Hey guys, with the rise of Lantern Control on MODO, if it starts picking up IRL, should we be worried about it getting hit similar to Eggs? I know Lantern isn't that slow but it's still not fast and is a playing style that WotC despises...
Not sure it'll get a banhammer right now. It definitely does not abuse T4...by definition. It does lock out opponents, but it can be beat as well. Affinity hate also hates on Lantern. And (experienced) Magic players will always leave SB slots for Artifact and Enchantment removal. Though I can see Lantern being nerfed (and not killed) by banning Ensnaring Bridge.
Is a match lottery really that big of a deal? It seems players either complain about lack of diversity, or too much diversity. What is the happy medium?
Variance is a built-in lottery anyways, and we dont try to fix variance in any way (apart from better deck construction). Diversity is better than a small pool of dominant decks, and everything else is just rogue.
Long post incoming...
I had this exact discussion the other day so I'm going post a personal summation of experiences and interactions, which I feel is also a norm for most people I interact with.
Diversity - This is the touchiest of topics as of late, what counts as diverse? Is it your mana base and spells or the philosophy of interaction? I feel as of the past year, people definitely tend toward the latter. It's deck philosophy, I would bet money on it. It's probably difficult playing against Signal Pest match 1, then Goblin Guide match 2, and then Glistener Elf match 3 then be able to emotionally handle yourself, and claim Modern is diverse. This is the harsh problem with the NWO of how Magic is being developed. Everything includes interaction for the highest extent on the board. It feels like Magic is being developed to be a worse Hearthstone. Our recently printed removal comes at high costs or sorcery speed, our threats out tempo our removal in great strides, and our life totals mean next to nothing. With the printing of 4 Standard Sets a year, a newly announced Modern Masters, and a supplementary product, Modern will only receive problematic cards, and our situation will extrapolate. Not only is diversity among the populace a difficult definition, but the philosophy of deck building with newer printings only give the situation muddy waters. We aren't getting premier removal, and we are receiving more premier threats.
Variance - Magic the Gathering has been outclassed, and this isn't just a Modern problem. A side effect of what was described above make this game have high variance. If premier threats are stronger than our premier removal, than proactivity is the only possible reward. If being proactive is the only positive strategy, we become less and less interactive with each other from mulligan decisions to ignoring board states. This is where I believe our feelings become prevalent when we speak about decks like Bant Eldrazi, Infect, Affinity, Burn, Suicide Zoo, Storm, Ad Nauseam, etc. The best choices for entering a tournament are the decks that make less choices in game. Magic is too much lottery, from Aetherworks Marvel to Serum Visions. Your proactive draw determines your fate, and your mulligans punish you more than ever before. The amount of stress I see in a single person from just a basic mulligan of 7 to 6 is absolutely devastating to watch, but it's justified.
There are 3 issues Wizards needs to address in January with the B&R announcement
1. How they will promote the growth of Modern going forward - I know this has been done to death, but the lack of unbannings, and any lack of reasoning for unbannings or bannings causes large skepticism, 3 months is too long to just be disappointed over and over, the Modern Masters set release annualy is something that should have happened years ago.
2. How they want to vision the format in terms of balance - It's obvious removal/card draw/consistency/defense mechanics/police cards are overall horrible. The ones that are in guidance for the format, even are talked about as being ban targets. Those examples are primarily Blood Moon and Ensnaring Bridge, these cards are forced to be the only police cards in the format, and by such a factor, they are envisioned as evil or restrictive of game play. The truth is Karn Liberated being slammed turn 3 is restricting game play, Glistener Elf forcing your mana every turn is restricting game play, and Dredge pushing resilient creatures from the top 18 cards of their deck is restricting gameplay.
3. Last but not least, Wizards needs to start justifying why all the fair cards, and cantrips on the banned list are still banned. Ponder, Preordain, Bloodbraid Elf, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, & Stoneforge Mystic. Midrange decks as a meta-share are completely suffering, along with control and combo. All of these cards have been banned or preemptively banned from the format to ensure those decks are never dominant, yet looking at the metagame percentages, that situation is nowhere near the truth and by knowledge of the format from a simplistic point of view, the removal of these cards won't even solve all the problems we are currently facing, but it would be a great direction in the steps forward.
They need to justify why we live in aggro world for 6 frustrating months with no action at all. They need to justify their complete lack of attention towards Modern players for over a year from helping the format grow and get better. If they lack any motivation to ensure the health of the Modern format, why are they in charge of the banned list?
Hey guys, with the rise of Lantern Control on MODO, if it starts picking up IRL, should we be worried about it getting hit similar to Eggs? I know Lantern isn't that slow but it's still not fast and is a playing style that WotC despises...
Not sure it'll get a banhammer right now. It definitely does not abuse T4...by definition. It does lock out opponents, but it can be beat as well. Affinity hate also hates on Lantern. And (experienced) Magic players will always leave SB slots for Artifact and Enchantment removal. Though I can see Lantern being nerfed (and not killed) by banning Ensnaring Bridge.
No bridge would kill it and match lottery is the main reason pros hated a protour for modern and just played twin if I recall.
WOTC has the issue that design is so far ahead that they just can't deal with issues by printing cards for years. By then even if they did we'all have a new set of issues/busted cards. Example will be (and I may be 100% wrong because most think the card is trash) pia's revolution type cards that are just a bonus to decks already trying to do their thing but getting bonuses now. KCI/affinity could easily use this type of effect because their spells are free and the sac outlet is real!
3. Last but not least, Wizards needs to start justifying why all the fair cards, and cantrips on the banned list are still banned. Ponder, Preordain, Bloodbraid Elf, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, & Stoneforge Mystic. Midrange decks as a meta-share are completely suffering, along with control and combo. All of these cards have been banned or preemptively banned from the format to ensure those decks are never dominant, yet looking at the metagame percentages, that situation is nowhere near the truth and by knowledge of the format from a simplistic point of view, the removal of these cards won't even solve all the problems we are currently facing, but it would be a great direction in the steps forward.
They need to justify why we live in aggro world for 6 frustrating months with no action at all. They need to justify their complete lack of attention towards Modern players for over a year from helping the format grow and get better. If they lack any motivation to ensure the health of the Modern format, why are they in charge of the banned list?
I believe your posts always have good justification and I often agree, even if I come from a Combo player's point of view. I do actually believe that instead of doing bans, Wizards should try each of those unbans that you suggested, with the possible exception of Ponder. I do believe that no more than 1-2 of them should come off at a time though, but to see 0 time and time again is indeed an insult. I do also believe that Jund is not quite as powerful as many think it is. It struggles in many matchups and there simply are few gimmes for it nowadays. Many people play Jund because they paid so much for it; they're not just going to shelve the deck, especially when a simple 1 card unban could make it a player again.
