Twin would also promote interaction as well, since the best strategy against it is main deck disruption like kill spells, counterspells, and discard spells. Any deck packing interaction and a reasonable clock (like Jund) is always a nightmare matchup, and having Twin back in the spotlight would promote more interactive decks. Not only that, but it would give other blue based control decks a positive matchup while also thinning the field of linear degeneracy, giving those blue based control decks better opportunities to play more targeted answers. That way NOBODY has their deck banned and we see if the influx of reactive decks that Twin brings with it helps restore balance to a format where ignoring your opponent and counting to 20 is the best strategy.
The Jund/Twin matchup was unfavorable pre-board but a lot closer post-board and far from a 'nightmare'. Twin had the best overall win percentages against the field in its day, but you already know this and it's part of the reason you want it back.
And 'counting to 20'? What about counting to 4?
Reviving Twin is not the solution to the aggro-heavy meta we have now. It would only set Modern back. We could use a couple of better cheap answers and possibly some card filtering like Preordain.
Well that's not really a fair comparison considering twin existed since the beginning of modern but mostly I was trying to be facetious. What I was tryiing to say was something like this:
"I do not think a twin unban would fix the issues with the format. However, I also think the twin combo was easier to interact with and more "fair" than post-kaladesh infect and dredge, and if those two are deemed to be balanced then twin is too."
The question is what should be allowed in modern. If infect and dredge's powerlevel are deemed ok then twin should also be. If twin is deemed to powerful, then so should dredge and infect.
If you don't think it's a fair comparison, then you shouldn't be making such bold claims.
I don't agree that Twin was easier to interact with than Infect. Exarch naturally survives Bolt. Sorcery-speed removal like Roast is also much worse against Twin than Infect. The obvious retort is that Infect plays a lot of protection spells, to which I'll repeat: Exarch doesn't need a single protection spell to survive against the most common removal spell in the format (for almost six years running, according to mtgtop8).
I don't see the point of comparing a compact combo that only takes 10 slots in your deck to an archetype that demands that you devote all 40 nonland cards in your deck to it. Clearly the focused deck is going to have more blowout wins when all its pieces come together. The disadvantage is that it's much harder to recover when the opponent disrupts its synergy. You can't have your cake and eat it.
If you don't think twin and infect can be compared then why are you doing exactly that?
Twin warped the meta, and so do all these linear aggro decks. Twin made you unable to tap out on turn 3, the current meta asks you to prevent decks ending the game on turn 3
And Deceiver Exarch might survive bolt, but twin did not get to play 8+ dispels that are also super efficient burn spells.
If you don't think twin and infect can be compared then why are you doing exactly that?
Twin warped the meta, and so do all these linear aggro decks. Twin made you unable to tap out on turn 3, the current meta asks you to prevent decks ending the game on turn 3
And Deceiver Exarch might survive bolt, but twin did not get to play 8+ dispels that are also super efficient burn spells.
Because you made a comparison, and I was willing to humor you. I can stop talking about Twin any time you're willing to stop talking about it.
Twin warped the meta, and so do all these linear aggro decks. Twin made you unable to tap out on turn 3, the current meta asks you to prevent decks ending the game on turn 3
Serious question - what powerful decks don't warp a meta?
Twin would also promote interaction as well, since the best strategy against it is main deck disruption like kill spells, counterspells, and discard spells. Any deck packing interaction and a reasonable clock (like Jund) is always a nightmare matchup, and having Twin back in the spotlight would promote more interactive decks. Not only that, but it would give other blue based control decks a positive matchup while also thinning the field of linear degeneracy, giving those blue based control decks better opportunities to play more targeted answers. That way NOBODY has their deck banned and we see if the influx of reactive decks that Twin brings with it helps restore balance to a format where ignoring your opponent and counting to 20 is the best strategy.
The Jund/Twin matchup was unfavorable pre-board but a lot closer post-board and far from a 'nightmare'. Twin had the best overall win percentages against the field in its day, but you already know this and it's part of the reason you want it back.
