I can't believe dig through time is even being entertained, although for very different reasons, that card was too powerful for legacy. I played my jund deck against a standard deck with ddt and it absolutely stomped me. It can look through 7 cards at the end of my turn for 2 mana. Like, are you kidding me? You can forgot about those combo decks taking a crap on them.
Just because a deck doesn't violate the turn 4 rule doesn't mean it can't be oppressive. If ddt I would be furious, that's the only unban that would make me want to leave modern
Honestly, I think it's because people are realizing that Preordain and Jace will do too little to actually help the reactive blue decks in today's meta and they're looking for ANYTHING ELSE that's not Splinter Twin.
For some perspective: I would take DTT over Twin ALL DAY EVERY DAY. Dig Through Time is stupid good. Maybe too good? Would definitely better than Twin ever was.
'Definitely better than Twin'
Enough said no?
LOL. Maybe it was a bit overblown, because I don't know what hypothetical DTT deck would be "best." But I played with DTT a LOT in Standard and it made me feel like I was playing a totally different format. Well.. at least until Abzan started running Crackling Doom. The card is totally nuts in a control shell. 2 mana to find what you need at instant speed. It's really hard to whiff when digging 7 deep for any two cards.
You may cast this card without paying its mana cost if you sacrifice an island
Control lives on always making its land drops and getting to the late game. The deckbuilding cost of this card would be real(needs islands), but would not be a "must play blue" that many people are worried about. It would also be harder for decks like ad naus to take advantage of because while they have blue mana they rarely have very many islands and having one in play before going off may or may not be able to happen.
The second, unstated part of my argument is this. Preordain and Dig Through Time would help interactive blue decks more than they help combo decks. Those decks would help keep the combo decks in check. And I really doubt that either of them is individually powerful enough to cause blue interactive decks to dominate the entire format. How do you think Dig Through Time would break the format?
Ah, I see where you're coming from.
I almost agree with you. But IMO, as long as the format lacks an adequate, main-deckable way of spell-based combo decks, I'm afraid that Dig Through Time will push those decks much further than the decks that would keep them in check. Really, what keeps combo in check is aggro; Control's tools are too weak or too niche to do an adequate job. Otherwise, I think you'd be spot-on.
I guess there's a chance that access to Dig would make more traditional permission-based blue control (like your Esper Draw-Go) viable in the wider meta, which would increase the number of decks that could keep spell-based combo in check. But without better ways of interacting with the stack, I think combo benefits way more than control. Especially when Control would be digging for Five-Turn Clock and/or Negate, while combo would be searching out I Win Right Now and/or Force of Will With No Downside.
I suppose Pact of Negation would be an annoying problem, but I would be fine trading it for Dig on the banlist if necessary. Besides, Control can search out plenty of cards that win or stabilize the game on the spot, such as Gifts Ungiven or Madcap Experiment. The problem is finding them quickly enough and finding enough answers to survive long enough to cast them. Dig would help a lot with this. Dig would also help Tempo and blue midrange a lot.
I can't believe dig through time is even being entertained, although for very different reasons, that card was too powerful for legacy. I played my jund deck against a standard deck with ddt and it absolutely stomped me. It can look through 7 cards at the end of my turn for 2 mana. Like, are you kidding me? You can forgot about those combo decks taking a crap on them.
Just because a deck doesn't violate the turn 4 rule doesn't mean it can't be oppressive. If ddt I would be furious, that's the only unban that would make me want to leave modern
Just because a card is too powerful for Legacy doesn't make it too powerful for Modern.
I can't believe dig through time is even being entertained, although for very different reasons, that card was too powerful for legacy. I played my jund deck against a standard deck with ddt and it absolutely stomped me. It can look through 7 cards at the end of my turn for 2 mana. Like, are you kidding me? You can forgot about those combo decks taking a crap on them.
Just because a deck doesn't violate the turn 4 rule doesn't mean it can't be oppressive. If ddt I would be furious, that's the only unban that would make me want to leave modern
Honestly, I think it's because people are realizing that Preordain and Jace will do too little to actually help the reactive blue decks in today's meta and they're looking for ANYTHING ELSE that's not Splinter Twin.
For some perspective: I would take DTT over Twin ALL DAY EVERY DAY. Dig Through Time is stupid good. Maybe too good? Would definitely better than Twin ever was.
I know that. I personally would say that Twin wouldn't be broken in Modern and Dig probably wouldn't be, but Dig is definitely more powerful than Twin. The reason why I am suggesting Dig over Twin is because Dig would add more diversity to blue decks while Twin would just be a single good blue deck.
Do I believe they made a mistake in not banning only Treasure Cruise and let the format be with DTT and if need be reban it in 4 months's time? Yes. But they chose to ban TC and DTT together and after leaving DTT in Legacy the card broke the format. Now, again, do I believe the reason Dig Through Time broke Legacy is mostly Omniscience combo? Yes, I do.
But ultimately lists like THIS list from yesterday's MODO, or lists like UR Delver, or lists like RUG Scapeshift or all kind of controls and maybe 1 off in decks like Infect or other combo decks to come(not sure about Ad Nauseam or/and Bloom Titan as well) would take it. The card will be 2-4 off in too many decks, that's the problem in WOTC eyes.
Again, even if I think the laugh with this idea, with the banning of Gitaxian Probe the card is probably safer and I would entertain the idea. But honestly, it's not going to come.
Again, I am sure it's Splinter Twin or nothing in WOTC's eyes.
I do agree that Dig is probably never going to be unbanned. I am just saying that, even if it became widely played (and I doubt that it would be any more widely played than other Modern staples like Bolt, Push, Path, Goyf, Serum Visions, etc.), I think it wouldn't break the format.
Widely played though isnt even an indication of being broken. Bolt is not broken. Never has been, never will be. Dig, I think is probably busted in half. Instant card advantage and 7 deep dig... yikes.
Dig through time does make modern worse though, it very much becomes a more consistent sideboard lottery format. Oh hey, crumble is good now, I have 4 cards that dig 1/7th through my deck, at that point, 2 crumbles will definitely be GG against Tron, blue will have no issues finding those crumbles and then a snapcaster, or the land needed.
Hey, let's just drop Elspeth, Sun's champion against Jund, I'll dig through my deck, and if I don't find it, I'll chain another Dig to find it.
And you think combo decks won't abuse this? Combo decks will even warp itself if it can to play Dig, why the hell shouldn't they?
I would never, ever, ever play a midrange deck in a format with dig through time, you will be demolished and buried in CA and perfect answers and threats.
