Really depends on what your looking for in a format. If all you want to do is bash creatures together and like the idea of a constantly changing format, standard is for you. If you like doing very powerful things, want to just play 1-2 decks forever, and like the idea of every game feeling completely different, modern is the format for you. If all you actually want to do is play a blue deck legacy is for you.
Don't let the vocal minority of the Internet cloud your perspective of modern, it is not just a bunch of unfair decks. Modern is a format that allows any strategy to be viable. Want to throw a bunch of enchantments on one dude and coast that to victory? There's a deck for that. Like ramp? Deck for that too. Spell based combo? We've got it. Midrange? Yup. Tokens? Take your pick. Do you just never want to lose to burn? There's even a deck for that
Really depends on what your looking for in a format. If all you want to do is bash creatures together and like the idea of a constantly changing format, standard is for you. If you like doing very powerful things, want to just play 1-2 decks forever, and like the idea of every game feeling completely different, modern is the format for you. If all you actually want to do is play a blue deck legacy is for you.
Don't let the vocal minority of the Internet cloud your perspective of modern, it is not just a bunch of unfair decks. Modern is a format that allows any strategy to be viable. Want to throw a bunch of enchantments on one dude and coast that to victory? There's a deck for that. Like ramp? Deck for that too. Spell based combo? We've got it. Midrange? Yup. Tokens? Take your pick. Do you just never want to lose to burn? There's even a deck for that
This is a really good post and this put the current Modern in a positive state.
Let me have a stab at a negative statement regarding Modern. Right now, much of Modern is just racing. Jund is the most played deck, so there is that. Outside of that, many of the other top decks are trying to turn 3-5 you. If you lose die rolls or stumble a bit, you could easily find yourself on the wrong side of an 3-3 evening. But I do feel that it is true that you can play a pretty big variety of decks. There are also many fun decks that you can occasionally steal wins with as well. You don't have to live in Tier 1 to do well. I personally rarely play Tier 1 decks. In fact, my limited experience with them was a smaller win rate.
Modern is my fun format. It is pretty much all I've played recently, outside of 3 Legacy events this past 2 weeks. But if I didn't have the cards for Modern many years ago, I would be very hesitant to pay some of the prices nowadays. I think for an outsider, they really need to evaluate what they will get out of the format since the price barrier is so expensive.
@bfrie - I have to stick up for Legacy - it being a format that I enjoy the most, but get to play the least. You don't have to play a Blue deck. I've played Eldrazi, Imperial Painter, and Elves in the past 3 tournaments I've played. I've also played more often against Belcher than Miracles in these 3 tournaments (2 vs. 0), so Legacy is much more diverse in my honest opinion. But it definitely depends on how one defines diversity.
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 enjoy modern, it`s my favourite format. It is true that there is a fair deal of fast, non-interactive decks in modern, but it`s nowhere near as bad as these forums and certain websites would have you believe - the fraction of these decks are lower than you`d think based on how much people complain about it, and the decks aren`t as non-interactive or un-interactable as people are saying. People are complaining maybe the most about Infect, but it`s easy to interact with if you`re playing an interactive deck yourself. In my opinion, if you show up with Ad Nauseam and then complain about modern just being two people playing solitaire and racing, it`s your own fault. If you pick up a deck like Jund or Jeskai, you are never really playing non-interactive magic. I do agree with the notion that the fair, interactive decks should probably be more powerful compared to the unfair ones than they are right now, but describing it as a bad and broken format is, in my opinion, hyperbole.
As a player of fair, interactive decks I like facing most decks in modern, even most of the non-interactive ones, because it`s a problem to be solved. What do I pick from their hand with Inquisition? What do I Mana Leak? When do I deploy a threat and apply pressure, and when do I hold up answers? This is all great fun for me, I absolutely love playing against Infect because it`s a good puzzle. But if you`re not interacting at all, you`re probably going to have a bad time. If interactive magic is what we want, this means that Infect has a positive effect on the format.
I don`t think anyone can answer this for anyone else, though. Me, I played a fair bit of legacy before I came to the conclusion that it`s not for me. It`s a good format, but for me it`s not great; you are locked out of the game or dead to some broken combo on turns one/two/three way too often, and I also hate that half the decks are running free counterspells so that you`re pitching spells out in the dark half the time and hoping that they might stick. Other people will tell you that it`s the best format, as if that`s something that can be stated objectively, which is obviously nonsense. If asked to decide, I`d tell you that modern is the best format, but you shouldn`t trust me either. A lot of people love legacy, many prefer modern, and others again feel that both these formats are too fast and/or too broken and have more fun playing more fair magic in limited and standard. So you really shouldn`t take anyone`s word for it. Watch coverage, proxy up some decks and try it out, and then decide if it`s worth getting into for you.
Edit: Please don`t let this post spark a discussion that belongs in the ban thread.
Really depends on what your looking for in a format. If all you want to do is bash creatures together and like the idea of a constantly changing format, standard is for you. If you like doing very powerful things, want to just play 1-2 decks forever, and like the idea of every game feeling completely different, modern is the format for you. If all you actually want to do is play a blue deck legacy is for you.
Don't let the vocal minority of the Internet cloud your perspective of modern, it is not just a bunch of unfair decks. Modern is a format that allows any strategy to be viable. Want to throw a bunch of enchantments on one dude and coast that to victory? There's a deck for that. Like ramp? Deck for that too. Spell based combo? We've got it. Midrange? Yup. Tokens? Take your pick. Do you just never want to lose to burn? There's even a deck for that
@bfrie - I have to stick up for Legacy - it being a format that I enjoy the most, but get to play the least. You don't have to play a Blue deck. I've played Eldrazi, Imperial Painter, and Elves in the past 3 tournaments I've played. I've also played more often against Belcher than Miracles in these 3 tournaments (2 vs. 0), so Legacy is much more diverse in my honest opinion. But it definitely depends on how one defines diversity.
i was not attacking/insulting legacy there, there is a lot of people that really want to do nothing but play blue decks and win with them a disproportionate amount of the time, and these people will not have a good time with modern, legacy is the format for them. i am aware that legacy has other options and am a big fan of the format, and my post was oversimplifying what each format was about
Modern is a very fun format worth getting into. It is very funn. I have also had problems finding any other format with such deck diversaty and there are just so much decks you can play. If you have a preffered playstile chances are you can find a competetive deck like that.
Modern has two problems.
1. The price barrier for entry is exspensive. This can be midigated by playing budget decks, I would recomend some of the MTGGoldfish budget decks, or the budget section of modern on these forums.
2. Some of the modern decks are not that interactive. However, how big of a problem this actually is can be debated. On mant GP tournaments fast non interactive decks can be found doing well. But when you saw the modern section of worlds they played a lot of midrange interactive decks. At this point it gets harder to objectivly say what decks are best. And also, many of the fast decks can be hated out by sideboard cards.
This last point will not be a problem in your local meta as local meta is very different then grand prix meta.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have dyslexia, no I am not going to spell check for you, yes you have to live with the horrors of it.