Comments like this are exactly why it's so difficult to have productive conversations about Twin. I understand the deck was good, but I also understand it did a lot of things to keep the format healthy. We have seen the ramifications of a Twinless format for nearly a year now and it is possibly the most complained-about year Modern has ever had. You don't have to believe me though, feel free to read articles for yourself made just a month and a half before the ban announcement. Articles praising the duo of Twin and BGx, highlighting the need for both and the specific positive impacts these decks had on the format. They even predict completely that a lack of Twin would result in a huge rise of linear decks, and here we are.
This may come as a surprise, but I actually care about the format in addition to the deck I play, and I think the format as a whole was a lot better last year than it is right now.
The banning of twin allowed more linear, goldfishy decks to exist in the metagame but it is downright wrong to say that the banning of twin single-handedly opened the floodgates for these type of deck to flourish. Based on the information they had and existing card pool at that time, those writers were objectively wrong. Interactive decks were still able to do well in the aftermath of the eye of ugin ban.
Twin being banned didn't lead to a huge rise of linear decks. New cards did. SOI block gave Dredge amalgam and neonate followed by carthatic reunion from Kaladesh. Infect gained an unneeded power boost from blossoming defense.
And while there are articles by well known players talking about how the twin ban was a mistake and how twin was good for the format, some players have also come out in praise and defense of the decision. Who are you to say that the ones who hold the same position as you are right and the ones that don't are wrong ?
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
I proposed this before, but for the sake of conversation I suppose I'll do it again.
Unban Twin, ban Exarch. I really feel this could be a good compromise. It offers the benefits of the Twin deck being in the meta, while tempering its effects, because...
1. Twin is legal again! No more (or well, at least less) complaining!
3. The only non-Boltable option, Ringer, is not versatile, unlike Exarch!
4. Krasis and Ringer force the deck to go Temur or Jeskai, respectively, weakening the manabase!
5. Sticking just with Conscripts and Mite to remain Izzet means only 4 pieces to deploy for turn 4 kill, and you can kill said piece just by sneezing at it!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos-y Johnny. All will be One
Modern - Cheeri0s (building), Belcher (building), Lantern (building), UW Control (building)
RIP Magic Duels. Wizards will regret what they did to you.
I proposed this before, but for the sake of conversation I suppose I'll do it again.
Unban Twin, ban Exarch. I really feel this could be a good compromise. It offers the benefits of the Twin deck being in the meta, while tempering its effects, because...
1. Twin is legal again! No more (or well, at least less) complaining!
3. The only non-Boltable option, Ringer, is not versatile, unlike Exarch!
4. Krasis and Ringer force the deck to go Temur or Jeskai, respectively, weakening the manabase!
5. Sticking just with Conscripts and Mite to remain Izzet means only 4 pieces to deploy for turn 4 kill, and you can kill said piece just by sneezing at it!
I actually was going to post the exact same thing, kuddos.
To add a few more points it also, at least I would hope, force twin to play either very midrange, very tempo, or very very controlling. Youd be slower if you opt in the conscripts, because 5 mana. That makes nahiri more appealing in a long run. With white you can be a better deck, but with bell ringer... who is overall a worse card. And with green, probably your best bet at that point, youd either go full on tempo or midrange, which makes your deck with differeing weaknesses but not overtly so.
I proposed this before, but for the sake of conversation I suppose I'll do it again.
Unban Twin, ban Exarch. I really feel this could be a good compromise. It offers the benefits of the Twin deck being in the meta, while tempering its effects, because...
1. Twin is legal again! No more (or well, at least less) complaining!
3. The only non-Boltable option, Ringer, is not versatile, unlike Exarch!
4. Krasis and Ringer force the deck to go Temur or Jeskai, respectively, weakening the manabase!
5. Sticking just with Conscripts and Mite to remain Izzet means only 4 pieces to deploy for turn 4 kill, and you can kill said piece just by sneezing at it!
I agree with this as an eventual solution. However, I would suggest unbanning Twin exactly as is (no other bans, possibly other unbans) and see what happens first, especially in our current extremely hostile meta. If Twin actually becomes a problem, then Exarch is a clear and easy target to keep the deck around without destroying it entirely. But swap banning Exarch right away seems extremely contrived.
so what about a set of counterspells that both cost one blue.