Combo will become rougher for midrange decks, people will probably result to aggro if they don't play combo.
Scapeshift will play a bunch of things like electroyze to fill up their GY, mana, and win with their combo, probably to the point that people would be begging for a DTT ban and a Twin unban, then we'd get stupid ass comments like, "is it time for Scapeshift to get a ban?
I know we've all talked about DTT in passing here and there in the year, but it's usually been like 2 posts and the thread moves on.
This talk is by far some of the worst I've ever read in this thread, and it becomes very difficult to take this thread seriously
Like, seriously, if we unban DDT let's just unban POD, Twin, DRS, BBE, Jace and SFM while we're at it.
Honestly, DTT would be a great fit for control, the only thing I fear after that is Scapeshift. It's currently doing poorly from lack of selection and with DTT + more lands out from ramp + pact of negation + boseiju would be a control nightmare. They could main 1 boseiju or 2 main with 2 pact of negation sideboard. This could lead to them DTT on end step turn 4 of the "control" players turn where they already have pact mana available and the ability to try and force a win. If the control player tries to stop the DTT depending on what the hands involved are they are basically dead. If DTT resolves they can find their pacts and other counter magic and try and force it. If the DTT doesn't resolve and they go for it anyway and it goes south for scapeshift they can just pay the pact and try again.
This is why pact of negation's design was supremely flawed and I think in modern boseiju and cavern more than cover the reactive deck that could even begin to be a thing in modern. DTT is probably the selection that control needs, but I'd try preordain first or give a better designed free counter to control.
EDIT: apparently more people agreed while i was typing this up.
On the subject of Dig Through Time, I went through the lists of the 2014 Modern World Championship tournament (Link: http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/2014WC/modern-decklists-2014-12-02), and while it is a very small sample size, it does consist of some of the players at the time who no doubt went through a great deal of play-testing before competing, so I figured it'd be relevant. One thing I did notice is that all of the all-in combo decks using it also had a full set of Gitaxian Probes to fuel it. The few decks that didn't, namely some Scapeshift decks and 1 lone Jeskai Control deck, didn't run a full set, and all of them went either 1-3 or 0-4 (http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/2014WC/modern-metagame-world-championship-2014-12-02). I also noticed that all of the Delver decks used TC over DTT and ran 3-4 Probes. So, from this, I gathered the following:
All-In combo decks relied heavily on Probe and may have more issues with making it live early game without the free cantrip and the perfect knowledge Probe provided
Combo-Control decks would definitely get a noticeable boost in power, but compared to the other decks available at the time, it was not as busted as all-in combo decks or Delver decks using T
Delver decks, which previously relied heavily on TC and Probe, might consider using DTT, but the lack of probe to pump it and the threat of Tasigur or Tarm makes me question if it would be busted and I would like to see someone test a DTT URx delver deck against the meta and see whether they prefer that over Grixis Delver or Temur Delver
All in all, I think it's reasonable to think that DTT would be OK in this meta, but honestly, to me it just seems like the decks that would run were more or less oppressed by much stronger decks that were available at the time, which makes it hard to really say whether it would be safe in a meta with a much lower power level than back then. I think something like Preordain, which digs through fewer cards and only cantrips, would be a much safer unban than DTT. As a side note, if someone could find metagame statistics for the DTT/TC meta, I'd really like to see that since the World Championship data was the best I could find
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks
Modern: UWUW Control UBRGrixis Shadow URIzzet Phoenix
Honestly, DTT would be a great fit for control, the only thing I fear after that is Scapeshift. It's currently doing poorly from lack of selection and with DTT + more lands out from ramp + pact of negation + boseiju would be a control nightmare. They could main 1 boseiju or 2 main with 2 pact of negation sideboard. This could lead to them DTT on end step turn 4 of the "control" players turn where they already have pact mana available and the ability to try and force a win. If the control player tries to stop the DTT depending on what the hands involved are they are basically dead. If DTT resolves they can find their pacts and other counter magic and try and force it. If the DTT doesn't resolve and they go for it anyway and it goes south for scapeshift they can just pay the pact and try again.
This is why pact of negation's design was supremely flawed and I think in modern boseiju and cavern more than cover the reactive deck that could even begin to be a thing in modern. DTT is probably the selection that control needs, but I'd try preordain first or give a better designed free counter to control.
EDIT: apparently more people agreed while i was typing this up.
As far as I can tell, most of the problems that people have with Dig Through Time involve Pact of Negation. I know that Wizards doesn't do swap bans, but I think almost all of the potential problems with Dig would be eliminated if Pact was banned.
On the subject of Dig Through Time, I went through the lists of the 2014 Modern World Championship tournament (Link: http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/2014WC/modern-decklists-2014-12-02), and while it is a very small sample size, it does consist of some of the players at the time who no doubt went through a great deal of play-testing before competing, so I figured it'd be relevant. One thing I did notice is that all of the all-in combo decks using it also had a full set of Gitaxian Probes to fuel it. The few decks that didn't, namely some Scapeshift decks and 1 lone Jeskai Control deck, didn't run a full set, and all of them went either 1-3 or 0-4 (http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/2014WC/modern-metagame-world-championship-2014-12-02). I also noticed that all of the Delver decks used TC over DTT and ran 3-4 Probes. So, from this, I gathered the following:
All-In combo decks relied heavily on Probe and may have more issues with making it live early game without the free cantrip and the perfect knowledge Probe provided
Combo-Control decks would definitely get a noticeable boost in power, but compared to the other decks available at the time, it was not as busted as all-in combo decks or Delver decks using T
Delver decks, which previously relied heavily on TC and Probe, might consider using DTT, but the lack of probe to pump it and the threat of Tasigur or Tarm makes me question if it would be busted and I would like to see someone test a DTT URx delver deck against the meta and see whether they prefer that over Grixis Delver or Temur Delver
All in all, I think it's reasonable to think that DTT would be OK in this meta, but honestly, to me it just seems like the decks that would run were more or less oppressed by much stronger decks that were available at the time, which makes it hard to really say whether it would be safe in a meta with a much lower power level than back then. I think something like Preordain, which digs through fewer cards and only cantrips, would be a much safer unban than DTT. As a side note, if someone could find metagame statistics for the DTT/TC meta, I'd really like to see that since the World Championship data was the best I could find
I agree with this overall. I also think that the best Delver decks would be Jeskai if Dig was unbanned. Grixis Delver and Temur Delver are too reliant on delve creatures for their main threats to be able to as easily transition to Dig Through Time while UR Delver good solely because of the card velocity that Gitaxian Probe and Treasure Cruise helped provide.