I would like to point out that in a 62 person RPTQ in SoCal today, myself and 2 guys I came with saw exactly 0 Jund/Junk decks. I personally played against 2 Abzan Company decks, my Dredge player friend faced 2 Sun and Moon and 2 Infect, and the Bant Eldrazi player saw 2 Burn. BGx was simply non-existent in a tournament where I felt many were trying to next level one another. Jund was NOT a player. When do you expect to see more Sun and Moon than BGx?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
3. Last but not least, Wizards needs to start justifying why all the fair cards, and cantrips on the banned list are still banned. Ponder, Preordain, Bloodbraid Elf, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, & Stoneforge Mystic. Midrange decks as a meta-share are completely suffering, along with control and combo. All of these cards have been banned or preemptively banned from the format to ensure those decks are never dominant, yet looking at the metagame percentages, that situation is nowhere near the truth and by knowledge of the format from a simplistic point of view, the removal of these cards won't even solve all the problems we are currently facing, but it would be a great direction in the steps forward.
They need to justify why we live in aggro world for 6 frustrating months with no action at all. They need to justify their complete lack of attention towards Modern players for over a year from helping the format grow and get better. If they lack any motivation to ensure the health of the Modern format, why are they in charge of the banned list?
I believe your posts always have good justification and I often agree, even if I come from a Combo player's point of view. I do actually believe that instead of doing bans, Wizards should try each of those unbans that you suggested, with the possible exception of Ponder. I do believe that no more than 1-2 of them should come off at a time though, but to see 0 time and time again is indeed an insult. I do also believe that Jund is not quite as powerful as many think it is. It struggles in many matchups and there simply are few gimmes for it nowadays. Many people play Jund because they paid so much for it; they're not just going to shelve the deck, especially when a simple 1 card unban could make it a player again.
I would like to point out that in a 62 person RPTQ in SoCal today, myself and 2 guys I came with saw exactly 0 Jund/Junk decks. I personally played against 2 Abzan Company decks, my Dredge player friend faced 2 Sun and Moon and 2 Infect, and the Bant Eldrazi player saw 2 Burn. BGx was simply non-existent in a tournament where I felt many were trying to next level one another. Jund was NOT a player. When do you expect to see more Sun and Moon than BGx?
I don't see how unbanning cards like Bloodbraid Elf or Jace, the Mind Sculptor helps any deck beat any of the aggro decks that people complain about. They simply help cement your deck as the best Mid-range(in BBE's case) or the best Control(in JtMS' case).
I find it funny that BGx players are complaining about how poorly their deck is doing. It is still tier 1 and still the most played single deck in Modern.
IMO the problems BGx has atm have nothing to do with the format being unhealthy but are all rooted in logical out growths in the format. BGx is currently having a hard time dealing with the variety of decks that prey on the traditional BGx play style, decks like Infect, Burn, DSZoo, etc.. and other "linear" strategies are generally well positioned against the average BGx attrition build. BGx has traditionally been able to deal with similar shifts in the meta-game but new factors in the meta-game have pushed it into attempting to play a less focused and more "generally good" build. The first of the new factors is Bant Eldrazi, which has pushed BGx decks out of the status of defacto best mid-range deck, it is a slightly bigger and slightly better mid-range deck and this is a axis of competition that BGx has never had to deal with in moderns history. In the past the only question was which BGx deck would you play if you wanted to play mid-range now that is challenged.
The other factor is the rise of dredge which pairs up well against the traditional BGx removal suite and make discard spells generally bad. BGx has the means to defeat anyone of these strategies but not all at once. It could be built to deal with Bant Eldrazi decks but would suffer to much against fast aggro, it could build to beat fast aggro but would be crushed by Bant Eldrazi going way over it, Dredge has always been a deck that requires SB hate but between low end aggro and over top Bant Eldrazi BGx decks cannot be prepared for everything and anything in the format.
IMO this mostly evidence that BGx is the single Best decks given that every other deck that is doing well tends to attack BGx decks. This has been a trend since the banning of Birthing Pod, both BGx and Twin decks are generally weak against linear aggro decks like infect(which was not held in check by Twin like some people will say but was held in check by one of the best decks maindecking direct hate against it)Pod was great against infect aggro/combo and pretty much was the worst match up any deck looking to go under BGx or Twin decks could face, things like Burn or DSZoo would just fold in the face of the infinite life combo.
I'm going to drop this in here while the thread is young. Consider this my manifesto for what modern, in my mind, SHOULD be:
Premise 1:
Modern exists as an alternative to legacy, where many different playstyles and every strategic deck archetype can exist in a viable form, which is not subject to the restrictions of the reserve list. In essence, it should fill the "ability to scratch any itch" status that legacy and vintage have, without the card availability issues.
Premise 2a:
Modern SHOULD exist as a format into which standard decks of rotating formats should be able to pass in spirit, if not in letter. If you enjoyed playing Mono Black Devotion or UW Elixir in RTR-Theros standard, there should be viable versions of those decks (grindy UW control with a late game backed by sphinx's revelation, or mono-black midrange powered by thoughtseize and efficient black removal and creatures). If your jam was more Jeskai-Black, there should be a four-color midrange deck capable of grinding from aggressive creatures to a hard control route. If you were an Atarka Red player, there should be a fast aggressive creature deck in Red and Green for you to play.
Premise 2b:
NOT EVERY DECK can port directly into modern from standard. The nature of modern is such that its power level will be very high, and that bar only continues to be set higher as time goes on. Decks based around block-mechanic synergy (think energy/aetherworks marvel) should probably port to modern with improved consistency and power level; decks based more around powerful individual cards and "goodstuff" strategies (like GB delirium in current standard) should have a much higher bar. Both decks are available as strategies in modern--GB delirium as either of the BGx midrange shells, aetherworks marvel as an actual aetherworks marvel deck, or any number of other spell-cheating mechanics (be it through the breach, goryo's vengeance, or pyretic ritual and friends).
Premise 2c:
The number of cards that enter "widespread" modern play from standard should reduce over time, as a general rule. This is because power creep in the game is slow but cyclical--in an ideal world, new cards would enter an already stable, balanced modern metagame on the basis of synergy between other card in the modern pool, or tools in modern enabling parasitic set mechanics (energy, soulshift, ninjitsu, morph) to become more synergistically powerful than they were during their standard formats, and not because these cards are general strict upgrades in power level to cards in existing decks. This is not to say that some sets introduce a lot of cards into modern (Oath of the Gatewatch) or that every set should have something for modern (looking at you, born of the gods).