"Burden of thought"
Cost: U
Counter target spell unless its controller pays its mana cost.
This would be insanely powerful early, punishing multicolor and aggro decks.
It would force them to slow play their Goblin Guide and the such. Making early game counters viable, and staying relevant late game but much less powerful.
"Weight of thought"
Cost: U
Counter target spell unless its controller pays life equal to its converted mana cost.
This not being super powerful in the early game, it becomes super relevant in the late game and forces them to make tough decisions "can i survive if i pay?"
The two paired would give a good early and late game counter.
Maybe too good? Just a draft that, maybe could be interesting.
I think there are a LOT of different ways WOTC could print counters if they wanted to. What you suggested may be too powerful in their Standard and Limited sets, which is ultimately WOTC's only concern. But I believe MaRo was positive about the suggestion of a counter that was UU, Counter Target Spell, additional cost to cast exile a land from your graveyard. In a Limited and Standard environment without fetchlands this wouldn't be overly powerful, maybe not even playable, but it would certainly be playable in Modern.
I think a functional counterspell reprint is too strong for modern. Exiling a land from the graveyard seems pretty negligible as an additional cost. Non-blue fair decks wouldn't be able to keep up with functional counterspell, Snapcaster mage and Ancestral Vision. It would eliminate big mana as a bad match up, skew the more-or-less even midrange match up in blue's favor and do little to nothing against linear non-dredge aggro that UXX is already decently good against.
I'd like to see something like this:
1UU: counter target spell, the converted mana cost of this card is UU when it's in your hand.
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
I think a functional counterspell reprint is too strong for modern. Exiling a land from the graveyard seems pretty negligible as an additional cost. Non-blue fair decks wouldn't be able to keep up with functional counterspell, Snapcaster mage and Ancestral Vision. It would eliminate big mana as a bad match up, skew the more-or-less even midrange match up in blue's favor and do little to nothing against linear non-dredge aggro that UXX is already decently good against.
I'd like to see something like this:
1UU: counter target spell, the converted mana cost of this card is UU when it's in your hand.
I don't think a functional reprint would be oppressive, at least not in the way you phrase it. Right now Snapcaster is not wrapping the format at all and AV is, well, less than spectacular. It's not like we have any Snapcaster mages in Tier 1 and only two are Snapcaster based decks (Jeskai control and Grixis Delver) and one that uses 0-2 copies. Ancestral Vision plays only in 1 deck (Jeskai control) and even there, there doesn't seem to be a consensus since there is a 50-50 split between people playing and people who don't.
If Uxx decks were already decently good against linear aggro decks then we wouldn't be talking about a problem, but right now blue based control decks don't seem like they can keep up with anything.
I didn't say it would be oppressive, I said the combination of counterspell + snap + AV would be too good against other non-blue fair decks which provides the incentive to go under. This is not something we want to encourage.
URx decks are pretty decent against most aggro decks other than dredge. They have all the tools available to deal with affinity/infect/burn/zoo. UXX decks have co-existed alongside affinity/infect/burn/zoo in modern for years with no issue. Dredge* is the biggest factor keeping blue out of the format. I've been keeping up with modern nexus's metagame breakdown and for the most part the downswing of blue decks have coincided with the upswing of dredge.
Even if you don't agree with me, a functional counterspell still wouldn't do anything to help blue in the current format. The decks ( Dredge and Eldrazi ) that are keeping blue down don't give a damn about counterspell.
My main consideration is the viability of other non-blue fair decks in a format with counterspell.
Which is why I think my card suggestion is a fair middle ground with that consideration in mind. The first use is basically counterspell. To flash it back, it becomes cancel.
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
I do agree that Dredge isn't helping out classical blue-based control (or anyone really), neither is Eldrazi. How I wish Oath of the Gatewatch had never been printed.
However I'm not sure how much Counterspell would swing the Jund/Junk match up, it would certainly help but discard into Lili is pretty back breaking plus there is a ton of control hate printed recently. However if you are worried about the Snap+Counterspell interaction (which I think is most peoples concern?) how about a counterspell the exiled itself (and possible the spell it countered if it is flavour thing)?