Really depends on what your looking for in a format. If all you want to do is bash creatures together and like the idea of a constantly changing format, standard is for you. If you like doing very powerful things, want to just play 1-2 decks forever, and like the idea of every game feeling completely different, modern is the format for you. If all you actually want to do is play a blue deck legacy is for you.
Don't let the vocal minority of the Internet cloud your perspective of modern, it is not just a bunch of unfair decks. Modern is a format that allows any strategy to be viable. Want to throw a bunch of enchantments on one dude and coast that to victory? There's a deck for that. Like ramp? Deck for that too. Spell based combo? We've got it. Midrange? Yup. Tokens? Take your pick. Do you just never want to lose to burn? There's even a deck for that
@bfrie - I have to stick up for Legacy - it being a format that I enjoy the most, but get to play the least. You don't have to play a Blue deck. I've played Eldrazi, Imperial Painter, and Elves in the past 3 tournaments I've played. I've also played more often against Belcher than Miracles in these 3 tournaments (2 vs. 0), so Legacy is much more diverse in my honest opinion. But it definitely depends on how one defines diversity.
i was not attacking/insulting legacy there, there is a lot of people that really want to do nothing but play blue decks and win with them a disproportionate amount of the time, and these people will not have a good time with modern, legacy is the format for them. i am aware that legacy has other options and am a big fan of the format, and my post was oversimplifying what each format was about
I can get behind that. I think for a first post for a newcomer to read, yours was very good. For some reason I have been unable to think of the correct word for the correct time, which is why the "in a positive state" and "in a negative state" came out awkwardly for me. I just wanted the newcomer to understand some positives and some negatives as well about Modern because for all we know, the negatives could outweigh the positives. For some, just the price barrier is enough. I know if I started Modern right now at the prices, I'd only own 2 decks max for now. When I started Modern before the format actually began (but there was talk about it), I spent around $2,800 total buying up all the potential staples that I could possibly need. Luckily for me, I had that at that time. For me to buy the same staples today, it would be considerably more than that.
*Yes, that can be true about Legacy. There are players who want to play the Tempo game all day or Control you with the best deck of the format. This is true. I sort of came to a bit of a revelation when you wrote that. I probably read too much into that. I realized that although I have had a lot of top 8s with Painter (despite going 10-9 in the past 3 tournaments with Eldrazi, Elves, and Painter), I have only actually won 1 tournament, outside of Sunday Legacy. So I probably need to be on a Blue deck to get more results instead of being complacent with top 8s occasionally.
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)
Modern is so worth getting into. There's a ton of decks that are all viable option. And it's great that it changes slowly. I used to be super into modern and played it every FMM religiously. Then some things happened in my life and I can't play as often as I once could. But when I come back to play, Jund is still Jund, Burn is still Burn and so on. So I'm still very familiar with most of the decks and I can always compete. This isn't to say some decks don't get better with time like Dredge.
Look... ive been with modern from the very start. Infact, I got the whole of naya colored cards for "free" at the start of it since when before modern was named modern i bought 7 dollar fetches and 1 dollar shocklands and sold them after the bubble. (That was the time modern was cheap. It never got better after the bubble)
Ive watched it take baby steps when RUG was a tier 1 deck and no one really knew what was good, when combo ruled the format and the deck that policed it was Zoo if you can believe that.
It grew up a bit into a child, when stuff was getting banned randomly for no real good reason... bloodbraid elf, wild nacatl.
Then modern actually started feeling like it had rules as a format and it got to teen years. As the meta started having clear rules to follow like... gbx shells should have x discard, y decays, or burn should have this exact curve/lands, ect pod and twin started capatilizing on this and becoming "very very good", and the meta turned mostly into those decks plus jund. This was its teen Years as a format. Its got rules, but learning which is the best.
Eldrazi happened after and now were here. Most of the best decks are race decks and then there are decks that can beat them, sometimes. This is now its college years. Its knows what does what, and even what is best beating what, but its still slower in changing and countering that, and is still also getting impacted bt new cards.
In short... modern is big enough that its got some decks that roots run deep and arent going anywhere, like jund and affinity, and some that have old tools qith new ones just printed to be a complete deck, like suicide zoo and dredge.
The real issue is it had WAY MORE decks that want to be the second one, nut those cards havent been printed, so they are just a half a deck. Alot of control strats fall here. Grixis and esper are like 1 or 2 good cards from being tier one. But since they arent, well might as well play jund or affinity because the power level is higher.
Course, I jammed tier 2 zoo for years perfectly fine. I had fun. You can easily jam grixis at an fmn and go 5-0... because if jund is a 5 in power grixis is only like a 4.5. Its not much different, but people will lead you to beleive that that 1% is a huge gap. I wont deny it is a gap, but its much smaller than you think.
Of course theres always the shot that that perfect u/b card is printed next set and grixis is suddenly tier 1. Thats what modern is doing right now, only getting better as the decks that need it get cards and become better. It just will take time. And thats ok
Honestly, if money is your main woe, start playing online, not mtgo, and if you play what you want and you really like it, buy it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
#TeamChimneyImpForMythic
I am trying to get better at making decks. I have had trouble creating more competitive decks as I only really build with the cards I have. I dont have that many value cards, in function or expense. I (almost) never play at FNM type events so its not like im playing against $2k decks. If I do usally play at one, Its a draft or limited game. Any advice on building decks is greatly supported! DMs are appreciated.
Thank you!
To put it more simply, it's like saying, "I can prove Jesus is real and loves you. See? Here's my Hispanic friend Jesus. He's had a crush on you for a long time. Tell em' Jesus."
Here's a joke! Whats the internal temperature of a Taun-Taun?
Really depends on what your looking for in a format. If all you want to do is bash creatures together and like the idea of a constantly changing format, standard is for you. If you like doing very powerful things, want to just play 1-2 decks forever, and like the idea of every game feeling completely different, modern is the format for you. If all you actually want to do is play a blue deck legacy is for you.
Don't let the vocal minority of the Internet cloud your perspective of modern, it is not just a bunch of unfair decks. Modern is a format that allows any strategy to be viable. Want to throw a bunch of enchantments on one dude and coast that to victory? There's a deck for that. Like ramp? Deck for that too. Spell based combo? We've got it. Midrange? Yup. Tokens? Take your pick. Do you just never want to lose to burn? There's even a deck for that
@bfrie - I have to stick up for Legacy - it being a format that I enjoy the most, but get to play the least. You don't have to play a Blue deck. I've played Eldrazi, Imperial Painter, and Elves in the past 3 tournaments I've played. I've also played more often against Belcher than Miracles in these 3 tournaments (2 vs. 0), so Legacy is much more diverse in my honest opinion. But it definitely depends on how one defines diversity.
i was not attacking/insulting legacy there, there is a lot of people that really want to do nothing but play blue decks and win with them a disproportionate amount of the time, and these people will not have a good time with modern, legacy is the format for them. i am aware that legacy has other options and am a big fan of the format, and my post was oversimplifying what each format was about
heh... Well... You only described about a quarter of the field, but most decks run force of will and brainstorm. I prefer my elves and colorless eldrazi with 16 sol lands... Around here, I've seen Jund, burn, and even goblins. D&T is popular because 90% of the cards aren't reserved and easy to get. But... yeah, blue is the most played color, even if it were to splash for BS, Daze, and Force. But the format is healthy and has many options. But a format where most of the field plays blue? I point to vintage. I've got a vintage hatebears deck that costs less than a grand and can roll over many decks. Chalice for 0, Null rods mainboard... As is Trinishpere and Gaddock Teeg.