Pact is pretty much what concerns me it gives the edge to any selection wizards prints and the decks that run it don't give a damn about losing because they win that turn anyway. Poorly designed card imo.
A few things I think worthy of noting regarding blue's place in the current modern metagame:
1. The problem with blue decks (when I say blue decks I'm talking about attrition based blue decks and not things like Bant Eldrazi, Infect, or Merfolk) trying to play a control strategy via attrition is that the strategy to get to a point where attrition matters is very difficult via deck composition itself. A lot of control decks have to play 24+ lands versus aggro decks often playing a much lower number (Death's Shadow playing ~18). That makes it tough when you may have 6+ more lands in your deck than your opponent. Compare that to Legacy where Miracles runs ~21 land. That matters in a game designed to get to topdecking. If you compare the essential backbone of this to Jund decks it's not that dissimilar. Jund decks are attrition decks that have a goal of ending up with both players having nothing in hand while the Jund player has the only on-board presence. Blue attrition decks often have the goal of the opponent having nothing in hand, neither player having much on the battlefield, and the blue player having an in-hand presence. Strength on-board vs. strength in-hand is a big difference when a tarmogoyf can close out a game in 3 or 4 attacks.
2. Card advantage (one route for attrition) is difficult in older formats because the mana investment to add more cards to hand has a significant opportunity cose. Esper Charm is a great magic card but very constraining on manabases. Things like Kolaghan's Command, Electrolyze, Think Twice, Ancestral Vision, Cryptic Command all provide options for card advantage but have big constraints in them. Again, compare that to Miracles which is running Predict; Jace, the Mind Sculptor; and Snapcaster Mage as card advantage in most builds with built in CA via cards like Counterbalance + Top as well.
3. Life totals are under a fair bit more stress in Modern as well with needing to often shock yourself once or twice based on deckbuilding mana constraints (look at how a Grixis Control deck plays). This is one of the reasons why things like Burn are more popular in modern relative to legacy.
These three deckbuilding constraints make it a risky proposition trying to play long and win via reactive attrition. I think it's very easy to look at deckbuilding options and realize that countermagic is often worse than discard. Spending one mana (and maybe some life) and a card to (ideally) take a card from your opponent is technically a tempo-negative play, it may be more efficient than holding up modern's situational countermagic.
Blue attrition decks are really (and have been for a long time) struggling to have something worth working towards. Esper Control is working towards a big token production spell or refuelling with Sphinx's Revelation. Grixis Control grinds card advantage one step at a time until its resources run over the opponent. Decks of this style work towards incremental advantage. Compare this to decks like Twin of old or Scapeshift with Blue. They can make use of Remand because they have the ability to have a bit more of a proactive gameplan that lets them have something to clearly work towards. That is their clock (if they survive enough to assemble the requisite cards they win). Attrition style decks miss out on that and that's one reason why decks like Blue Moon never quite held a metashare like Splinter Twin could. This is why decks with AV and Sword of the Meek haven't been able to take off once added to the format after Twin left.
That's not to say that blue doesn't have excellent cards, or even threats. Snapcaster, Vendilion Clique, Delver of Secrets, Geist, Spell Queller are all really good magic cards.
But what it boils down to is that people wanting to play an attrition strategy as well as a blue deck are starting to realize that blue's traditional strength of being a reactive counterspell deck are quite limited. Look at Corey Burkhart's GP list (4 Cryptics, 1 Countersqall, 1 Logic Knot, 2 Spell Snare) and 22 lands. It plays fewer lands than a traditional control deck. It has a small counterspell package and is more focused on removal with 11 spells or the evolution of Esper decks playing maindeck Liliana of the Veil and discard spells.
The traditional reactive attrition strategy of stablize early and grind to the point you can't lose while slowly winning at your leisure is just not as viable in modern as it is in other formats.
On a serious note, what would you guys think of something akin to a dual land, but with either the Legendary rule, or across the entire cycle, you can only have one out? By across the whole cycle, I mean a keyword that would read you can only have one of this out at a time. They could basically all check each other for the Legendary rule.
This would make it easier for multi colored decks to get going in the start of the game without having to lose 3 life, while being easily fetchable.
If there's anything Wizards learns specifically from the problems with Standard at the moment and the last couple of years that could apply to Modern, it's that they need to give us a way to interact reasonably cheaply with Planeswalkers that's also not dead in every other circumstance. I've lost so many times because my opponent landed a big impact planeswalker that I had no way of answering - most usually it's Karn and Ugin, but Big Elspeth or even Chandra, Torch of Defiance have done it to me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
Splinter Twin warped the format in ways that no other Tier 1 deck does, what other deck forces you to not play magic until you have mana to cast your spell plus cast your answer.
Infect, Cheeri0s, Abzan Company, Goryo's Reanimator, Gifts Storm, etc.
People keep saying that Twin promoted interactive games but in reality it didn't it shut off the game for the opponent until they hit 2-3 more land drops and then could continue p.aying assuming the Twin player didn't bounce a land back to your hand or tap down your mana etc.... if that is healthy then nothing is bad
We have decks like Lantern Control, RW Prison, Blue Moon, and Skred Red that basically just try to stop you from playing Magic at all, but having to hold up removal mana is too much for you? You're being hypocritical if you think these decks are ok but Twin wasn't.
I have one for Commander and picked up another yesterday "just in case." I think he is a terrible unban choice for a number of reasons, but I also don't want to be left out in the cold if he is unbanned. I had to pay out the rear to get my AVs... not going to let that happen again.
Yeah, this is what I always tell people when they bring up the price argument. If you think you would want to play with a card that's often in unban discussions, like Jace or SFM, you should already have a playset. You have no one to blame but yourself if it gets unbanned, the price jumps up, and you end up having to pay Tarmogoyf prices for them.
Not sure if this has ever been discussed or not as a way to test cards on the ban list, but what would you guys think of a "parole" approach. With this model, Wizards could designate a card for a parole period so to speak, declaring a temporary, pseudo-unban. During this time, the selected card is legal for modern play, and in an effort to minimize the effects of unbanning and potentially having to reban a card, Wizards could furnish the community with a sanctioned proxy (perhaps a card frame lacking art or something so it is instantly recognizable)that is available for download on their website. These could also be provided on MTGO pretty effortlessly.
Wizards has demonstrated with the Grave Troll experiment that they are willing to take chances, and I think that this could be a way to do so while removing a lot of the financial risk from the process. This whole experiment could be paired with a new parole feedback system to allow them to gather data more effectively as to what the community thinks about the change. If, after the test period has expired, the card is too strong or dominant, it gets put back on the list and no one is out any money for their efforts. If the card proves to be fine then it could be unbanned proper, and no one could say they suddenly got blindsided by the need to acquire the card.