Premise 3:
In the interest of providing a sustainable format, it is in the interest of everyone that the format be cyclical or self-correcting; periodically increasing the size of the ban list in response to increasing power level of individual archetypes and strategies is ineffective as a management tool for the format because it only delays the inevitable creep of powerlevel in various archetypes. Therefore, cards should only be on the banned list for extenuating circumstances: either the card is fundamentally a mistake of magic design (or functions in a synergistic way that behaves in a similar fashion to other design mistakes), the card is directly and solely enabling of an archetype or archetypes that infringe upon tournament mechanics and time constraints, the card is solely enabling of an archetype that absolutely and unavoidably inhibits format diversity in a manner that is either detrimental to overall tournament attendance or is resistant to natural metagame correction, or the card inhibits design space in a way that is limiting with regards to the previous three reasons.
Based on these premises, we can derive a few more pieces of information:
Derivation 1:
mental misstep, Skullclamp, and second sunrise absolutely must remain on the banlist for being known violators of tournament mechanics or design mistakes, and their unbanning should be taken only with extreme precaution, or as a publicized "test" to see if they are once again suitable for the evolved modern format.
umezzawa's Jitte deserves close scrutiny as a potential "design mistake" ban candidate or should remain banned as such
sensei's divining top should either remain banned or be watched carefully as a potential offender under the tournament mechanics clause,
dark depths and hypergenesis can conceivably remain banned or at least closely watched as potential offenders for infringing upon future design space
dread return, birthing pod, glimpse of nature, eye of ugin, and splinter twin should certainly be watchlisted as being potentially stifling of tournament attendance/metagame diversity, due to the resilience and speed these cards offer to their respective decks. Dread Return in particular may rapidly warrant re-banning.
Derivation 2:
Based on Premise 1, diversity of strategic archetype is important to a healthy modern format. Not every strategic archetype needs to have a tier one deck (tier one prison strategies don't make for good tournaments overall), but they should at least have viable tier 2 contenders, and a dedicated pilot of a given strategic archetype should have a reasonable chance of making Day 2 of large events and an expert pilot should be able to top 8 these events under favorable metagame conditions.
Derivation 3: Based on premise 1, modern should be a format which mirrors the skill-curve of legacy. What this means is that consistently powerful decks (regular tier 1 contenders) should more consistently reward tight play, good metagaming, and knowledge and preparedness for a matchup than they do variance of matchups and opening hands or the die roll. Decks which significantly benefit from favorable pairings, "lucky" variance with opening hands, or benefit more significantly than is normal from the advantage of being on the play should suffer in overall consistency or strength when on the draw. An extremely experienced pilot on a niche archetype should be favored in matchups he has metagamed and specifically prepared for when paired against less individually practiced opponents.
So where does modern stand on these points? Not very well.
In particular:
Modern has very little archetype diversity. At the time of writing, 32%+ of the metagame is fast, goldfishy agro decks, with varying levels of a combo quality--ranging from the all in combo of death's shadow + temur battle rage, the synergy machine of affinity, or the consistent pile that is naya burn, this is a third of the metagame that is essentially looking to goldfish you with fast creatures and a little bit of "reach". By the same numbers, a tad under 15% of the metagame is comprised of "traditional" midrange decks, including BGx and Bant Eldrazi, and then the next 8% or so are "big mana" decks (either of the tron or valakut-based varieties) and then we come in with prison archetypes at a measly 2.5%, and other controlling archetypes not even present enough to be recognized. Actual combo has a representation of one archetype as well (Ad Nauseum combo), and it also sits at about a 2.5% metagame share.
Based on the top 60% of the metagame, we see slightly over half of it (and a third of the overall metagame) comprised of decks filling every shade along the spectrum of aggressive linear creature decks. In an idealized, balanced metagame, we need some sort of cyclical balancing force, which tends to indicate at the very least a rock-paper-scissors trifecta, which would indicate at most a 20% strategic archetype share in the top 60% is healthy. Traditional midrange occupies a healthy portion of the metagame, "big mana" occupies a reasonable if slightly depressed portion of the metagame, and pure combo and prison are heavily under-represented, and actual control is absent entirely.
Takeaway: Modern is too linear, and needs some form of improvement to enable the prevalence and diversity of pure combo and controlling decks.
When it comes to the idea of a skill-curve, modern is woefully inadequate. Most of the complaints that come about modern from the professional community stem from the fact that there are too many different decks that require sideboard cards to consistently beat, or that there is no reasonable deck that can perform at a consistent 50-50 against the format at large. What most people take away from this complaint is the idea that Pro's either want there to be a narrow metagame (easy to attack, but boring for non-professional players who want a varied and diverse format), or that pro's want an OP deck (jund to be 55-45 or better against everything), or even that they just refuse to actually learn the intricacies of the format and that they refuse to invest the time to overcome these barriers to consistently performing well.
The disconnect here is that most people reading these commentaries mis-understand the intent of what these Pros mean. They don't care that a dedicated modern specialist can overcome bad matchups--in fact, most professional players would prefer if this were more strongly the case! They also don't want a deck that is universally better than 50-50 against the metagame at large--such a deck leads to very repetitive professional events, and increases the variance inherent in performance even among the pro's, which (they feel) takes away their own control over their professional livelihood.
What the professionals want is a format where the pool of competitive decks is diverse AND in which their personal skill (whether at magic in general, or in a specific archetype that they take the time investment to master) matters MORE in an individual matchup than luck of the die roll, archetype matchup, and variance in opening hands.
Takeaway: Professional players, and likely players in general, don't particularly care about *where* the powerlevel in the format is. What they want is the ability to leverage their personal time investment in the format and their own skill at metagaming and understanding specific matchups (things they have AGENCY over) more than the things they don't have agency over (like whether they win a die roll, get a favorable matchup, or draw their sideboard cards in their opening hand).
Conclusion:
It is my belief that the *best* solution for the long-term health and sustainability of the modern format is to release the large majority of the cards from the modern B&R list and see where things shake out after six months. Modern has already demonstrated that cards that are initially powerful or stifling of competitive diversity can, over time, be adjusted to by the available card pool and metagame. Since the initial banned list of the community cup, bitterblossom, wild nacatl, valakut, the molten pinnacle, and ancestral vision have been banned and subsequently unbanned. Additionally, sword of the meek, golgari grave-troll, both cards that don't really fit any of the ban description categories I listed, have come off of the banned list and not really been trouble for any real numerical reason.