OP: I'm not sure where you come from, you seem to be new on the forum but are you also new to Magic as a game? I started playing with a group of people I did not know because I had been introduced to the game by someone and they were playing the EDH format, which sounded very fun to me. I've enjoyed playing it for many years but decided to also pick up the more competitive game in the form of modern. Coming from EDH decks only, I had at most one copy of the more expensive cards, and most of them not very useful at that (in modern that is).
The fun thing about modern is that (certainly at the FNM level) it allows you to play decks that are not on top of the competitive list. I started out with a mono green aggro deck with Leatherback Baloth and when I had saved up some cash (I was a student at the time) I bought a playset of Inkmoth Nexus and converted the deck to mono green Infect. Shocks were reprinted, hello Breeding Pools. MM release, pick up a playset of Spellskite. In this way I upgraded my deck over time and since I started at FNM level I could really do well even with a 'subpar' list.
Modern is a great format, I rewards knowledge of your decks and when you decide to get into the format I would advise you to beforehand decide on what deck you would like to play and start collecting and practicing. I think you'll notice that the more familiar you become with the deck, the better your results will be.
A deck that's being developed at the moment is UW Spirits, it's a very fun tempo-style deck with a lot of interaction and play. I think most of the spirits that are in there can be purchased for cheap, the only thing expensive you would need are the Cavern of Souls and Aether Vial but I believe the deck can function without them and you can get those as an upgrade later on.
You'll find the deck here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/deck-creation-modern/678555-uw-spirits]
The biggest problem with modern are the decks that don't let others play the game. Hyper Aggro and Combo decks are very big problems in the format and it only takes two people playing them at an LGS to bring the entire house down. My suggestion is to check out modern night at your LGS and figure out the meta first. Some peoples local meta are merfolk, Jund, etc, and those are fun to play against. If the meta is a lot of burn, affinity, Ad Nauseum, infect, etc, just get the heck out of there and don't look back. Those decks make people want to hurl chairs out windows for a variety of reasons, though to be fair Burn is probably the least offensive on the list.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I think financially the answer is a likely to be resounding "no" if you are comparing to Legacy and have a reasonable expectation of getting some of the money you spend back.
Here is what I think, entirely subjective of course, and I will quote prices in Euro/£s, but the principles apply to $ as well.
The big costs to Modern have been the fetch lands (now reasonably but still significantly priced for allied ones, unreasonably priced for the enemy ones), shock lands and fast lands- all reasonably priced too with the exception of the BR fastland, and most likely to hold value over the forseeable. These cards are not too expensive in themselves and can be used again by several decks.
So far no problem, apart from enemy fetches that you may well get stung on at some point.
The wider issues are-
Snapcaster, lily OTV, Noble, Cavern, and Goyf, alongside some planeswalkers du jour that will probably drop in price over the next couple of years whose price is driven by Standard, and one or two other cards like Chalice, Inkmoth, Voice and Blood Moon. These are not reasonably priced, and most decks need one or more of them.
To get a playset of Nobles at the moment will set you back on Ebay approximately £160 or its value in Euros. Cavern playset s will go for maybe 120-130, for example. Lily and Goyf significantly more. Now these are good cards, and will never get reprinted in Standard. But the potential to get stung is there, MM reprints potentially driving their prices down by half, albiet for a time as MM or Conspiracy style reprints will drive the price down for a short while. The cards do bounce back but if you wish to change format, deck or whatever you could lose a significant chunk.
Then specifically you need to consider the nuts and bolts of your deck, and generally the rule is a useful but older uncommon like Finks or Path will have costs in the £5 range as well. These are reasonably priced in themselves but they add up. Sideboard cards like Leyline of Sanctity have been driven down to acceptable-ish levels, whereas cards like Spellskite have stayed stuck at double that and both are significantly costed.
If any card goes in a half-decent Modern deck or is a muti-format card then you can bet it will be £5-10 range, or more.
We don't have to worry about ban-lists too much now, but all-in-all it costs a fair chunk for a single Modern deck, and unless you want to grind away for big prizes you may want to have 2 or 3 decks available for the sake of variety. It is a lot of money.
Of course Legacy costs significantly more, because of the duals, but the threat of devaluation simply does not exist for the majority of the expensive cards, which is why they are expensive, although some like Show and Tell and Berserk have been recently reprinted and could have caused people to lose cash, many of the key cards in the format will continue to increase as long as the format exists and is played.
All this assumes that fakes do not damage the game and make paper cards worthless, and that both Modern and Legacy continue, which brings us to the last point- will either format be retired, which for my money I think will not happen to Legacy, but may happen in someway with Modern, given the player grumblings we so often see and the desire to make it accessible but limit the number of formats.
Of course if its just entertainment you want and don't care about recouping costs at any point then its down to the type of Mtg you want to play, the events you want to go to, and how quick you want the meta to change-Legacy players don't switch decks with the regularity of Modern players, for example.
As others have said, it REALLY depends on what you're looking for out of a format.
Cost-wise Legacy is probably the safest bet if you have events for it in your area. The gap between Modern and Legacy has shrunk drastically, Legacy has cards that won't get devalued by reprints since they can't be reprinted, and both Modern and Legacy allow you to just buy into a single deck and not worry about rotation like in Standard. However, cards get banned more frequently in Modern than in Legacy. That said, there are a fair number of cards that overlap in the formats and depending on what you like playing then buying a Legacy or Modern deck can get you pretty close to the other.
Play-wise, Legacy is dominated by blue because of the power of Brainstorm and the efficiency of cards like Force of Will and Wasteland. In Modern every archetype in Magic is available to you and if you learn your deck well, metagame well, and get a bit lucky you can spike any event with a huge variety of decks and strategies.
Competition-wise, Modern is the inverse of the previous statement. Because you can spike an event with a huge variety of decks and strategies, it's hard to meta-game and win on an consistent basis. This makes pro and competitive players disgruntled with the format. But if you want to play Modern at the kitchen table, FNM, and a few other local events, then this shouldn't be a concern. Only people with realistic aspirations for getting on the Pro Tour or spiking a GP should really care about this.
As others have said, it REALLY depends on what you're looking for out of a format.
Cost-wise Legacy is probably the safest bet if you have events for it in your area. The gap between Modern and Legacy has shrunk drastically, Legacy has cards that won't get devalued by reprints since they can't be reprinted, and both Modern and Legacy allow you to just buy into a single deck and not worry about rotation like in Standard. However, cards get banned more frequently in Modern than in Legacy. That said, there are a fair number of cards that overlap in the formats and depending on what you like playing then buying a Legacy or Modern deck can get you pretty close to the other.
Play-wise, Legacy is dominated by blue because of the power of Brainstorm and the efficiency of cards like Force of Will and Wasteland. In Modern every archetype in Magic is available to you and if you learn your deck well, metagame well, and get a bit lucky you can spike any event with a huge variety of decks and strategies.