Sure, this doesn't help the issue of cards getting banned in the first place, but what is there to lose by giving a card a "hearing" once a year and see what happens? How would you react to such an offering by Wizards?
This is one of the best ideas I've ever heard on this site, lol. There's already precedence for gold bordered cards. They could do that, make them available for purchase directly from them for like a dollar a piece so they even make some money off this. The gold bordered versions are tournament legal during the parole period, and then when it finishes if they decide to keep the card unbanned they then say the gold bordered versions are no longer tournament legal, so you need real copies. This is a great idea!
If there's anything Wizards learns specifically from the problems with Standard at the moment and the last couple of years that could apply to Modern, it's that they need to give us a way to interact reasonably cheaply with Planeswalkers that's also not dead in every other circumstance. I've lost so many times because my opponent landed a big impact planeswalker that I had no way of answering - most usually it's Karn and Ugin, but Big Elspeth or even Chandra, Torch of Defiance have done it to me.
I really don't think wizards needs to think about nerfing 6 or 7 mana planeswalkers. Like at all. While tron is doing OK at the moment (because of collective brutality) it was only just recently on the metagame trashpile, and control is only hovering above the baseline of "maybe playable".
Surely any lessons from modern that need to be learnt are to do with fast aggro decks like dredge, and the effect of shocklands, making aggro and burn better than they are in any other format. Right?
When have big elspeth or Karn ever been an actual problem in modern? I can't think of a single time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
WotC fundamentally operates with a policy of knowing more about what's happening than the playerbase. This has always somewhat concerned me, but it comes up a lot: they hate leaks, they don't want sites mining too much metagame data, and they keep most discussion of bans/formats secret. They CANNOT know exactly what the effects of unbanning, say, preordain would be, without giving it a proper amount of testing. The only way to test this is to use the playerbase; WotC will never have another more effective testing resource. WotC doesn't like keeping the playerbase in the know about future actions, and so precludes this option. WotC prefers ambiguity and uncertainty internally rather than the playerbase have concrete data, which I think is frankly somewhat silly when something like MTGO exists.
Of all the things WotC does, this one I hate, because it is a remarkably outdated practice overall. The overwhelming opaqueness of their game management is just baffling when, yes, they could easily have modern leagues where cards x-y-z are temporarily unbanned for data collection purposes. Oh well.
This is the kind of process that produces statements like:
"Temur and Jeskai decks are being supplanted by Twin and will be awesome when Twin is banned!"
"Kiki-Jiki is a fine replacement for Twin!"
"Sword of the Meek gives Control decks a powerful combo finisher and will help Lantern!"
"Gitaxian Probe actually hurt reactive decks!"
"Cathartic Reunion and Prized Amalgam broke Dredge, but GGT is DEFINITELY the problem!"
This is exactly how I feel lately, there has been so many bannings that are the kind of "intellectually cute" bans that are supposed to shape and level the playing field, but none of them have actually worked. I would say the only few exceptions past the GSZ bans is that Eggs, Bloom, Infect and Twin are actually near dead considering this last GP. So out of the Bitterblossom, Wild Nacatl, Golgari Grave-Troll, Bloodbraid Elf, Deathrite Shaman, Gitaxian Probe, Birthing Pod bannings, we still see all the same problems they tried to address. When will Wizards stop banning?
Someone explain to me again; why the fair cards are on this banned list? Because they are more powerful than your grey ogre? Is this a joke?
If the card isn't Skullclamp level broken, it should be fair game.
so instant win infinite combos are "fair"
Pod proves your statement about "bans that are supposed to shape and level the playing field, but none of them have actually worked" statement is completely wrong, while Pod was legal no other value creature decks existed in any competitive sense.
Pod proves your statement about "bans that are supposed to shape and level the playing field, but none of them have actually worked" statement is completely wrong, while Pod was legal no other value creature decks existed in any competitive sense.
What does Pod prove? That we have the same damn menace with Collected Company now? How about Goryo's Vengeance? How about Through the Breach? What's the actual difference when we have decks that kill you turn 3 anyway? Why are you being so selective where you think some decks deserve a banning and others not?
This banned list is completely arbitrary, and yes for me personally Birthing Pod pushes the line of being a broken card in the Modern format. Yet at the same time, we never had any decent blue consistency cards unbanned to try and keep Pod in check.
It's definitely one of the cards I think deserves a second chance in a format that isn't being arbitrarily sculpted, based on people who complain because they suck at Magic.
Splinter Twin warped the format in ways that no other Tier 1 deck does, what other deck forces you to not play magic until you have mana to cast your spell plus cast your answer.
Infect, Cheeri0s, Abzan Company, Goryo's Reanimator, Gifts Storm, etc.
People keep saying that Twin promoted interactive games but in reality it didn't it shut off the game for the opponent until they hit 2-3 more land drops and then could continue p.aying assuming the Twin player didn't bounce a land back to your hand or tap down your mana etc.... if that is healthy then nothing is bad
We have decks like Lantern Control, RW Prison, Blue Moon, and Skred Red that basically just try to stop you from playing Magic at all, but having to hold up removal mana is too much for you? You're being hypocritical if you think these decks are ok but Twin wasn't.
Cheeri0's is a deck that is easy to beat if you interact with them. Infect the same. the only decks you pointed out that actually attempt to strictly do a similar thing are Goyro's and Storm and those are currently no where near as consistent as the Twin combo. Cheeri0's and Infect actually force you play magic you need to interact with them to beat them. Twin had 2 dedicated hate cards and was still better than the hate because of the 3 hate cards only one was good enough to run main deck.
The prison decks you pointed to are all much easier to beat than the Twin Combo and that is why they are far less played. You want to beat a Blood Moon deck, fetch up some basics, Lantern Control is also easily beaten by most of the same tools used to beat affinity. Not being hypocritical Blood Moon its self doesn't make it so that you cannot play the game, it punishes greedy mana bases if your running 24 lands and Blood Moon shuts your deck down that is really your fault, perfect mana is not a given in the game no matter how pampered you have been. Twin demands that you simply cannot play anything because you will instantly lose, you will not have a chance to draw out of it like against Blue Moon (which is why that deck kind of sucks). Its funny that you point to CoCo Company as on twins level of broken it is good but it can just wiff, if I tap out on 3 to commit a threat and you go pestermite untap Twin you are not going to wiff.