At their core, what these cards do is allow decks to consistently execute their gameplan or locate narrow, matchup specific tools.
GSZ, dig through time, ponder, and to a lesser extent preordain allow decks to execute their gameplan by finding exactly what is needed in a slightly longer game, or the cantrips backed by treasure cruise ensure that faster decks (and some combo decks) can consistently churn through their decks without loosing too much velocity. In general, I believe that an unbanning of this entire set of cards ultimately favors fair decks, because the fast combo decks are all very soft to the 1 and 2 mana blue permission spells. Furthermore, grave hate actually is fairly strong against all of the combo decks involved with using treasure cruise, and the incentive to play strong grave hate also weakens other potentially-very-strong linear archetypes. Finally, most of the unfair combo decks that utilize these cards are very soft to certain individual hatebears, for which the presence of GSZ in the format is a huge step forward in playability, as an archetype or as part of a fair strategy.
Cards in this category exclusively serve spell based non-interactive combo. Again, this is a category that is currently very under-represented in the modern metagame at the present time, and again, this category of deck is usually weak to grave hate. Also, these decks are universally soft to cheap permission and a fast clock. In other words, these decks are competitive with the other fast linear decks. Chrome mox in particular I think might open up some archetype space--only affinity actually gets a real mana accelerant in the format, and it may be interesting to see what shakes out when other decks get access to a mana dork (deathrite shaman) or a fast mana rock with a steep cost (chrome mox). The worry here in my mind is that summer bloom might be too strong given that it's a lot less soft to normal interaction, but at the same time it's still hard for it to deal with mana leak and spell pierce backed up by a clock. It also just loses to blood moon.
With the majority of the cards being unbanned in current modern components of grindy fair decks, and the circumstances under which they were unbanned, it seems pretty reasonable that most of these cards return. Questions surround two of them in particular: Deathrite shaman, as potentially limiting diversity among fair decks, and Bloodbraid elf, because it would push Jund even harder than it already is. The obvious rebuttal here is that DRS is necessary to power up most of the fair decks to adequately compete with the newer, faster combo decks, and it provides a swiss army knife of interaction for dealing with the various non-fair decks in the format. Punishing fire is obviously important to deal with the fact that the new combo decks likely feature a version of elves, and they also provide an engine for the fair decks to compete with control decks going long.
In all honesty, Blazing Shoal was banned before become immense was printed, and if you compare early builds of blazing infect to builds of today, I think you will quickly realize that newer builds, while a tad slower, are much more resilient and have a much better chance of interacting with their opponents enough to break serve and win from the back foot. It's a relic of Modern's past that it remains on the banned list. Gumming up your deck with four clunky uncastable cards and four very poor pump spells is not where modern infect wants to be.
Cloudpost is likely a stand-in for the urzatron decks, but it is worth noting that the speed with which emrakul mana can be hit is a concern, and this card might be too strong. Currently however, barring the absolute nut draw, it doesn't seem significantly better than tron's turn 3 plays, and it certainly outclasses on turns 5+. On the other hand, it's also fairly easy to profitably interact with the deck, as it's extremely slow and fast (er) mana is certainly a hallmark of this proposed reduction in the modern banlist.
The artifact lands no longer belong on the banned and restricted list. Yes, affinity might possibly become stronger with access to a multitude of sol lands, but remember that the artifact lands are also extremely weak. ancient grudge is now a 3 mana double-vindicate. many of the hate cards against affinity now also serve as complete land destruction spells. and Finally, affinity with artifact lands no longer gets the heavy creature-land manabase that is a huge part of its current flexibility and success--decks should be allowed to go slightly more linear at the cost of flexibility and robustness.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
Two things that seem to have slipped everyone's minds while talking about things like Dredge and Infect (in fact I only knew about these recently when I did a search on mtgtop8):
1) There are a total of 66 decks which played Chandra, Torch of Defiance in the main and/or side ever since Kaladesh was legal. Most of them are fair decks like Jund, Skred Red, Sun & Moon, with the odd LD or Valakut deck here and there.
2) Similarly there are 33 Inventors' Fair decks, 31 of which are Lantern Control.
Oh, and those two decks that everyone has been talking about? 92 Cathartic Reunion and 62 Blossoming Defense (most, but not all, of which are Dredge and Infect respectively).
i think that is time to unban consistency in the format. i feel that there is an inconsitency in wizard's argument about this subject, i mean, infect is really consistent because of it raw power, death shadow has the same power in terms of consistency, burn has reached a critical mass of excelent burn spells, affinity has a lot of bombs that takes advantage of it inner sinergy, but, at the same time, a blue mage cant cast ponder or preordain to find answers, combo decks cannot win consistency and, because of that, are ineficient to race aggro decks. green sun's zenith to find silver bullets is banned to (chord of calling is a card tho), id like to read an explanation by wizards, cause this is ridiculous
edit: id like tosee jace, bloodbraid and stoneforge unbanned too
Glad to see that alot of people believe these cards should be unbanned
Sfm
Jms
Bbe
I think dredge and infect are fine. As there is some sideboard support for these decks.
I feel taking more cards away only hurts modern as a hole.
When eye was banned I was pissed as I spent good money on a card and wizards just takes it away.
I just feel opening the banned cage helps the formate.
Bannings have never, should never, and will never be based on any monetary statistic. Eye deserved a ban.
100% agree. Sorry just venting
Heck I could have sold them and double my money. Lol
But again banning jace and stoneforge in a formate because it was banned in standard makes no sence.
Modern is not standard.