Competition-wise, Modern is the inverse of the previous statement. Because you can spike an event with a huge variety of decks and strategies, it's hard to meta-game and win on an consistent basis. This makes pro and competitive players disgruntled with the format. But if you want to play Modern at the kitchen table, FNM, and a few other local events, then this shouldn't be a concern. Only people with realistic aspirations for getting on the Pro Tour or spiking a GP should really care about this.
Not entirely true...
In the last Legacy 3k a couple months ago here, 107 people reporting...
I made the top 32 with Eldrazi, my friend made top 32 with infect... And I saw a fair number of reanimator decks and Charbelcher in the mix. Someone else I know made a crazy stupid Cheerios deck that also hit the top 32 and it was running only RG from what I saw. He had 4 MB Pyroblasts....
The top 32 had 5 UW Miracles players and 6 Eldrazi players. Helm of Obedience became my plan B quite a few times. The 12 post player, I beat him once with it. Since I couldn't compete, I took advantage of starting with Leyline of the Void and a single Show and Tell on his side won me the game and match.
So... not every deck is about spells. Well, creatures were summons too, and that's pretty penny. I'd say about half the players in the top 32 were playing Force and 75% were playing Brainstorm. But most of the rest? I'd give it even odds that only a third of the field were blue mages.
In the same eye, Modern is currently being dominated by three major decks and Bant has all the answers. It's Junk, Dredge, and Jeskai Harbinger. Then there's Affinity and Infect, also both are in blue. Out of the top 25 decks in Modern, 9 are running blue. Almost a third of the field.... Again.
I know this is my own opinion, because according to the mtg top 8 64% of the field played brainstorm and 52% played Force of Will. And in Modern, 40% of the people plays Bolt. So... I dunno. The top 8 were all over the place with 3rd and 4th as UW Miracles.
Modern staples are doing horribly right now on the financial market place and most are on a downward trajectory. Casual staples are actually the things increasing in cost because people are way more into casual than they are modern and generally hold on to the cards instead of trading them about.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I feel like Modern is in an ok spot right now. Casually or at the FNM level in most places it's good. The real competitive scene is a bit too linear but meta's are cyclical and I think there's still a chance things change. One thing you do have to accept in Modern though is that it's the fastest real constructed format, and that's never going to change. We have the strongest threats in the game, but half the powerful answers that keep Legacy in check don't exist here. That's both good and bad, but it's something you have to work with.
Ultimately, that means it's very hard to be reactive in Modern and be successful. I think we're going to see some changes soon though, with the speed of the format fastlands are excellent, and getting the other 5 opens up a secondary manabase. There's now a fetch/shock option and a fast option. Fetch/shock costs you life and beats Blood Moon. Fast saves you life but loses to Blood Moon. Those two choices will matter a lot in the future.
As far as the comparison to Legacy goes, I play a moderate amount, usually an event every 1-2 weeks, and I'm in some long term paper leagues. You don't need to play blue to be successful in Legacy, but it does help. The truth about Legacy though is that any deck is viable as long as you have enough interaction which is counters, discard, removal, and random misc disruption. The same holds true for Modern, decks like Jund which strike a balance between proactive and reactive are able to do so because they have threats and answers. The only thing is, you have to accept in Modern that you're going to give up a bigger chunk of wins to bad matchups.
In Legacy maybe 5% of matches are auto lose because you just can't interact with the opponent. In Modern, it will vary by tournament but probably average closer to 15%-20%. Which basically means you need to win the fair games, and read the meta well enough to guess the unfair decks and have game against them too. It's not an easy thing to do, but I'm a Jund player so my deck carries me a lot.
So... not every deck is about spells. Well, creatures were summons too, and that's pretty penny. I'd say about half the players in the top 32 were playing Force and 75% were playing Brainstorm. But most of the rest? I'd give it even odds that only a third of the field were blue mages.
In the same eye, Modern is currently being dominated by three major decks and Bant has all the answers. It's Junk, Dredge, and Jeskai Harbinger. Then there's Affinity and Infect, also both are in blue. Out of the top 25 decks in Modern, 9 are running blue. Almost a third of the field.... Again.
A third of the field on blue would actually be pretty balanced. In both 2 and 3 color pairs there's 4/10 pairs that have blue in them plus 1/5 in mono color. So all told, ignoring the frequency of 1 vs 2 vs 3 color decks that's 9/25 decks that contain blue.
Blue is actually under represented in Modern right now, but it's not a big deal. Some color is going to be on the bottom and blue is still showing up.
If you want to play something strong though, you should play green. Green now is what Blue used to be back when it was the boogeyman. It gets CA, deck manipulation, big bodies, powerful spells, usable but weak removal, tutoring, and more. It's the real busted color.
Jund is my favorite match up with my tron and bant eldrazi.
And yes, I can even agree with the auto lose ratios between the two formats. In modern if I run against certain decks I lose on the draw.
In Legacy that isn't true. And I don't play blue in Legacy. I have three decks I use regularly and only one of them contains a blue card called show and tell. Yes I am talking about 12 post.
Modern is great as long as you don't mind randomly losing to some number of decks because of the variance in your opening hand/draws and powerful sideboard cards.
The speed of the format is very often blown seriously out of proportion. Ive had plenty of sub T5 wins in standard riding through a temur battlerage or rally the ancestors. In general modern is fast, if you sit across from a warm body and gold fish for T3 wins and. It even look at your opponent. The reality is games after sideboard can and do go on longer. T8+ is not uncommon for me if I adequately prepare for the decks I need to slow down.
The big advocates against the speed of the format are the better players. How can a professional magic player leverage his superior card pool knowledge, sequencing practice, and expansive rules familiarity if you're threatening a win on turn 3-4. They can't and they don't like it, and I get why. The longer the game goes the higher chances they have of winning. Fatigue, misplays, knowledge all come to bear when more decisions are introduced. Time is a factor they are want back in the game, but they are also the wiling to pick up a quick combo kill deck (hello Sam Black and deaths shadow aggro). No digs against Sam and I'm not saying he holds that view, just giving an example.
Modern really does have a flavor for everyone and I personally really like that obsecure decks can spike a tournament when no one has the tools to stop them. It stops people from being too greedy, it stops harsh sideboarding against a plethora of strats, etc. I hate losing to mill but it's not unfair. The strat also sucks because emrakul is floating around now in jeskai nahiri. The format does change, just slowly.
From personal experience I can't even begin to tell you the amount of salt people spew at me for playing elves in tournaments. Funny thing is, in games 2/3 I'm bringing in very interactive pieces like discard, tutors for non combo pieces, and road blocks for particular strats . But because I'm not playing draw go or jund I'm playing unfair magic...
Yeah eldrazi was busted in half before the ban, but no other deck has felt like that in my hands or the hands of my opponent. Amulet bloom was getting there for me though and I'm not unhappy to see that crap gone in its initial incarnation.
The format is great and there are some super great budget decks that can put up a fighting chance. Just don't expect to drop a few grand building 1-3 decks and have them be unbeatable because of your investment.