Ultimately I can't see Counterspell making it's way into modern with the currently standard design philosophy anyway, however I could see: 1U or UU
Counter target spell with CMC 3 or less
A kind of inverted Disdainful Stroke, seems fine in standard give they typically have a much wider curve then we see in modern.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In play: Jund Death Shadow, Grixis Control, Eldrazi Stompy, Ponza
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
I think a functional counterspell reprint is too strong for modern. Exiling a land from the graveyard seems pretty negligible as an additional cost. Non-blue fair decks wouldn't be able to keep up with functional counterspell, Snapcaster mage and Ancestral Vision. It would eliminate big mana as a bad match up, skew the more-or-less even midrange match up in blue's favor and do little to nothing against linear non-dredge aggro that UXX is already decently good against.
I'd like to see something like this:
1UU: counter target spell, the converted mana cost of this card is UU when it's in your hand.
At that point you might as well just have it exile on hitting the bin.
I do agree that Dredge isn't helping out classical blue-based control (or anyone really), neither is Eldrazi. How I wish Oath of the Gatewatch had never been printed.
However I'm not sure how much Counterspell would swing the Jund/Junk match up, it would certainly help but discard into Lili is pretty back breaking plus there is a ton of control hate printed recently. However if you are worried about the Snap+Counterspell interaction (which I think is most peoples concern?) how about a counterspell the exiled itself (and possible the spell it countered if it is flavour thing)?
Ultimately I can't see Counterspell making it's way into modern with the currently standard design philosophy anyway, however I could see: 1U or UU
Counter target spell with CMC 3 or less
A kind of inverted Disdainful Stroke, seems fine in standard give they typically have a much wider curve then we see in modern.
As I said, it's a combination of all the things. Right now, Jund/Junk vs Jeskai/Grixis with AV are pretty evenly matched, +/- 5% at most. I believe that Counterspell would tip it into UXX favor a bit too much. Bearing in mind that we're talking about the GBx, the tier 1 midrange archetype that best suits grinding. There are other fair decks in the tier 2/2.5 status that would stand to lose a lot more with a counterspell in the format.
It would have to be templated as "1UU: This spell costs 1 less to cast if you cast it from your hand. Counter target spell." I think that's probably fair, but I still don't see it being printed.
Not to familiar with templating of cards but you get the idea.
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
I think a functional counterspell reprint is too strong for modern. Exiling a land from the graveyard seems pretty negligible as an additional cost. Non-blue fair decks wouldn't be able to keep up with functional counterspell, Snapcaster mage and Ancestral Vision. It would eliminate big mana as a bad match up, skew the more-or-less even midrange match up in blue's favor and do little to nothing against linear non-dredge aggro that UXX is already decently good against.
I'd like to see something like this:
1UU: counter target spell, the converted mana cost of this card is UU when it's in your hand.
At that point you might as well just have it exile on hitting the bin.
It would have to be templated as "1UU: This spell costs 1 less to cast if you cast it from your hand. Counter target spell." I think that's probably fair, but I still don't see it being printed.
If Counterspell has been too powerful for all these Standard and Limited sets that don't include Snapcaster Mage, then this version would have the exact same problem. The issue with WOTC seems not to be the Snapcaster interaction but the initial casting itself.
Twin would also promote interaction as well, since the best strategy against it is main deck disruption like kill spells, counterspells, and discard spells. Any deck packing interaction and a reasonable clock (like Jund) is always a nightmare matchup, and having Twin back in the spotlight would promote more interactive decks. Not only that, but it would give other blue based control decks a positive matchup while also thinning the field of linear degeneracy, giving those blue based control decks better opportunities to play more targeted answers. That way NOBODY has their deck banned and we see if the influx of reactive decks that Twin brings with it helps restore balance to a format where ignoring your opponent and counting to 20 is the best strategy.
The Jund/Twin matchup was unfavorable pre-board but a lot closer post-board and far from a 'nightmare'. Twin had the best overall win percentages against the field in its day, but you already know this and it's part of the reason you want it back.