Does anyone go around talking up about how Shocklands are "sooooo goooood" and how they'd be used in addition to regular duals in Legacy/Vintage because of that fact?
I'm not complaining about Serum Visions. I'm simply arguing that it is not "sooooo goooood", as claimed by "ashtonkutcher" before going on to essentially say why Serum Visions is good enough for Modern when it really isn't.
Shocklands are good enough however, making that analogy irrelevant.
Serum Visions ranks among the top 10 most played spells in Modern. Clearly it's good. The amount of consistency it provides is well worth the 4 slots.
If the best cantrip in Modern was Peek then you'd be justified in calling it terrible, because decks wouldn't play 4 Peek, they'd put 1 land and 3 other spells in those slots instead. But that isn't the case with SV. So SV is good. So good.
Shocklands and SV are powerful cards in Modern. I don't care about them being too weak in Legacy because we're in the Modern forum.
Cheeri0's is a deck that is easy to beat if you interact with them. Infect the same. the only decks you pointed out that actually attempt to strictly do a similar thing are Goyro's and Storm and those are currently no where near as consistent as the Twin combo. Cheeri0's and Infect actually force you play magic you need to interact with them to beat them. Twin had 2 dedicated hate cards and was still better than the hate because of the 3 hate cards only one was good enough to run main deck.
You're such an unbelievable hypocrite, dude. Cheeri0s and Infect are fine because you can beat them by interacting with them? What exactly do you think beat Twin? Twin's worst matchups were all the interactive decks in the format. And Twin couldn't win before turn 4, whereas decks like Infect, UR Battle Rage, and especially Cheeri0s can win regularly on turn 3, and sometimes on turn 2. And there were tons of maindeckable cards that were good against Twin. Spellskite, hand disruption, LotV, creature removal, Abrupt Decay, counterspells. These are all maindeckable things that were good against Twin. And then in your sideboard you can bring in hosers like Choke, Boil, Rending Volley, Nature's Claim, Rakdos Charm, Torpor Orb, and the new Authority of the Consuls if it's ever unbanned.
The prison decks you pointed to are all much easier to beat than the Twin Combo and that is why they are far less played. You want to beat a Blood Moon deck, fetch up some basics, Lantern Control is also easily beaten by most of the same tools used to beat affinity. Not being hypocritical Blood Moon its self doesn't make it so that you cannot play the game, it punishes greedy mana bases if your running 24 lands and Blood Moon shuts your deck down that is really your fault, perfect mana is not a given in the game no matter how pampered you have been. Twin demands that you simply cannot play anything because you will instantly lose, you will not have a chance to draw out of it like against Blue Moon (which is why that deck kind of sucks). Its funny that you point to CoCo Company as on twins level of broken it is good but it can just wiff, if I tap out on 3 to commit a threat and you go pestermite untap Twin you are not going to wiff.
So if we're going by how easy decks are to beat, then we need to ban every deck that had a higher overall win percentage than Twin, because that clearly means they are harder to beat than Twin. So that means we're banning Bant Company, Death Shadow Aggro, Jeskai Control, Naya Zoo, Affinity, Elves, Soul Sisters, Bogles, and Merfolk. All these decks need something banned from them because they all had higher win percentages than Twin when MTGGoldfish did their analysis of 28k games of Modern a little over a year ago.
And your argument against Twin was that it made you wait until you had enough mana to hold up removal before casting your creatures or whatever else, effectively taxing your mana. What do you think Blood Moon does? Blood Moon stops you from casting your spells because it screws up your mana fixing. Chalice of the Void stops you from casting your spells by countering them. Lantern Control just doesn't let you have relevant spells. These forms of taxing your mana and what spells you can play are totally fine, but Twin making you represent removal is not? And if you're tapping out on 3 to play a threat when you know or suspect you're playing against Twin, then you made a bad play and don't deserve to win that game. It's like tapping out when your opponent has a Blighted Agent across the board. It's a bad play and you can't be mad if you get killed for making it.
Just admit it dude, you just don't like the deck. I could at least respect your opinion of not liking the deck for personal reasons, but every argument you've ever made against Twin in these threads has been really weak and hypocritical when you're fine with other decks that do the exact same things that you complain about Twin for. You don't need to come up with bull*****, just say you don't want the deck back because you don't like it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern UBR Grixis Shadow UBR UR Izzet Phoenix UR UW UW Control UW GB GB Rock GB
Commander BG Meren of Clan Nel Toth BG BGUW Atraxa, Praetor's Voice BGUW
i agree with the twin unban, but maybe twin is just the idea of cards that can speed down (sorry for my english) modern. Id like to play ur twin, but if not twin, i want modern to become more balanced betwin non-interactive and interactive decks without the need of playing bg decks
Guys, please, stop complaining about Twin. It's impossible to unban him now bcs you have to ban some other cards like Ancestral vision to not let him dominate Modern format.
Train left and you can't do anything about this.
I am under the general impression that former twin pilots here have a very poor understanding of how frustrating twin is to play against, especially for newer or more casual players, but even for more experienced ones. It doesn'tlet youplaymagic and is obviouslyunfair. Twin is the kind of blue deck that causes player to hate blue, and there are a lot of players who already hate blue.
Regardless, this thread is a masterpiece of people with bias in one way or another. I don't mind twin and disagreed with the ban, but I do get why people might irrationally hate the deck: it's tilting in the same way lantern is tilting in that you can see your cards, but you know you can't play them the way you want to play them, if at all. Bad feels.
~~~
I think wasteland and force of will would solve the format. Also, preordain is secretly card advantage and would help control a lot. Jace is a trap, Mystic is seriously overrated, and this thread is hilarious.
Not sure if this has ever been discussed or not as a way to test cards on the ban list, but what would you guys think of a "parole" approach. With this model, Wizards could designate a card for a parole period so to speak, declaring a temporary, pseudo-unban. During this time, the selected card is legal for modern play, and in an effort to minimize the effects of unbanning and potentially having to reban a card, Wizards could furnish the community with a sanctioned proxy (perhaps a card frame lacking art or something so it is instantly recognizable)that is available for download on their website. These could also be provided on MTGO pretty effortlessly.
Wizards has demonstrated with the Grave Troll experiment that they are willing to take chances, and I think that this could be a way to do so while removing a lot of the financial risk from the process. This whole experiment could be paired with a new parole feedback system to allow them to gather data more effectively as to what the community thinks about the change. If, after the test period has expired, the card is too strong or dominant, it gets put back on the list and no one is out any money for their efforts. If the card proves to be fine then it could be unbanned proper, and no one could say they suddenly got blindsided by the need to acquire the card.