The speed of the format is very often blown seriously out of proportion. Ive had plenty of sub T5 wins in standard riding through a temur battlerage or rally the ancestors. In general modern is fast, if you sit across from a warm body and gold fish for T3 wins and. It even look at your opponent. The reality is games after sideboard can and do go on longer. T8+ is not uncommon for me if I adequately prepare for the decks I need to slow down.
The big advocates against the speed of the format are the better players. How can a professional magic player leverage his superior card pool knowledge, sequencing practice, and expansive rules familiarity if you're threatening a win on turn 3-4. They can't and they don't like it, and I get why. The longer the game goes the higher chances they have of winning. Fatigue, misplays, knowledge all come to bear when more decisions are introduced. Time is a factor they are want back in the game, but they are also the wiling to pick up a quick combo kill deck (hello Sam Black and deaths shadow aggro). No digs against Sam and I'm not saying he holds that view, just giving an example.
Modern really does have a flavor for everyone and I personally really like that obsecure decks can spike a tournament when no one has the tools to stop them. It stops people from being too greedy, it stops harsh sideboarding against a plethora of strats, etc. I hate losing to mill but it's not unfair. The strat also sucks because emrakul is floating around now in jeskai nahiri. The format does change, just slowly.
From personal experience I can't even begin to tell you the amount of salt people spew at me for playing elves in tournaments. Funny thing is, in games 2/3 I'm bringing in very interactive pieces like discard, tutors for non combo pieces, and road blocks for particular strats . But because I'm not playing draw go or jund I'm playing unfair magic...
Yeah eldrazi was busted in half before the ban, but no other deck has felt like that in my hands or the hands of my opponent. Amulet bloom was getting there for me though and I'm not unhappy to see that crap gone in its initial incarnation.
The format is great and there are some super great budget decks that can put up a fighting chance. Just don't expect to drop a few grand building 1-3 decks and have them be unbeatable because of your investment.
Exactly. This.
Modern is easier to get into than legacy, due to the reserved list or just some cards WotC is afraid to print.... Like Imperial Recruiter for example.
But... With that out of the way, here's how I remember:
Tron decks, a good solid tier 1 Tron costed around 1k, on the same note a little over a month ago a good solid standard deck costs around the the same when you include 4 Jaces and a few other cards. However, that deck is only good for a short time, now even shorter because of the way the format is now rotating the way it is. When they announced they were doing this, I quit standard and got out of it ASAP and only kept the cards that would see legacy and modern play. Yes, I dropped out shortly after the Khans block... I've always had a hand in legacy and modern, and I even dabble with a vintage deck that doesn't contain any of the power 9 and can have a reasonably good chance of beating the top strategies there too.
Here's how I see it...
Standard, a playground full of kids. Only a few decks are viable and after a while it's all you get to see.
Modern, it's sort of like boxing. You have to study all the field, pick a deck idea, and go with it. Most games are evenly matched and you do well. There are several budget strategies, and I can name 30 decks off the top of my head that sees play quite often. One week, I'll see infect, burn, jeskai control, jeskai ascendancy, dredge, merfolk, living end, and goryo's vengeance. The next week I'll see merfolk, affinity, infect, elves, goblins, 8 rack, b/w tokens, junk midrange, junk combo. After that there's slivers, infect, merfolk, scapeshift, knightfall, kikki chord, jeskai control, u/r storm, boros burn, naya burn, and so on... I'll see soul sisters and boros sisters on occasion as well. I'll see colorless eldrazi, b/w eldrazi taxes, g/w death and taxes, u/w spirits, bogles, and more.... The point I am making is that there's a whole slew of strategies. It's all viable. It's all good. And I like the area I play because of the wide range of players who run so many different archetypes out there.
But... I said boxing... Most decks are able to interact with one another and are evenly matched and wins can go either way. Some decks are favored to win more than others so if you pick a deck figure out what you are weak or strong against and practice, practice, practice. I have proxied out decks to play against all the time, I find a friend, and I play my deck and play against the other. Or I switch and see how to beat my own deck. But that's the point...
There are certain decks you have no chance against. An 8 rack deck will almost always lose to soul sisters. A soul sisters deck will almost always lose to Tron. A Tron deck loses to Eggs. Goblins lose to Elves. Elves beat fish. Fish has even odds against tron. It's all a matter of knowing.
So... As for boxing, those decks that are almost certainly auto-lose, imagine you are Little Mac vs Mike Tyson and that's pretty much what you are facing.
Legacy, is far more stable. I'll say fencing. Even if you are quick off the draw your opponent can disrupt you and knock your foil away if you get too overconfident. They too, don't win on turn 0 or 1 unless your opponent is dense and keeps a really bad hand or something like that. Sometimes you can surprise your opponent when they are casting Tendrils of Agony by dropping a Ruric Thar, the Unbowed on top of them. It's always fun to see a burn player in Legacy cry when they see this guy... Yeah, he's that good. But that's the point.. Oh, I think I can do all this to you, wait, no... I die to my own double bolts and brainstorms.
Legacy/Modern is interchangeable. Infect in Modern is much like Infect in Legacy. And no, you don't need duals to play the deck either. You just need a pair of Berserks, a few Force of Wills, and a playset each of Daze and Brainstorm and call it goo.... good. Only card there that's high cost is Force. My friend has had a Modern infect deck forever, and he bought 1 Force at a time and Berserks are 20 a pop thanks to Conspiracy 2. Legacy also has a wide array of decks, and not one is totally dominant over another. It's why a deck like Eldrazi and 16 Sol Ring Lands can still be beaten by a deck with a few lands..
As for Merfolk, no difference really, just Force of Will, True-Name Nemesis, and some other random cards. Same with Death and Taxes. Eh... Maybe. Hatebears, the same in Modern and Vintage... Yes... vintage. I told you had a vintage deck with no power 9, didn't I? Hatebears is that deck and it does win games. It's funny, a deck that's mostly modern, with a few legacy cards, and a single strip mine... Can beat a vintage deck like Workshop and Storm.
Vintage....
You have two master duelists with live steel. The first to make a mistake is dead. Legacy is more forgiving, Modern more so, and standard, I was beaten by someone who made several misplays just because I couldn't deal with a pair of siege rhinos and a hornet queen.
My point is, investment in a specific deck for Modern or Legacy can be downright awesome, Standard however? Loses almost all value at rotation.
I've had more fun playing modern in the past 6 months or so (maybe since the eye of ugin banning) than I've had in a while. Probably because I find there's a great amount of decks viable right now
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It seems like a lot of "unfair" decks in modern.
Don't let the vocal minority of the Internet cloud your perspective of modern, it is not just a bunch of unfair decks. Modern is a format that allows any strategy to be viable. Want to throw a bunch of enchantments on one dude and coast that to victory? There's a deck for that. Like ramp? Deck for that too. Spell based combo? We've got it. Midrange? Yup. Tokens? Take your pick. Do you just never want to lose to burn? There's even a deck for that
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR
This is a really good post and this put the current Modern in a positive state.