Neither card have been seen in the formate so what proves the banned?
it isn't about proving why they should be banned, but why they should be unbanned. when modern was formed, it was barely different from extended, where these cards proved to be too powerful and needed to be banned. therefore, it is hard to argue that they were a good ban for the time. today, both of these cards continue to be powerhouses in legacy. yes, legacy is most certainly a different format, but the fact that these cards are still big players in the format after nearly a decade of new printings shows they are indeed just as strong as they used to be.
now, this doesn't mean they need to stay banned, plenty of cards have been unbanned with little to no effect on the format! i would even call the ancestral visions unban a positive effect on the format! therefore, it is up to people like you and i to SHOW that these cards are safe for the format. saying that modern is not standard is obvious, but absolutely not a valid reason to unban anything. testing, such as that was done on modern nexus, is what we need to do. we need to also show that the card fits their past urban criteria, meaning the card does not slot into any existing tier 1 strategies and does not create any t4 violating decks. the urban should also help bolster struggling strategies or create new ones entirely. on a complete side note, the unban should achieve a goal, it should fix a stated problem in the format, not just be an urban for the sake of unbanning. GGT was an urban for the sake of unbanning something, it did not create any new, interesting decks, and it did not fix any problems in the format. the result of this was adding a ticking time bomb to the format, which has recently begun to detonate.
i believe that jace is similar to ggt in this way. while it clearly bolsters struggling strategies in the format, it does not do so in a way that fixes the stated problems with the format. if one believes the formats problems are that there are too many linear ago strategies, a jace urban does nothing to aid this. it simply adds a new time bomb to the format. if the format was to slow down with jace in it, a U based deck would absolutely DOMINATE the meta in my opinion. i do not believe this to be a good thing, i am strictly of the opinion that fair decks need a gentle nudge in the right direction, and jace is simply not a gentle nudge. what we need is the following
unban:
sfm
preordain
ban:
prized amalgam
print:
innocent blood
swords to plowshares
thats it, modern would be in a far better place if those were done
it isn't about proving why they should be banned, but why they should be unbanned.
Ok that's a solid idea! Here, let's have a conversation with Mr. Aaron F himself!
AF: We don't like consistency in Modern, so we have placed Preordain and Ponder on the banned list.
MTGSally: That's sorta ridiculous no?
AF: What do you mean?
MTGSally: Well... Burn has 30 redundant spells with the same function, and so does Infect and Boggles. So why do those decks get consistent play and new printings with each Standard set?
AF: Uhhhhh.....
MTGSally: Also, look at Dredge, they can potentially look over their top 18 cards! For just two mana!
AF: Uhhhh.....
MTGSally: Then there's Tron, Eldrazi, and Collected Company decks! They have tutors, the best cantrip in Modern belongs to GREEN, along with fast mana!!!!
Hey guys, with the rise of Lantern Control on MODO, if it starts picking up IRL, should we be worried about it getting hit similar to Eggs? I know Lantern isn't that slow but it's still not fast and is a playing style that WotC despises...
Eggs wasn't hit for being slow, it was hit for having long turns. If a match went to time and your 5 turns started that could be 20 minutes from an eggs player trying to kill you. Not the case with lantern. It's a similar, but important distinction to keep in mind here.
I don't feel unbanning cards like JMS or SFM fixes the issue I see. As there is still turn three kills. Infect and dredge.
What I see is it opens doors for people to brew decks that haven't been see in modern EVER.
I feel doing some major unbanned with out banned cards might help the formate. Let's see if infect or dredge can do what they do if there was a true control deck.
Plus just think of the excitement of modern as a hole if those two cards are taken out of there unjustly prision.
They where both banned when modern as a hole was different.
I don't feel unbanning cards like JMS or SFM fixes the issue I see. As there is still turn three kills. Infect and dredge.
What I see is it opens doors for people to brew decks that haven't been see in modern EVER.
I feel doing some major unbanned with out banned cards might help the formate. Let's see if infect or dredge can do what they do if there was a true control deck.
Plus just think of the excitement of modern as a hole if those two cards are taken out of there unjustly prision.
They where both banned when modern as a hole was different.
dredge will 100% do what its doing if jtms or sfm, or even both were unbanned. the deck preys upon this type of deck. as for turn 3 kills, you will never eliminate them all, at least without adding 50+ cards to the banlist. this is why the t4 rule isn't "can the deck conceivably win before t4, ever?" but "is it a top-tier deck that wins before t4 around 25% of the time".
in addition, it is quite hard to actually argue that those cards create new decks that haven't been in modern before, especially jace. jace quite clearly just goes straight into grins/jeskai, decks we have seen before. the decklists don't even really change, just cut a few cards and add a few jace. sfm has much more potential in this aspect, as there is potentially a puresteel paladin or some other form of W/x equipment matters deck that could easily end up in tier 2. the problem is there are several obvious homes for her that are currently viable in the format that are probably just better, hence hurting said fringe decks chances of actually breaking out.
I wonder instead of bans , why not try unbanning a couple of cards to shake the meta, also how about trying to increase the SB slot from 15 to 20? Modern and Legacy has such a large pool of cards, that I feel 15 sb slots is not enough. For standard with the 6 expansions 15 seems ok.
This thread is full of idiots... Lightning Bolt is NOT being reprinted.
Many times has a writer in Wizards said so, because of the plain and simple fact that it's too powerful for what it costs. x/3 creatures shouldn't be able to die at instant speed for one mana without a signifigant drawback. (like PTE giving you a land)
I absolutely guarantee that LB will not be printed in M10, and you can quote me on that.
SB space is probably not a good topic to start here, but 15 is the number we have, and it should never be increased. Ever. The ramifications are scary, to say the least.
I'm sure this has been discussed at some point on the forum, but has Wizards every mentioned anything about testing bans/unbans on MODO? Similar to how Blizzard implements a PTR in all their games before they patch something. You could run free leagues and such and get feedback from the community. Obviously you'll never be able to know for sure whether a change in the card pool is good or bad for the format, but it could be a way to analyze potentially problem cards without affecting the actual meta.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWR Breach, UWB Esper control
Legacy: UW RiP/Helm, UR Sneak and Show
SB space is probably not a good topic to start here, but 15 is the number we have, and it should never be increased. Ever. The ramifications are scary, to say the least.
Yeah especially adding 5 spots. That could completely change your deck post board. Another reason is because you want play as uniform as possible from format to format.
It would be absolutely absurd to change sideboard slots. You might as well allow people to change decks between games at that point. 15 is already plenty, and if that's not enough, then its a testament to the lack of good, generalized, maindeck answers.
Not sure it'll get a banhammer right now. It definitely does not abuse T4...by definition. It does lock out opponents, but it can be beat as well. Affinity hate also hates on Lantern. And (experienced) Magic players will always leave SB slots for Artifact and Enchantment removal. Though I can see Lantern being nerfed (and not killed) by banning Ensnaring Bridge.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
Long post incoming...
I had this exact discussion the other day so I'm going post a personal summation of experiences and interactions, which I feel is also a norm for most people I interact with.