Sure, this doesn't help the issue of cards getting banned in the first place, but what is there to lose by giving a card a "hearing" once a year and see what happens? How would you react to such an offering by Wizards?
It would make a whole lot of sense, but for two basic problems:
First, any card allowed in such a testing environment would potentially skyrocket in price, because mtg speculation. This could perhaps be overcome by having a regular monthly rotation of what card is allowed to be tested, but this doesn't solve the second problem.
WotC fundamentally operates with a policy of knowing more about what's happening than the playerbase. This has always somewhat concerned me, but it comes up a lot: they hate leaks, they don't want sites mining too much metagame data, and they keep most discussion of bans/formats secret. They CANNOT know exactly what the effects of unbanning, say, preordain would be, without giving it a proper amount of testing. The only way to test this is to use the playerbase; WotC will never have another more effective testing resource. WotC doesn't like keeping the playerbase in the know about future actions, and so precludes this option. WotC prefers ambiguity and uncertainty internally rather than the playerbase have concrete data, which I think is frankly somewhat silly when something like MTGO exists.
Of all the things WotC does, this one I hate, because it is a remarkably outdated practice overall. The overwhelming opaqueness of their game management is just baffling when, yes, they could easily have modern leagues where cards x-y-z are temporarily unbanned for data collection purposes. Oh well.
While I agree with most of your points regarding wizards transparency, I don't see how a price increase based on a pseudo-unban would be worse or on par with that of an actual, surprise unban. At the very least, every player would know that there is a chance this card may not come off the list to begin with, so they can all act accordingly. Again, the feedback system I mentioned could help to assuage this to a point, maybe have a dynamic "approval rating" on the website.
Yes, I realize that this flies in the face of everything Wizards has done up until this point in terms of sharing information, but I know I am not alone in wanting more communication from this company. This was more just a thought experiment at what the community would view as an acceptable "olive branch" in terms of letting us in a little bit so that we can actualy make choices instead of throwing up our hands and posting about how if X, Y, or Z happens, we will sell our entire collection.
That being said, I agree with the sentiment of whoever posted something to the effect of "if you want to play with a card on the ban list, buy it now." Dig the well long before you get thirsty and all that. Even if the card never come off, it's price will likely hover around its banned value anyway.
Does anyone go around talking up about how Shocklands are "sooooo goooood" and how they'd be used in addition to regular duals in Legacy/Vintage because of that fact?
I'm not complaining about Serum Visions. I'm simply arguing that it is not "sooooo goooood", as claimed by "ashtonkutcher" before going on to essentially say why Serum Visions is good enough for Modern when it really isn't.
Shocklands are good enough however, making that analogy irrelevant.
Serum Visions ranks among the top 10 most played spells in Modern. Clearly it's good. The amount of consistency it provides is well worth the 4 slots.
If the best cantrip in Modern was Peek then you'd be justified in calling it terrible, because decks wouldn't play 4 Peek, they'd put 1 land and 3 other spells in those slots instead. But that isn't the case with SV. So SV is good. So good.
Shocklands and SV are powerful cards in Modern. I don't care about them being too weak in Legacy because we're in the Modern forum.
I'm arguing against the implied justification that we don't need something better, like Preordain, in Modern. Quit bringing up Legacy, as I was just countering the comment regarding it. Serum Visions is bad, and so is Sleight of Hand, and Peek. All of the blue 1 mana can trips in Modern currently, are bad. We need better. Unban Preordain.
That is all I'm saying. So try to understand the context of the argument.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
LOL. Maybe it was a bit overblown, because I don't know what hypothetical DTT deck would be "best." But I played with DTT a LOT in Standard and it made me feel like I was playing a totally different format. Well.. at least until Abzan started running Crackling Doom. The card is totally nuts in a control shell. 2 mana to find what you need at instant speed. It's really hard to whiff when digging 7 deep for any two cards.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
"Force of give modern a safety valve"
UU2- maybe UU3
Counter target spell
You may cast this card without paying its mana cost if you sacrifice an island
Control lives on always making its land drops and getting to the late game. The deckbuilding cost of this card would be real(needs islands), but would not be a "must play blue" that many people are worried about. It would also be harder for decks like ad naus to take advantage of because while they have blue mana they rarely have very many islands and having one in play before going off may or may not be able to happen.
I suppose Pact of Negation would be an annoying problem, but I would be fine trading it for Dig on the banlist if necessary. Besides, Control can search out plenty of cards that win or stabilize the game on the spot, such as Gifts Ungiven or Madcap Experiment. The problem is finding them quickly enough and finding enough answers to survive long enough to cast them. Dig would help a lot with this. Dig would also help Tempo and blue midrange a lot.
Just because a card is too powerful for Legacy doesn't make it too powerful for Modern.
I know that. I personally would say that Twin wouldn't be broken in Modern and Dig probably wouldn't be, but Dig is definitely more powerful than Twin. The reason why I am suggesting Dig over Twin is because Dig would add more diversity to blue decks while Twin would just be a single good blue deck.
I do agree that Dig is probably never going to be unbanned. I am just saying that, even if it became widely played (and I doubt that it would be any more widely played than other Modern staples like Bolt, Push, Path, Goyf, Serum Visions, etc.), I think it wouldn't break the format.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Spirits
Hey, let's just drop Elspeth, Sun's champion against Jund, I'll dig through my deck, and if I don't find it, I'll chain another Dig to find it.
And you think combo decks won't abuse this? Combo decks will even warp itself if it can to play Dig, why the hell shouldn't they?
I would never, ever, ever play a midrange deck in a format with dig through time, you will be demolished and buried in CA and perfect answers and threats.
Combo will become rougher for midrange decks, people will probably result to aggro if they don't play combo.
Scapeshift will play a bunch of things like electroyze to fill up their GY, mana, and win with their combo, probably to the point that people would be begging for a DTT ban and a Twin unban, then we'd get stupid ass comments like, "is it time for Scapeshift to get a ban?
I know we've all talked about DTT in passing here and there in the year, but it's usually been like 2 posts and the thread moves on.
This talk is by far some of the worst I've ever read in this thread, and it becomes very difficult to take this thread seriously
Like, seriously, if we unban DDT let's just unban POD, Twin, DRS, BBE, Jace and SFM while we're at it.
This is why pact of negation's design was supremely flawed and I think in modern boseiju and cavern more than cover the reactive deck that could even begin to be a thing in modern. DTT is probably the selection that control needs, but I'd try preordain first or give a better designed free counter to control.
EDIT: apparently more people agreed while i was typing this up.