Let me have a stab at a negative statement regarding Modern. Right now, much of Modern is just racing. Jund is the most played deck, so there is that. Outside of that, many of the other top decks are trying to turn 3-5 you. If you lose die rolls or stumble a bit, you could easily find yourself on the wrong side of an 3-3 evening. But I do feel that it is true that you can play a pretty big variety of decks. There are also many fun decks that you can occasionally steal wins with as well. You don't have to live in Tier 1 to do well. I personally rarely play Tier 1 decks. In fact, my limited experience with them was a smaller win rate.
Modern is my fun format. It is pretty much all I've played recently, outside of 3 Legacy events this past 2 weeks. But if I didn't have the cards for Modern many years ago, I would be very hesitant to pay some of the prices nowadays. I think for an outsider, they really need to evaluate what they will get out of the format since the price barrier is so expensive.
@bfrie - I have to stick up for Legacy - it being a format that I enjoy the most, but get to play the least. You don't have to play a Blue deck. I've played Eldrazi, Imperial Painter, and Elves in the past 3 tournaments I've played. I've also played more often against Belcher than Miracles in these 3 tournaments (2 vs. 0), so Legacy is much more diverse in my honest opinion. But it definitely depends on how one defines diversity.
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)As a player of fair, interactive decks I like facing most decks in modern, even most of the non-interactive ones, because it`s a problem to be solved. What do I pick from their hand with Inquisition? What do I Mana Leak? When do I deploy a threat and apply pressure, and when do I hold up answers? This is all great fun for me, I absolutely love playing against Infect because it`s a good puzzle. But if you`re not interacting at all, you`re probably going to have a bad time. If interactive magic is what we want, this means that Infect has a positive effect on the format.
I don`t think anyone can answer this for anyone else, though. Me, I played a fair bit of legacy before I came to the conclusion that it`s not for me. It`s a good format, but for me it`s not great; you are locked out of the game or dead to some broken combo on turns one/two/three way too often, and I also hate that half the decks are running free counterspells so that you`re pitching spells out in the dark half the time and hoping that they might stick. Other people will tell you that it`s the best format, as if that`s something that can be stated objectively, which is obviously nonsense. If asked to decide, I`d tell you that modern is the best format, but you shouldn`t trust me either. A lot of people love legacy, many prefer modern, and others again feel that both these formats are too fast and/or too broken and have more fun playing more fair magic in limited and standard. So you really shouldn`t take anyone`s word for it. Watch coverage, proxy up some decks and try it out, and then decide if it`s worth getting into for you.
Edit: Please don`t let this post spark a discussion that belongs in the ban thread.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
i was not attacking/insulting legacy there, there is a lot of people that really want to do nothing but play blue decks and win with them a disproportionate amount of the time, and these people will not have a good time with modern, legacy is the format for them. i am aware that legacy has other options and am a big fan of the format, and my post was oversimplifying what each format was about
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR
Modern has two problems.
1. The price barrier for entry is exspensive. This can be midigated by playing budget decks, I would recomend some of the MTGGoldfish budget decks, or the budget section of modern on these forums.
2. Some of the modern decks are not that interactive. However, how big of a problem this actually is can be debated. On mant GP tournaments fast non interactive decks can be found doing well. But when you saw the modern section of worlds they played a lot of midrange interactive decks. At this point it gets harder to objectivly say what decks are best. And also, many of the fast decks can be hated out by sideboard cards.
This last point will not be a problem in your local meta as local meta is very different then grand prix meta.
I can get behind that. I think for a first post for a newcomer to read, yours was very good. For some reason I have been unable to think of the correct word for the correct time, which is why the "in a positive state" and "in a negative state" came out awkwardly for me. I just wanted the newcomer to understand some positives and some negatives as well about Modern because for all we know, the negatives could outweigh the positives. For some, just the price barrier is enough. I know if I started Modern right now at the prices, I'd only own 2 decks max for now. When I started Modern before the format actually began (but there was talk about it), I spent around $2,800 total buying up all the potential staples that I could possibly need. Luckily for me, I had that at that time. For me to buy the same staples today, it would be considerably more than that.
*Yes, that can be true about Legacy. There are players who want to play the Tempo game all day or Control you with the best deck of the format. This is true. I sort of came to a bit of a revelation when you wrote that. I probably read too much into that. I realized that although I have had a lot of top 8s with Painter (despite going 10-9 in the past 3 tournaments with Eldrazi, Elves, and Painter), I have only actually won 1 tournament, outside of Sunday Legacy. So I probably need to be on a Blue deck to get more results instead of being complacent with top 8s occasionally.
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)Ive watched it take baby steps when RUG was a tier 1 deck and no one really knew what was good, when combo ruled the format and the deck that policed it was Zoo if you can believe that.
It grew up a bit into a child, when stuff was getting banned randomly for no real good reason... bloodbraid elf, wild nacatl.
Then modern actually started feeling like it had rules as a format and it got to teen years. As the meta started having clear rules to follow like... gbx shells should have x discard, y decays, or burn should have this exact curve/lands, ect pod and twin started capatilizing on this and becoming "very very good", and the meta turned mostly into those decks plus jund. This was its teen Years as a format. Its got rules, but learning which is the best.
Eldrazi happened after and now were here. Most of the best decks are race decks and then there are decks that can beat them, sometimes. This is now its college years. Its knows what does what, and even what is best beating what, but its still slower in changing and countering that, and is still also getting impacted bt new cards.
In short... modern is big enough that its got some decks that roots run deep and arent going anywhere, like jund and affinity, and some that have old tools qith new ones just printed to be a complete deck, like suicide zoo and dredge.
The real issue is it had WAY MORE decks that want to be the second one, nut those cards havent been printed, so they are just a half a deck. Alot of control strats fall here. Grixis and esper are like 1 or 2 good cards from being tier one. But since they arent, well might as well play jund or affinity because the power level is higher.
Course, I jammed tier 2 zoo for years perfectly fine. I had fun. You can easily jam grixis at an fmn and go 5-0... because if jund is a 5 in power grixis is only like a 4.5. Its not much different, but people will lead you to beleive that that 1% is a huge gap. I wont deny it is a gap, but its much smaller than you think.
Of course theres always the shot that that perfect u/b card is printed next set and grixis is suddenly tier 1. Thats what modern is doing right now, only getting better as the decks that need it get cards and become better. It just will take time. And thats ok
Thank you!
heh... Well... You only described about a quarter of the field, but most decks run force of will and brainstorm. I prefer my elves and colorless eldrazi with 16 sol lands... Around here, I've seen Jund, burn, and even goblins. D&T is popular because 90% of the cards aren't reserved and easy to get. But... yeah, blue is the most played color, even if it were to splash for BS, Daze, and Force. But the format is healthy and has many options. But a format where most of the field plays blue? I point to vintage. I've got a vintage hatebears deck that costs less than a grand and can roll over many decks. Chalice for 0, Null rods mainboard... As is Trinishpere and Gaddock Teeg.
The fun thing about modern is that (certainly at the FNM level) it allows you to play decks that are not on top of the competitive list. I started out with a mono green aggro deck with Leatherback Baloth and when I had saved up some cash (I was a student at the time) I bought a playset of Inkmoth Nexus and converted the deck to mono green Infect. Shocks were reprinted, hello Breeding Pools. MM release, pick up a playset of Spellskite. In this way I upgraded my deck over time and since I started at FNM level I could really do well even with a 'subpar' list.