Comments like this are exactly why it's so difficult to have productive conversations about Twin. I understand the deck was good, but I also understand it did a lot of things to keep the format healthy. We have seen the ramifications of a Twinless format for nearly a year now and it is possibly the most complained-about year Modern has ever had. You don't have to believe me though, feel free to read articles for yourself made just a month and a half before the ban announcement. Articles praising the duo of Twin and BGx, highlighting the need for both and the specific positive impacts these decks had on the format. They even predict completely that a lack of Twin would result in a huge rise of linear decks, and here we are.
This may come as a surprise, but I actually care about the format in addition to the deck I play, and I think the format as a whole was a lot better last year than it is right now.
By 'productive conversations about Twin' you seem to mean agreement with your position, given that 99% of your posts about the state of Modern can be summarized as 'Unban Twin Blue sux'. You have specifically stated in the past that the higher than average win ratio of Twin was one of the reasons you played it. I'm not saying that this is bad or unusual, but that you are clearly biased. You dismiss Grixis and Jeskai as though they don't exist and you ignore statistics that don't help promote your agenda (PT results are 'now irrelevant'? Give me a break).
As for people complaining about Modern in the past year, much of it was due to the MOST POWERFUL DECK EVER wrecking the format and much of it was the standard 'Modern is a sideboard format' complaining that we got even while Twin was still around. Many people enjoy Modern currently and think that while the format is aggro-heavy right now, it could use a few cheap answers and some card filtering to help control, midrange and combo, not a complete overhaul or a new format or bans or unbans (aside from possibly Preordain).
Regarding your linked articles, I could easily link articles (Sheridan's comes to mind) describing the positive aspects of the Twin ban but you've already read or ignored them.
I am still of the opinion that a Twin unban is a step backwards, not forwards. The real solution is to unban stuff like Preordain to dig for existing generic answers, and/or to actively print better answers into Modern. Unfortunately, Wizards has given no indication they are moving towards either right now, so I understand why the short-term step backwards to Twin may register as an improvement over a hypothetical that may never materialize. If we get to April 2017 and Wizards still has made no movement towards more open and viable reactive, blue-based options, then we might have to reconsider. Holding out hope for something that is never going to happen isn't a winning line.
I am still of the opinion that a Twin unban is a step backwards, not forwards. The real solution is to unban stuff like Preordain to dig for existing generic answers, and/or to actively print better answers into Modern. Unfortunately, Wizards has given no indication they are moving towards either right now, so I understand why the short-term step backwards to Twin may register as an improvement over a hypothetical that may never materialize. If we get to April 2017 and Wizards still has made no movement towards more open and viable reactive, blue-based options, then we might have to reconsider. Holding out hope for something that is never going to happen isn't a winning line.
If that ends up being the case in April with nothing on the horizon, that sounds like a good time to start liquidating my Modern URx collection of staples and just stick to Commander. It will be clear that they either truly do not care about actually managing the format or they want to take the format in a direction that I want nothing to do with.
Has anyone ever considered the option of wizards printing cards via modern masters 2017, commander, conspiracy, etc. that have never been printed before, but that would become modern legal? Basically skip standard and avoid the "power creep" problem. This would allow them to tweak our decks and create more viable strategies.
It's been happening with Legacy since the very first commander and seems to be enjoyed. Standard avoids the warp and players get what they want! And it'll sell product!! win/win
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The Jund/Twin matchup was unfavorable pre-board but a lot closer post-board and far from a 'nightmare'. Twin had the best overall win percentages against the field in its day, but you already know this and it's part of the reason you want it back.
And 'counting to 20'? What about counting to 4?
Reviving Twin is not the solution to the aggro-heavy meta we have now. It would only set Modern back. We could use a couple of better cheap answers and possibly some card filtering like Preordain.
I don't agree that Twin was easier to interact with than Infect. Exarch naturally survives Bolt. Sorcery-speed removal like Roast is also much worse against Twin than Infect. The obvious retort is that Infect plays a lot of protection spells, to which I'll repeat: Exarch doesn't need a single protection spell to survive against the most common removal spell in the format (for almost six years running, according to mtgtop8).