All in all, I think it's reasonable to think that DTT would be OK in this meta, but honestly, to me it just seems like the decks that would run were more or less oppressed by much stronger decks that were available at the time, which makes it hard to really say whether it would be safe in a meta with a much lower power level than back then. I think something like Preordain, which digs through fewer cards and only cantrips, would be a much safer unban than DTT. As a side note, if someone could find metagame statistics for the DTT/TC meta, I'd really like to see that since the World Championship data was the best I could find
Modern:
UWUW Control
UBRGrixis Shadow
URIzzet Phoenix
RIP Splinter Twin 2010-2016
As far as I can tell, most of the problems that people have with Dig Through Time involve Pact of Negation. I know that Wizards doesn't do swap bans, but I think almost all of the potential problems with Dig would be eliminated if Pact was banned.
I agree with this overall. I also think that the best Delver decks would be Jeskai if Dig was unbanned. Grixis Delver and Temur Delver are too reliant on delve creatures for their main threats to be able to as easily transition to Dig Through Time while UR Delver good solely because of the card velocity that Gitaxian Probe and Treasure Cruise helped provide.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
1. The problem with blue decks (when I say blue decks I'm talking about attrition based blue decks and not things like Bant Eldrazi, Infect, or Merfolk) trying to play a control strategy via attrition is that the strategy to get to a point where attrition matters is very difficult via deck composition itself. A lot of control decks have to play 24+ lands versus aggro decks often playing a much lower number (Death's Shadow playing ~18). That makes it tough when you may have 6+ more lands in your deck than your opponent. Compare that to Legacy where Miracles runs ~21 land. That matters in a game designed to get to topdecking. If you compare the essential backbone of this to Jund decks it's not that dissimilar. Jund decks are attrition decks that have a goal of ending up with both players having nothing in hand while the Jund player has the only on-board presence. Blue attrition decks often have the goal of the opponent having nothing in hand, neither player having much on the battlefield, and the blue player having an in-hand presence. Strength on-board vs. strength in-hand is a big difference when a tarmogoyf can close out a game in 3 or 4 attacks.
2. Card advantage (one route for attrition) is difficult in older formats because the mana investment to add more cards to hand has a significant opportunity cose. Esper Charm is a great magic card but very constraining on manabases. Things like Kolaghan's Command, Electrolyze, Think Twice, Ancestral Vision, Cryptic Command all provide options for card advantage but have big constraints in them. Again, compare that to Miracles which is running Predict; Jace, the Mind Sculptor; and Snapcaster Mage as card advantage in most builds with built in CA via cards like Counterbalance + Top as well.
3. Life totals are under a fair bit more stress in Modern as well with needing to often shock yourself once or twice based on deckbuilding mana constraints (look at how a Grixis Control deck plays). This is one of the reasons why things like Burn are more popular in modern relative to legacy.
These three deckbuilding constraints make it a risky proposition trying to play long and win via reactive attrition. I think it's very easy to look at deckbuilding options and realize that countermagic is often worse than discard. Spending one mana (and maybe some life) and a card to (ideally) take a card from your opponent is technically a tempo-negative play, it may be more efficient than holding up modern's situational countermagic.
Blue attrition decks are really (and have been for a long time) struggling to have something worth working towards. Esper Control is working towards a big token production spell or refuelling with Sphinx's Revelation. Grixis Control grinds card advantage one step at a time until its resources run over the opponent. Decks of this style work towards incremental advantage. Compare this to decks like Twin of old or Scapeshift with Blue. They can make use of Remand because they have the ability to have a bit more of a proactive gameplan that lets them have something to clearly work towards. That is their clock (if they survive enough to assemble the requisite cards they win). Attrition style decks miss out on that and that's one reason why decks like Blue Moon never quite held a metashare like Splinter Twin could. This is why decks with AV and Sword of the Meek haven't been able to take off once added to the format after Twin left.
That's not to say that blue doesn't have excellent cards, or even threats. Snapcaster, Vendilion Clique, Delver of Secrets, Geist, Spell Queller are all really good magic cards.
But what it boils down to is that people wanting to play an attrition strategy as well as a blue deck are starting to realize that blue's traditional strength of being a reactive counterspell deck are quite limited. Look at Corey Burkhart's GP list (4 Cryptics, 1 Countersqall, 1 Logic Knot, 2 Spell Snare) and 22 lands. It plays fewer lands than a traditional control deck. It has a small counterspell package and is more focused on removal with 11 spells or the evolution of Esper decks playing maindeck Liliana of the Veil and discard spells.
The traditional reactive attrition strategy of stablize early and grind to the point you can't lose while slowly winning at your leisure is just not as viable in modern as it is in other formats.
This would make it easier for multi colored decks to get going in the start of the game without having to lose 3 life, while being easily fetchable.
RIP Splinter Twin 2010-2016
Infect, Cheeri0s, Abzan Company, Goryo's Reanimator, Gifts Storm, etc.
We have decks like Lantern Control, RW Prison, Blue Moon, and Skred Red that basically just try to stop you from playing Magic at all, but having to hold up removal mana is too much for you? You're being hypocritical if you think these decks are ok but Twin wasn't.
Yeah, this is what I always tell people when they bring up the price argument. If you think you would want to play with a card that's often in unban discussions, like Jace or SFM, you should already have a playset. You have no one to blame but yourself if it gets unbanned, the price jumps up, and you end up having to pay Tarmogoyf prices for them.
This is one of the best ideas I've ever heard on this site, lol. There's already precedence for gold bordered cards. They could do that, make them available for purchase directly from them for like a dollar a piece so they even make some money off this. The gold bordered versions are tournament legal during the parole period, and then when it finishes if they decide to keep the card unbanned they then say the gold bordered versions are no longer tournament legal, so you need real copies. This is a great idea!
I orgasmed a little when I read this sentence....
UBR Grixis Shadow UBR
UR Izzet Phoenix UR
UW UW Control UW
GB GB Rock GB
Commander
BG Meren of Clan Nel Toth BG
BGUW Atraxa, Praetor's Voice BGUW
I really don't think wizards needs to think about nerfing 6 or 7 mana planeswalkers. Like at all. While tron is doing OK at the moment (because of collective brutality) it was only just recently on the metagame trashpile, and control is only hovering above the baseline of "maybe playable".
Surely any lessons from modern that need to be learnt are to do with fast aggro decks like dredge, and the effect of shocklands, making aggro and burn better than they are in any other format. Right?