Modern is a great format, I rewards knowledge of your decks and when you decide to get into the format I would advise you to beforehand decide on what deck you would like to play and start collecting and practicing. I think you'll notice that the more familiar you become with the deck, the better your results will be.
A deck that's being developed at the moment is UW Spirits, it's a very fun tempo-style deck with a lot of interaction and play. I think most of the spirits that are in there can be purchased for cheap, the only thing expensive you would need are the Cavern of Souls and Aether Vial but I believe the deck can function without them and you can get those as an upgrade later on.
You'll find the deck here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/deck-creation-modern/678555-uw-spirits]
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Here is what I think, entirely subjective of course, and I will quote prices in Euro/£s, but the principles apply to $ as well.
The big costs to Modern have been the fetch lands (now reasonably but still significantly priced for allied ones, unreasonably priced for the enemy ones), shock lands and fast lands- all reasonably priced too with the exception of the BR fastland, and most likely to hold value over the forseeable. These cards are not too expensive in themselves and can be used again by several decks.
So far no problem, apart from enemy fetches that you may well get stung on at some point.
The wider issues are-
Snapcaster, lily OTV, Noble, Cavern, and Goyf, alongside some planeswalkers du jour that will probably drop in price over the next couple of years whose price is driven by Standard, and one or two other cards like Chalice, Inkmoth, Voice and Blood Moon. These are not reasonably priced, and most decks need one or more of them.
To get a playset of Nobles at the moment will set you back on Ebay approximately £160 or its value in Euros. Cavern playset s will go for maybe 120-130, for example. Lily and Goyf significantly more. Now these are good cards, and will never get reprinted in Standard. But the potential to get stung is there, MM reprints potentially driving their prices down by half, albiet for a time as MM or Conspiracy style reprints will drive the price down for a short while. The cards do bounce back but if you wish to change format, deck or whatever you could lose a significant chunk.
Then specifically you need to consider the nuts and bolts of your deck, and generally the rule is a useful but older uncommon like Finks or Path will have costs in the £5 range as well. These are reasonably priced in themselves but they add up. Sideboard cards like Leyline of Sanctity have been driven down to acceptable-ish levels, whereas cards like Spellskite have stayed stuck at double that and both are significantly costed.
If any card goes in a half-decent Modern deck or is a muti-format card then you can bet it will be £5-10 range, or more.
We don't have to worry about ban-lists too much now, but all-in-all it costs a fair chunk for a single Modern deck, and unless you want to grind away for big prizes you may want to have 2 or 3 decks available for the sake of variety. It is a lot of money.
Of course Legacy costs significantly more, because of the duals, but the threat of devaluation simply does not exist for the majority of the expensive cards, which is why they are expensive, although some like Show and Tell and Berserk have been recently reprinted and could have caused people to lose cash, many of the key cards in the format will continue to increase as long as the format exists and is played.
All this assumes that fakes do not damage the game and make paper cards worthless, and that both Modern and Legacy continue, which brings us to the last point- will either format be retired, which for my money I think will not happen to Legacy, but may happen in someway with Modern, given the player grumblings we so often see and the desire to make it accessible but limit the number of formats.
Of course if its just entertainment you want and don't care about recouping costs at any point then its down to the type of Mtg you want to play, the events you want to go to, and how quick you want the meta to change-Legacy players don't switch decks with the regularity of Modern players, for example.
Cost-wise Legacy is probably the safest bet if you have events for it in your area. The gap between Modern and Legacy has shrunk drastically, Legacy has cards that won't get devalued by reprints since they can't be reprinted, and both Modern and Legacy allow you to just buy into a single deck and not worry about rotation like in Standard. However, cards get banned more frequently in Modern than in Legacy. That said, there are a fair number of cards that overlap in the formats and depending on what you like playing then buying a Legacy or Modern deck can get you pretty close to the other.
Play-wise, Legacy is dominated by blue because of the power of Brainstorm and the efficiency of cards like Force of Will and Wasteland. In Modern every archetype in Magic is available to you and if you learn your deck well, metagame well, and get a bit lucky you can spike any event with a huge variety of decks and strategies.
Competition-wise, Modern is the inverse of the previous statement. Because you can spike an event with a huge variety of decks and strategies, it's hard to meta-game and win on an consistent basis. This makes pro and competitive players disgruntled with the format. But if you want to play Modern at the kitchen table, FNM, and a few other local events, then this shouldn't be a concern. Only people with realistic aspirations for getting on the Pro Tour or spiking a GP should really care about this.
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
Not entirely true...
In the last Legacy 3k a couple months ago here, 107 people reporting...
The top 8 was:
1. Painter
2. Dredge
3. UW Miracles
4. UW Miracles
5. Elves
6. Eldrazi
7. 12 Post
8. Ad Naus Tendrils
I made the top 32 with Eldrazi, my friend made top 32 with infect... And I saw a fair number of reanimator decks and Charbelcher in the mix. Someone else I know made a crazy stupid Cheerios deck that also hit the top 32 and it was running only RG from what I saw. He had 4 MB Pyroblasts....
The top 32 had 5 UW Miracles players and 6 Eldrazi players. Helm of Obedience became my plan B quite a few times. The 12 post player, I beat him once with it. Since I couldn't compete, I took advantage of starting with Leyline of the Void and a single Show and Tell on his side won me the game and match.
So... not every deck is about spells. Well, creatures were summons too, and that's pretty penny. I'd say about half the players in the top 32 were playing Force and 75% were playing Brainstorm. But most of the rest? I'd give it even odds that only a third of the field were blue mages.
In the same eye, Modern is currently being dominated by three major decks and Bant has all the answers. It's Junk, Dredge, and Jeskai Harbinger. Then there's Affinity and Infect, also both are in blue. Out of the top 25 decks in Modern, 9 are running blue. Almost a third of the field.... Again.
I know this is my own opinion, because according to the mtg top 8 64% of the field played brainstorm and 52% played Force of Will. And in Modern, 40% of the people plays Bolt. So... I dunno. The top 8 were all over the place with 3rd and 4th as UW Miracles.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Ultimately, that means it's very hard to be reactive in Modern and be successful. I think we're going to see some changes soon though, with the speed of the format fastlands are excellent, and getting the other 5 opens up a secondary manabase. There's now a fetch/shock option and a fast option. Fetch/shock costs you life and beats Blood Moon. Fast saves you life but loses to Blood Moon. Those two choices will matter a lot in the future.
As far as the comparison to Legacy goes, I play a moderate amount, usually an event every 1-2 weeks, and I'm in some long term paper leagues. You don't need to play blue to be successful in Legacy, but it does help. The truth about Legacy though is that any deck is viable as long as you have enough interaction which is counters, discard, removal, and random misc disruption. The same holds true for Modern, decks like Jund which strike a balance between proactive and reactive are able to do so because they have threats and answers. The only thing is, you have to accept in Modern that you're going to give up a bigger chunk of wins to bad matchups.