Diversity - This is the touchiest of topics as of late, what counts as diverse? Is it your mana base and spells or the philosophy of interaction? I feel as of the past year, people definitely tend toward the latter. It's deck philosophy, I would bet money on it. It's probably difficult playing against Signal Pest match 1, then Goblin Guide match 2, and then Glistener Elf match 3 then be able to emotionally handle yourself, and claim Modern is diverse. This is the harsh problem with the NWO of how Magic is being developed. Everything includes interaction for the highest extent on the board. It feels like Magic is being developed to be a worse Hearthstone. Our recently printed removal comes at high costs or sorcery speed, our threats out tempo our removal in great strides, and our life totals mean next to nothing. With the printing of 4 Standard Sets a year, a newly announced Modern Masters, and a supplementary product, Modern will only receive problematic cards, and our situation will extrapolate. Not only is diversity among the populace a difficult definition, but the philosophy of deck building with newer printings only give the situation muddy waters. We aren't getting premier removal, and we are receiving more premier threats.
Variance - Magic the Gathering has been outclassed, and this isn't just a Modern problem. A side effect of what was described above make this game have high variance. If premier threats are stronger than our premier removal, than proactivity is the only possible reward. If being proactive is the only positive strategy, we become less and less interactive with each other from mulligan decisions to ignoring board states. This is where I believe our feelings become prevalent when we speak about decks like Bant Eldrazi, Infect, Affinity, Burn, Suicide Zoo, Storm, Ad Nauseam, etc. The best choices for entering a tournament are the decks that make less choices in game. Magic is too much lottery, from Aetherworks Marvel to Serum Visions. Your proactive draw determines your fate, and your mulligans punish you more than ever before. The amount of stress I see in a single person from just a basic mulligan of 7 to 6 is absolutely devastating to watch, but it's justified.
There are 3 issues Wizards needs to address in January with the B&R announcement
1. How they will promote the growth of Modern going forward - I know this has been done to death, but the lack of unbannings, and any lack of reasoning for unbannings or bannings causes large skepticism, 3 months is too long to just be disappointed over and over, the Modern Masters set release annualy is something that should have happened years ago.
2. How they want to vision the format in terms of balance - It's obvious removal/card draw/consistency/defense mechanics/police cards are overall horrible. The ones that are in guidance for the format, even are talked about as being ban targets. Those examples are primarily Blood Moon and Ensnaring Bridge, these cards are forced to be the only police cards in the format, and by such a factor, they are envisioned as evil or restrictive of game play. The truth is Karn Liberated being slammed turn 3 is restricting game play, Glistener Elf forcing your mana every turn is restricting game play, and Dredge pushing resilient creatures from the top 18 cards of their deck is restricting gameplay.
3. Last but not least, Wizards needs to start justifying why all the fair cards, and cantrips on the banned list are still banned. Ponder, Preordain, Bloodbraid Elf, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, & Stoneforge Mystic. Midrange decks as a meta-share are completely suffering, along with control and combo. All of these cards have been banned or preemptively banned from the format to ensure those decks are never dominant, yet looking at the metagame percentages, that situation is nowhere near the truth and by knowledge of the format from a simplistic point of view, the removal of these cards won't even solve all the problems we are currently facing, but it would be a great direction in the steps forward.
They need to justify why we live in aggro world for 6 frustrating months with no action at all. They need to justify their complete lack of attention towards Modern players for over a year from helping the format grow and get better. If they lack any motivation to ensure the health of the Modern format, why are they in charge of the banned list?
No bridge would kill it and match lottery is the main reason pros hated a protour for modern and just played twin if I recall.
WOTC has the issue that design is so far ahead that they just can't deal with issues by printing cards for years. By then even if they did we'all have a new set of issues/busted cards. Example will be (and I may be 100% wrong because most think the card is trash) pia's revolution type cards that are just a bonus to decks already trying to do their thing but getting bonuses now. KCI/affinity could easily use this type of effect because their spells are free and the sac outlet is real!
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
I believe your posts always have good justification and I often agree, even if I come from a Combo player's point of view. I do actually believe that instead of doing bans, Wizards should try each of those unbans that you suggested, with the possible exception of Ponder. I do believe that no more than 1-2 of them should come off at a time though, but to see 0 time and time again is indeed an insult. I do also believe that Jund is not quite as powerful as many think it is. It struggles in many matchups and there simply are few gimmes for it nowadays. Many people play Jund because they paid so much for it; they're not just going to shelve the deck, especially when a simple 1 card unban could make it a player again.
I would like to point out that in a 62 person RPTQ in SoCal today, myself and 2 guys I came with saw exactly 0 Jund/Junk decks. I personally played against 2 Abzan Company decks, my Dredge player friend faced 2 Sun and Moon and 2 Infect, and the Bant Eldrazi player saw 2 Burn. BGx was simply non-existent in a tournament where I felt many were trying to next level one another. Jund was NOT a player. When do you expect to see more Sun and Moon than BGx?
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)I don't see how unbanning cards like Bloodbraid Elf or Jace, the Mind Sculptor helps any deck beat any of the aggro decks that people complain about. They simply help cement your deck as the best Mid-range(in BBE's case) or the best Control(in JtMS' case).
I find it funny that BGx players are complaining about how poorly their deck is doing. It is still tier 1 and still the most played single deck in Modern.
IMO the problems BGx has atm have nothing to do with the format being unhealthy but are all rooted in logical out growths in the format. BGx is currently having a hard time dealing with the variety of decks that prey on the traditional BGx play style, decks like Infect, Burn, DSZoo, etc.. and other "linear" strategies are generally well positioned against the average BGx attrition build. BGx has traditionally been able to deal with similar shifts in the meta-game but new factors in the meta-game have pushed it into attempting to play a less focused and more "generally good" build. The first of the new factors is Bant Eldrazi, which has pushed BGx decks out of the status of defacto best mid-range deck, it is a slightly bigger and slightly better mid-range deck and this is a axis of competition that BGx has never had to deal with in moderns history. In the past the only question was which BGx deck would you play if you wanted to play mid-range now that is challenged.
The other factor is the rise of dredge which pairs up well against the traditional BGx removal suite and make discard spells generally bad. BGx has the means to defeat anyone of these strategies but not all at once. It could be built to deal with Bant Eldrazi decks but would suffer to much against fast aggro, it could build to beat fast aggro but would be crushed by Bant Eldrazi going way over it, Dredge has always been a deck that requires SB hate but between low end aggro and over top Bant Eldrazi BGx decks cannot be prepared for everything and anything in the format.