I don't see the point of comparing a compact combo that only takes 10 slots in your deck to an archetype that demands that you devote all 40 nonland cards in your deck to it. Clearly the focused deck is going to have more blowout wins when all its pieces come together. The disadvantage is that it's much harder to recover when the opponent disrupts its synergy. You can't have your cake and eat it.
|
|
Big Johnny.
Twin warped the meta, and so do all these linear aggro decks. Twin made you unable to tap out on turn 3, the current meta asks you to prevent decks ending the game on turn 3
And Deceiver Exarch might survive bolt, but twin did not get to play 8+ dispels that are also super efficient burn spells.
A pump spell is not the same as a burn spell.
|
|
Big Johnny.
Serious question - what powerful decks don't warp a meta?
Comments like this are exactly why it's so difficult to have productive conversations about Twin. I understand the deck was good, but I also understand it did a lot of things to keep the format healthy. We have seen the ramifications of a Twinless format for nearly a year now and it is possibly the most complained-about year Modern has ever had. You don't have to believe me though, feel free to read articles for yourself made just a month and a half before the ban announcement. Articles praising the duo of Twin and BGx, highlighting the need for both and the specific positive impacts these decks had on the format. They even predict completely that a lack of Twin would result in a huge rise of linear decks, and here we are.
This may come as a surprise, but I actually care about the format in addition to the deck I play, and I think the format as a whole was a lot better last year than it is right now.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Twin being banned didn't lead to a huge rise of linear decks. New cards did. SOI block gave Dredge amalgam and neonate followed by carthatic reunion from Kaladesh. Infect gained an unneeded power boost from blossoming defense.
And while there are articles by well known players talking about how the twin ban was a mistake and how twin was good for the format, some players have also come out in praise and defense of the decision. Who are you to say that the ones who hold the same position as you are right and the ones that don't are wrong ?
URW PillowFort Stasis (costruction)
modern:
U
pauper:
UB Servitor Control
xenob8 : you know you are going to have a bad time when opponent starts with snow covered island
Unban Twin, ban Exarch. I really feel this could be a good compromise. It offers the benefits of the Twin deck being in the meta, while tempering its effects, because...
1. Twin is legal again! No more (or well, at least less) complaining!
2. Three of the remaining the combo piece choices are Boltable (Mite, Conscripts, Krasis)!
3. The only non-Boltable option, Ringer, is not versatile, unlike Exarch!
4. Krasis and Ringer force the deck to go Temur or Jeskai, respectively, weakening the manabase!
5. Sticking just with Conscripts and Mite to remain Izzet means only 4 pieces to deploy for turn 4 kill, and you can kill said piece just by sneezing at it!
Modern - Cheeri0s (building), Belcher (building), Lantern (building), UW Control (building)
RIP Magic Duels. Wizards will regret what they did to you.
I actually was going to post the exact same thing, kuddos.
To add a few more points it also, at least I would hope, force twin to play either very midrange, very tempo, or very very controlling. Youd be slower if you opt in the conscripts, because 5 mana. That makes nahiri more appealing in a long run. With white you can be a better deck, but with bell ringer... who is overall a worse card. And with green, probably your best bet at that point, youd either go full on tempo or midrange, which makes your deck with differeing weaknesses but not overtly so.
Id support that switch up.
I agree with this as an eventual solution. However, I would suggest unbanning Twin exactly as is (no other bans, possibly other unbans) and see what happens first, especially in our current extremely hostile meta. If Twin actually becomes a problem, then Exarch is a clear and easy target to keep the deck around without destroying it entirely. But swap banning Exarch right away seems extremely contrived.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
"Burden of thought"
Cost: U
Counter target spell unless its controller pays its mana cost.
This would be insanely powerful early, punishing multicolor and aggro decks.
It would force them to slow play their Goblin Guide and the such. Making early game counters viable, and staying relevant late game but much less powerful.
"Weight of thought"
Cost: U
Counter target spell unless its controller pays life equal to its converted mana cost.