In Legacy maybe 5% of matches are auto lose because you just can't interact with the opponent. In Modern, it will vary by tournament but probably average closer to 15%-20%. Which basically means you need to win the fair games, and read the meta well enough to guess the unfair decks and have game against them too. It's not an easy thing to do, but I'm a Jund player so my deck carries me a lot.
A third of the field on blue would actually be pretty balanced. In both 2 and 3 color pairs there's 4/10 pairs that have blue in them plus 1/5 in mono color. So all told, ignoring the frequency of 1 vs 2 vs 3 color decks that's 9/25 decks that contain blue.
Blue is actually under represented in Modern right now, but it's not a big deal. Some color is going to be on the bottom and blue is still showing up.
If you want to play something strong though, you should play green. Green now is what Blue used to be back when it was the boogeyman. It gets CA, deck manipulation, big bodies, powerful spells, usable but weak removal, tutoring, and more. It's the real busted color.
And yes, I can even agree with the auto lose ratios between the two formats. In modern if I run against certain decks I lose on the draw.
In Legacy that isn't true. And I don't play blue in Legacy. I have three decks I use regularly and only one of them contains a blue card called show and tell. Yes I am talking about 12 post.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
The big advocates against the speed of the format are the better players. How can a professional magic player leverage his superior card pool knowledge, sequencing practice, and expansive rules familiarity if you're threatening a win on turn 3-4. They can't and they don't like it, and I get why. The longer the game goes the higher chances they have of winning. Fatigue, misplays, knowledge all come to bear when more decisions are introduced. Time is a factor they are want back in the game, but they are also the wiling to pick up a quick combo kill deck (hello Sam Black and deaths shadow aggro). No digs against Sam and I'm not saying he holds that view, just giving an example.
Modern really does have a flavor for everyone and I personally really like that obsecure decks can spike a tournament when no one has the tools to stop them. It stops people from being too greedy, it stops harsh sideboarding against a plethora of strats, etc. I hate losing to mill but it's not unfair. The strat also sucks because emrakul is floating around now in jeskai nahiri. The format does change, just slowly.
From personal experience I can't even begin to tell you the amount of salt people spew at me for playing elves in tournaments. Funny thing is, in games 2/3 I'm bringing in very interactive pieces like discard, tutors for non combo pieces, and road blocks for particular strats . But because I'm not playing draw go or jund I'm playing unfair magic...
Yeah eldrazi was busted in half before the ban, but no other deck has felt like that in my hands or the hands of my opponent. Amulet bloom was getting there for me though and I'm not unhappy to see that crap gone in its initial incarnation.
The format is great and there are some super great budget decks that can put up a fighting chance. Just don't expect to drop a few grand building 1-3 decks and have them be unbeatable because of your investment.
It's less about whether Modern as a format is good for you and more whether or not there's a specific deck that you'd enjoy.
Exactly. This.
Modern is easier to get into than legacy, due to the reserved list or just some cards WotC is afraid to print.... Like Imperial Recruiter for example.
But... With that out of the way, here's how I remember:
Tron decks, a good solid tier 1 Tron costed around 1k, on the same note a little over a month ago a good solid standard deck costs around the the same when you include 4 Jaces and a few other cards. However, that deck is only good for a short time, now even shorter because of the way the format is now rotating the way it is. When they announced they were doing this, I quit standard and got out of it ASAP and only kept the cards that would see legacy and modern play. Yes, I dropped out shortly after the Khans block... I've always had a hand in legacy and modern, and I even dabble with a vintage deck that doesn't contain any of the power 9 and can have a reasonably good chance of beating the top strategies there too.
Here's how I see it...
Standard, a playground full of kids. Only a few decks are viable and after a while it's all you get to see.
Modern, it's sort of like boxing. You have to study all the field, pick a deck idea, and go with it. Most games are evenly matched and you do well. There are several budget strategies, and I can name 30 decks off the top of my head that sees play quite often. One week, I'll see infect, burn, jeskai control, jeskai ascendancy, dredge, merfolk, living end, and goryo's vengeance. The next week I'll see merfolk, affinity, infect, elves, goblins, 8 rack, b/w tokens, junk midrange, junk combo. After that there's slivers, infect, merfolk, scapeshift, knightfall, kikki chord, jeskai control, u/r storm, boros burn, naya burn, and so on... I'll see soul sisters and boros sisters on occasion as well. I'll see colorless eldrazi, b/w eldrazi taxes, g/w death and taxes, u/w spirits, bogles, and more.... The point I am making is that there's a whole slew of strategies. It's all viable. It's all good. And I like the area I play because of the wide range of players who run so many different archetypes out there.
But... I said boxing... Most decks are able to interact with one another and are evenly matched and wins can go either way. Some decks are favored to win more than others so if you pick a deck figure out what you are weak or strong against and practice, practice, practice. I have proxied out decks to play against all the time, I find a friend, and I play my deck and play against the other. Or I switch and see how to beat my own deck. But that's the point...
There are certain decks you have no chance against. An 8 rack deck will almost always lose to soul sisters. A soul sisters deck will almost always lose to Tron. A Tron deck loses to Eggs. Goblins lose to Elves. Elves beat fish. Fish has even odds against tron. It's all a matter of knowing.
So... As for boxing, those decks that are almost certainly auto-lose, imagine you are Little Mac vs Mike Tyson and that's pretty much what you are facing.
Legacy, is far more stable. I'll say fencing. Even if you are quick off the draw your opponent can disrupt you and knock your foil away if you get too overconfident. They too, don't win on turn 0 or 1 unless your opponent is dense and keeps a really bad hand or something like that. Sometimes you can surprise your opponent when they are casting Tendrils of Agony by dropping a Ruric Thar, the Unbowed on top of them. It's always fun to see a burn player in Legacy cry when they see this guy... Yeah, he's that good. But that's the point.. Oh, I think I can do all this to you, wait, no... I die to my own double bolts and brainstorms.
Legacy/Modern is interchangeable. Infect in Modern is much like Infect in Legacy. And no, you don't need duals to play the deck either. You just need a pair of Berserks, a few Force of Wills, and a playset each of Daze and Brainstorm and call it goo.... good. Only card there that's high cost is Force. My friend has had a Modern infect deck forever, and he bought 1 Force at a time and Berserks are 20 a pop thanks to Conspiracy 2. Legacy also has a wide array of decks, and not one is totally dominant over another. It's why a deck like Eldrazi and 16 Sol Ring Lands can still be beaten by a deck with a few lands..
As for Merfolk, no difference really, just Force of Will, True-Name Nemesis, and some other random cards. Same with Death and Taxes. Eh... Maybe. Hatebears, the same in Modern and Vintage... Yes... vintage. I told you had a vintage deck with no power 9, didn't I? Hatebears is that deck and it does win games. It's funny, a deck that's mostly modern, with a few legacy cards, and a single strip mine... Can beat a vintage deck like Workshop and Storm.
Vintage....
You have two master duelists with live steel. The first to make a mistake is dead. Legacy is more forgiving, Modern more so, and standard, I was beaten by someone who made several misplays just because I couldn't deal with a pair of siege rhinos and a hornet queen.
My point is, investment in a specific deck for Modern or Legacy can be downright awesome, Standard however? Loses almost all value at rotation.