IMO this mostly evidence that BGx is the single Best decks given that every other deck that is doing well tends to attack BGx decks. This has been a trend since the banning of Birthing Pod, both BGx and Twin decks are generally weak against linear aggro decks like infect(which was not held in check by Twin like some people will say but was held in check by one of the best decks maindecking direct hate against it)Pod was great against infect aggro/combo and pretty much was the worst match up any deck looking to go under BGx or Twin decks could face, things like Burn or DSZoo would just fold in the face of the infinite life combo.
Premise 1:
Modern exists as an alternative to legacy, where many different playstyles and every strategic deck archetype can exist in a viable form, which is not subject to the restrictions of the reserve list. In essence, it should fill the "ability to scratch any itch" status that legacy and vintage have, without the card availability issues.
Premise 2a:
Modern SHOULD exist as a format into which standard decks of rotating formats should be able to pass in spirit, if not in letter. If you enjoyed playing Mono Black Devotion or UW Elixir in RTR-Theros standard, there should be viable versions of those decks (grindy UW control with a late game backed by sphinx's revelation, or mono-black midrange powered by thoughtseize and efficient black removal and creatures). If your jam was more Jeskai-Black, there should be a four-color midrange deck capable of grinding from aggressive creatures to a hard control route. If you were an Atarka Red player, there should be a fast aggressive creature deck in Red and Green for you to play.
Premise 2b:
NOT EVERY DECK can port directly into modern from standard. The nature of modern is such that its power level will be very high, and that bar only continues to be set higher as time goes on. Decks based around block-mechanic synergy (think energy/aetherworks marvel) should probably port to modern with improved consistency and power level; decks based more around powerful individual cards and "goodstuff" strategies (like GB delirium in current standard) should have a much higher bar. Both decks are available as strategies in modern--GB delirium as either of the BGx midrange shells, aetherworks marvel as an actual aetherworks marvel deck, or any number of other spell-cheating mechanics (be it through the breach, goryo's vengeance, or pyretic ritual and friends).
Premise 2c:
The number of cards that enter "widespread" modern play from standard should reduce over time, as a general rule. This is because power creep in the game is slow but cyclical--in an ideal world, new cards would enter an already stable, balanced modern metagame on the basis of synergy between other card in the modern pool, or tools in modern enabling parasitic set mechanics (energy, soulshift, ninjitsu, morph) to become more synergistically powerful than they were during their standard formats, and not because these cards are general strict upgrades in power level to cards in existing decks. This is not to say that some sets introduce a lot of cards into modern (Oath of the Gatewatch) or that every set should have something for modern (looking at you, born of the gods).
Premise 3:
In the interest of providing a sustainable format, it is in the interest of everyone that the format be cyclical or self-correcting; periodically increasing the size of the ban list in response to increasing power level of individual archetypes and strategies is ineffective as a management tool for the format because it only delays the inevitable creep of powerlevel in various archetypes. Therefore, cards should only be on the banned list for extenuating circumstances: either the card is fundamentally a mistake of magic design (or functions in a synergistic way that behaves in a similar fashion to other design mistakes), the card is directly and solely enabling of an archetype or archetypes that infringe upon tournament mechanics and time constraints, the card is solely enabling of an archetype that absolutely and unavoidably inhibits format diversity in a manner that is either detrimental to overall tournament attendance or is resistant to natural metagame correction, or the card inhibits design space in a way that is limiting with regards to the previous three reasons.
Based on these premises, we can derive a few more pieces of information:
Derivation 1:
mental misstep, Skullclamp, and second sunrise absolutely must remain on the banlist for being known violators of tournament mechanics or design mistakes, and their unbanning should be taken only with extreme precaution, or as a publicized "test" to see if they are once again suitable for the evolved modern format.
umezzawa's Jitte deserves close scrutiny as a potential "design mistake" ban candidate or should remain banned as such
sensei's divining top should either remain banned or be watched carefully as a potential offender under the tournament mechanics clause,
dark depths and hypergenesis can conceivably remain banned or at least closely watched as potential offenders for infringing upon future design space
dread return, birthing pod, glimpse of nature, eye of ugin, and splinter twin should certainly be watchlisted as being potentially stifling of tournament attendance/metagame diversity, due to the resilience and speed these cards offer to their respective decks. Dread Return in particular may rapidly warrant re-banning.
Derivation 2:
Based on Premise 1, diversity of strategic archetype is important to a healthy modern format. Not every strategic archetype needs to have a tier one deck (tier one prison strategies don't make for good tournaments overall), but they should at least have viable tier 2 contenders, and a dedicated pilot of a given strategic archetype should have a reasonable chance of making Day 2 of large events and an expert pilot should be able to top 8 these events under favorable metagame conditions.
Derivation 3: Based on premise 1, modern should be a format which mirrors the skill-curve of legacy. What this means is that consistently powerful decks (regular tier 1 contenders) should more consistently reward tight play, good metagaming, and knowledge and preparedness for a matchup than they do variance of matchups and opening hands or the die roll. Decks which significantly benefit from favorable pairings, "lucky" variance with opening hands, or benefit more significantly than is normal from the advantage of being on the play should suffer in overall consistency or strength when on the draw. An extremely experienced pilot on a niche archetype should be favored in matchups he has metagamed and specifically prepared for when paired against less individually practiced opponents.
So where does modern stand on these points? Not very well.
In particular:
Modern has very little archetype diversity. At the time of writing, 32%+ of the metagame is fast, goldfishy agro decks, with varying levels of a combo quality--ranging from the all in combo of death's shadow + temur battle rage, the synergy machine of affinity, or the consistent pile that is naya burn, this is a third of the metagame that is essentially looking to goldfish you with fast creatures and a little bit of "reach". By the same numbers, a tad under 15% of the metagame is comprised of "traditional" midrange decks, including BGx and Bant Eldrazi, and then the next 8% or so are "big mana" decks (either of the tron or valakut-based varieties) and then we come in with prison archetypes at a measly 2.5%, and other controlling archetypes not even present enough to be recognized. Actual combo has a representation of one archetype as well (Ad Nauseum combo), and it also sits at about a 2.5% metagame share.
Based on the top 60% of the metagame, we see slightly over half of it (and a third of the overall metagame) comprised of decks filling every shade along the spectrum of aggressive linear creature decks. In an idealized, balanced metagame, we need some sort of cyclical balancing force, which tends to indicate at the very least a rock-paper-scissors trifecta, which would indicate at most a 20% strategic archetype share in the top 60% is healthy. Traditional midrange occupies a healthy portion of the metagame, "big mana" occupies a reasonable if slightly depressed portion of the metagame, and pure combo and prison are heavily under-represented, and actual control is absent entirely.
Takeaway: Modern is too linear, and needs some form of improvement to enable the prevalence and diversity of pure combo and controlling decks.