When have big elspeth or Karn ever been an actual problem in modern? I can't think of a single time.
so instant win infinite combos are "fair"
Pod proves your statement about "bans that are supposed to shape and level the playing field, but none of them have actually worked" statement is completely wrong, while Pod was legal no other value creature decks existed in any competitive sense.
What does Pod prove? That we have the same damn menace with Collected Company now? How about Goryo's Vengeance? How about Through the Breach? What's the actual difference when we have decks that kill you turn 3 anyway? Why are you being so selective where you think some decks deserve a banning and others not?
This banned list is completely arbitrary, and yes for me personally Birthing Pod pushes the line of being a broken card in the Modern format. Yet at the same time, we never had any decent blue consistency cards unbanned to try and keep Pod in check.
It's definitely one of the cards I think deserves a second chance in a format that isn't being arbitrarily sculpted, based on people who complain because they suck at Magic.
Cheeri0's is a deck that is easy to beat if you interact with them. Infect the same. the only decks you pointed out that actually attempt to strictly do a similar thing are Goyro's and Storm and those are currently no where near as consistent as the Twin combo. Cheeri0's and Infect actually force you play magic you need to interact with them to beat them. Twin had 2 dedicated hate cards and was still better than the hate because of the 3 hate cards only one was good enough to run main deck.
The prison decks you pointed to are all much easier to beat than the Twin Combo and that is why they are far less played. You want to beat a Blood Moon deck, fetch up some basics, Lantern Control is also easily beaten by most of the same tools used to beat affinity. Not being hypocritical Blood Moon its self doesn't make it so that you cannot play the game, it punishes greedy mana bases if your running 24 lands and Blood Moon shuts your deck down that is really your fault, perfect mana is not a given in the game no matter how pampered you have been. Twin demands that you simply cannot play anything because you will instantly lose, you will not have a chance to draw out of it like against Blue Moon (which is why that deck kind of sucks). Its funny that you point to CoCo Company as on twins level of broken it is good but it can just wiff, if I tap out on 3 to commit a threat and you go pestermite untap Twin you are not going to wiff.
If the best cantrip in Modern was Peek then you'd be justified in calling it terrible, because decks wouldn't play 4 Peek, they'd put 1 land and 3 other spells in those slots instead. But that isn't the case with SV. So SV is good. So good.
Shocklands and SV are powerful cards in Modern. I don't care about them being too weak in Legacy because we're in the Modern forum.
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
You're such an unbelievable hypocrite, dude. Cheeri0s and Infect are fine because you can beat them by interacting with them? What exactly do you think beat Twin? Twin's worst matchups were all the interactive decks in the format. And Twin couldn't win before turn 4, whereas decks like Infect, UR Battle Rage, and especially Cheeri0s can win regularly on turn 3, and sometimes on turn 2. And there were tons of maindeckable cards that were good against Twin. Spellskite, hand disruption, LotV, creature removal, Abrupt Decay, counterspells. These are all maindeckable things that were good against Twin. And then in your sideboard you can bring in hosers like Choke, Boil, Rending Volley, Nature's Claim, Rakdos Charm, Torpor Orb, and the new Authority of the Consuls if it's ever unbanned.
So if we're going by how easy decks are to beat, then we need to ban every deck that had a higher overall win percentage than Twin, because that clearly means they are harder to beat than Twin. So that means we're banning Bant Company, Death Shadow Aggro, Jeskai Control, Naya Zoo, Affinity, Elves, Soul Sisters, Bogles, and Merfolk. All these decks need something banned from them because they all had higher win percentages than Twin when MTGGoldfish did their analysis of 28k games of Modern a little over a year ago.
And your argument against Twin was that it made you wait until you had enough mana to hold up removal before casting your creatures or whatever else, effectively taxing your mana. What do you think Blood Moon does? Blood Moon stops you from casting your spells because it screws up your mana fixing. Chalice of the Void stops you from casting your spells by countering them. Lantern Control just doesn't let you have relevant spells. These forms of taxing your mana and what spells you can play are totally fine, but Twin making you represent removal is not? And if you're tapping out on 3 to play a threat when you know or suspect you're playing against Twin, then you made a bad play and don't deserve to win that game. It's like tapping out when your opponent has a Blighted Agent across the board. It's a bad play and you can't be mad if you get killed for making it.
Just admit it dude, you just don't like the deck. I could at least respect your opinion of not liking the deck for personal reasons, but every argument you've ever made against Twin in these threads has been really weak and hypocritical when you're fine with other decks that do the exact same things that you complain about Twin for. You don't need to come up with bull*****, just say you don't want the deck back because you don't like it.
UBR Grixis Shadow UBR
UR Izzet Phoenix UR
UW UW Control UW
GB GB Rock GB
Commander
BG Meren of Clan Nel Toth BG
BGUW Atraxa, Praetor's Voice BGUW
Train left and you can't do anything about this.
And yeah. Authority of the Consuls can't stop Pastermite or Krasis from killing you with Twin.
Regardless, this thread is a masterpiece of people with bias in one way or another. I don't mind twin and disagreed with the ban, but I do get why people might irrationally hate the deck: it's tilting in the same way lantern is tilting in that you can see your cards, but you know you can't play them the way you want to play them, if at all. Bad feels.
~~~
I think wasteland and force of will would solve the format. Also, preordain is secretly card advantage and would help control a lot. Jace is a trap, Mystic is seriously overrated, and this thread is hilarious.
While I agree with most of your points regarding wizards transparency, I don't see how a price increase based on a pseudo-unban would be worse or on par with that of an actual, surprise unban. At the very least, every player would know that there is a chance this card may not come off the list to begin with, so they can all act accordingly. Again, the feedback system I mentioned could help to assuage this to a point, maybe have a dynamic "approval rating" on the website.
Yes, I realize that this flies in the face of everything Wizards has done up until this point in terms of sharing information, but I know I am not alone in wanting more communication from this company. This was more just a thought experiment at what the community would view as an acceptable "olive branch" in terms of letting us in a little bit so that we can actualy make choices instead of throwing up our hands and posting about how if X, Y, or Z happens, we will sell our entire collection.
That being said, I agree with the sentiment of whoever posted something to the effect of "if you want to play with a card on the ban list, buy it now." Dig the well long before you get thirsty and all that. Even if the card never come off, it's price will likely hover around its banned value anyway.
I'm arguing against the implied justification that we don't need something better, like Preordain, in Modern. Quit bringing up Legacy, as I was just countering the comment regarding it. Serum Visions is bad, and so is Sleight of Hand, and Peek. All of the blue 1 mana can trips in Modern currently, are bad. We need better. Unban Preordain.
That is all I'm saying. So try to understand the context of the argument.