This not being super powerful in the early game, it becomes super relevant in the late game and forces them to make tough decisions "can i survive if i pay?"
The two paired would give a good early and late game counter.
Maybe too good? Just a draft that, maybe could be interesting.
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
I'd like to see something like this:
1UU: counter target spell, the converted mana cost of this card is UU when it's in your hand.
If Uxx decks were already decently good against linear aggro decks then we wouldn't be talking about a problem, but right now blue based control decks don't seem like they can keep up with anything.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
URx decks are pretty decent against most aggro decks other than dredge. They have all the tools available to deal with affinity/infect/burn/zoo. UXX decks have co-existed alongside affinity/infect/burn/zoo in modern for years with no issue. Dredge* is the biggest factor keeping blue out of the format. I've been keeping up with modern nexus's metagame breakdown and for the most part the downswing of blue decks have coincided with the upswing of dredge.
Even if you don't agree with me, a functional counterspell still wouldn't do anything to help blue in the current format. The decks ( Dredge and Eldrazi ) that are keeping blue down don't give a damn about counterspell.
My main consideration is the viability of other non-blue fair decks in a format with counterspell.
Which is why I think my card suggestion is a fair middle ground with that consideration in mind. The first use is basically counterspell. To flash it back, it becomes cancel.
However I'm not sure how much Counterspell would swing the Jund/Junk match up, it would certainly help but discard into Lili is pretty back breaking plus there is a ton of control hate printed recently. However if you are worried about the Snap+Counterspell interaction (which I think is most peoples concern?) how about a counterspell the exiled itself (and possible the spell it countered if it is flavour thing)?
Ultimately I can't see Counterspell making it's way into modern with the currently standard design philosophy anyway, however I could see:
1U or UU
Counter target spell with CMC 3 or less
A kind of inverted Disdainful Stroke, seems fine in standard give they typically have a much wider curve then we see in modern.
In the yard: RUG Delver, Kiki-Chord, Grixis Twin, Mardu Control, Smallpox, Jeskai Control, Jeskai Delver, Assault Loam, Elves, Deathcloud, Eggs, Storm
At that point you might as well just have it exile on hitting the bin.
As I said, it's a combination of all the things. Right now, Jund/Junk vs Jeskai/Grixis with AV are pretty evenly matched, +/- 5% at most. I believe that Counterspell would tip it into UXX favor a bit too much. Bearing in mind that we're talking about the GBx, the tier 1 midrange archetype that best suits grinding. There are other fair decks in the tier 2/2.5 status that would stand to lose a lot more with a counterspell in the format.
That was what I thought of initially. But I think having the option of snapcaster flashing it back as a cancel is still fairly relevant and balanced.
Not to familiar with templating of cards but you get the idea.
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
By 'productive conversations about Twin' you seem to mean agreement with your position, given that 99% of your posts about the state of Modern can be summarized as 'Unban Twin Blue sux'. You have specifically stated in the past that the higher than average win ratio of Twin was one of the reasons you played it. I'm not saying that this is bad or unusual, but that you are clearly biased. You dismiss Grixis and Jeskai as though they don't exist and you ignore statistics that don't help promote your agenda (PT results are 'now irrelevant'? Give me a break).
As for people complaining about Modern in the past year, much of it was due to the MOST POWERFUL DECK EVER wrecking the format and much of it was the standard 'Modern is a sideboard format' complaining that we got even while Twin was still around. Many people enjoy Modern currently and think that while the format is aggro-heavy right now, it could use a few cheap answers and some card filtering to help control, midrange and combo, not a complete overhaul or a new format or bans or unbans (aside from possibly Preordain).
Regarding your linked articles, I could easily link articles (Sheridan's comes to mind) describing the positive aspects of the Twin ban but you've already read or ignored them.
If that ends up being the case in April with nothing on the horizon, that sounds like a good time to start liquidating my Modern URx collection of staples and just stick to Commander. It will be clear that they either truly do not care about actually managing the format or they want to take the format in a direction that I want nothing to do with.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
It's been happening with Legacy since the very first commander and seems to be enjoyed. Standard avoids the warp and players get what they want! And it'll sell product!! win/win