answer the question as accurately as I would like.
What I'd really love to see is 100 Amulet Bloom goldfish games played out, ideally by 3-4 different players in 3-4 different tests. That would give us 3-4 independent runs of 100 games, and we could probably get a good idea about the win rate then. I'm currently working on an AV in Twin project though, so I don't have time myself to do this.
Speaking of Amulet Bloom, the deck's metagame percentage is up again in October. We're currently at about 5.6% with all the SCG States events tabulated. That will go up or down a bit as I finish out the October event data entry, but the end result is probably going to be Amulet Bloom around 6% at tier 1 status. Not sure if it can sustain those numbers into subsequent months, but that's where we are now.
From my perspective, that just leaves two questions:
- How do we define "consistently"? We can determine the statistical likelihood of goldfishing wins on certain turns, but that doesn't inform us unless we know what the threshold is.
- Does WOTC treat Turn 3 wins and Turn 2 wins equally? Does the level of scrutiny change? For instance (and using unreasonable numbers on purpose), if WOTC defines "consistently" as 60% of the time for Turn 3 wins, is it also 60% for Turn 2? Or is 40% on Turn 2 egregious enough?
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
The threshold is really tough to guess. Eggs was about 2% for a turn 2 win and just under 50% for a turn 3 on the draw and they didn't consider that too fast, though in Eggs case they had other reasons to ban so it being too fast is debatable.
RWG Burn
GW Abzan Company