When it comes to the idea of a skill-curve, modern is woefully inadequate. Most of the complaints that come about modern from the professional community stem from the fact that there are too many different decks that require sideboard cards to consistently beat, or that there is no reasonable deck that can perform at a consistent 50-50 against the format at large. What most people take away from this complaint is the idea that Pro's either want there to be a narrow metagame (easy to attack, but boring for non-professional players who want a varied and diverse format), or that pro's want an OP deck (jund to be 55-45 or better against everything), or even that they just refuse to actually learn the intricacies of the format and that they refuse to invest the time to overcome these barriers to consistently performing well.
The disconnect here is that most people reading these commentaries mis-understand the intent of what these Pros mean. They don't care that a dedicated modern specialist can overcome bad matchups--in fact, most professional players would prefer if this were more strongly the case! They also don't want a deck that is universally better than 50-50 against the metagame at large--such a deck leads to very repetitive professional events, and increases the variance inherent in performance even among the pro's, which (they feel) takes away their own control over their professional livelihood.
What the professionals want is a format where the pool of competitive decks is diverse AND in which their personal skill (whether at magic in general, or in a specific archetype that they take the time investment to master) matters MORE in an individual matchup than luck of the die roll, archetype matchup, and variance in opening hands.
Conclusion:
It is my belief that the *best* solution for the long-term health and sustainability of the modern format is to release the large majority of the cards from the modern B&R list and see where things shake out after six months. Modern has already demonstrated that cards that are initially powerful or stifling of competitive diversity can, over time, be adjusted to by the available card pool and metagame. Since the initial banned list of the community cup, bitterblossom, wild nacatl, valakut, the molten pinnacle, and ancestral vision have been banned and subsequently unbanned. Additionally, sword of the meek, golgari grave-troll, both cards that don't really fit any of the ban description categories I listed, have come off of the banned list and not really been trouble for any real numerical reason.
The remaining cards on the current modern B&R list that haven't been discussed in the section on cards that have to stay banned or watched closely are as follows:
artifact lands
blazing shoal
bloodbraid elf
chrome mox
cloudpost
deathrite shaman
dig through time
green sun's zenith
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
ponder
preordain
punishing fire
rite of flame
seething song
stoneforge mystic
summer bloom
treasure cruise
Of these cards, we can lump them into a couple of groups:
This portion of the list includes the following cards:
dig through time
green sun's zenith
ponder
preordain
treasure cruise
At their core, what these cards do is allow decks to consistently execute their gameplan or locate narrow, matchup specific tools.
GSZ, dig through time, ponder, and to a lesser extent preordain allow decks to execute their gameplan by finding exactly what is needed in a slightly longer game, or the cantrips backed by treasure cruise ensure that faster decks (and some combo decks) can consistently churn through their decks without loosing too much velocity. In general, I believe that an unbanning of this entire set of cards ultimately favors fair decks, because the fast combo decks are all very soft to the 1 and 2 mana blue permission spells. Furthermore, grave hate actually is fairly strong against all of the combo decks involved with using treasure cruise, and the incentive to play strong grave hate also weakens other potentially-very-strong linear archetypes. Finally, most of the unfair combo decks that utilize these cards are very soft to certain individual hatebears, for which the presence of GSZ in the format is a huge step forward in playability, as an archetype or as part of a fair strategy.
Cards in this category include the following:
chrome mox
rite of flame
seething song
summer bloom
Cards in this category exclusively serve spell based non-interactive combo. Again, this is a category that is currently very under-represented in the modern metagame at the present time, and again, this category of deck is usually weak to grave hate. Also, these decks are universally soft to cheap permission and a fast clock. In other words, these decks are competitive with the other fast linear decks. Chrome mox in particular I think might open up some archetype space--only affinity actually gets a real mana accelerant in the format, and it may be interesting to see what shakes out when other decks get access to a mana dork (deathrite shaman) or a fast mana rock with a steep cost (chrome mox). The worry here in my mind is that summer bloom might be too strong given that it's a lot less soft to normal interaction, but at the same time it's still hard for it to deal with mana leak and spell pierce backed up by a clock. It also just loses to blood moon.
Cards in this category include:
bloodbraid elf
deathrite shaman
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
punishing fire
stoneforge mystic
With the majority of the cards being unbanned in current modern components of grindy fair decks, and the circumstances under which they were unbanned, it seems pretty reasonable that most of these cards return. Questions surround two of them in particular: Deathrite shaman, as potentially limiting diversity among fair decks, and Bloodbraid elf, because it would push Jund even harder than it already is. The obvious rebuttal here is that DRS is necessary to power up most of the fair decks to adequately compete with the newer, faster combo decks, and it provides a swiss army knife of interaction for dealing with the various non-fair decks in the format. Punishing fire is obviously important to deal with the fact that the new combo decks likely feature a version of elves, and they also provide an engine for the fair decks to compete with control decks going long.
artifact lands
blazing shoal
cloudpost
In all honesty, Blazing Shoal was banned before become immense was printed, and if you compare early builds of blazing infect to builds of today, I think you will quickly realize that newer builds, while a tad slower, are much more resilient and have a much better chance of interacting with their opponents enough to break serve and win from the back foot. It's a relic of Modern's past that it remains on the banned list. Gumming up your deck with four clunky uncastable cards and four very poor pump spells is not where modern infect wants to be.
Cloudpost is likely a stand-in for the urzatron decks, but it is worth noting that the speed with which emrakul mana can be hit is a concern, and this card might be too strong. Currently however, barring the absolute nut draw, it doesn't seem significantly better than tron's turn 3 plays, and it certainly outclasses on turns 5+. On the other hand, it's also fairly easy to profitably interact with the deck, as it's extremely slow and fast (er) mana is certainly a hallmark of this proposed reduction in the modern banlist.
The artifact lands no longer belong on the banned and restricted list. Yes, affinity might possibly become stronger with access to a multitude of sol lands, but remember that the artifact lands are also extremely weak. ancient grudge is now a 3 mana double-vindicate. many of the hate cards against affinity now also serve as complete land destruction spells. and Finally, affinity with artifact lands no longer gets the heavy creature-land manabase that is a huge part of its current flexibility and success--decks should be allowed to go slightly more linear at the cost of flexibility and robustness.
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
1) There are a total of 66 decks which played Chandra, Torch of Defiance in the main and/or side ever since Kaladesh was legal. Most of them are fair decks like Jund, Skred Red, Sun & Moon, with the odd LD or Valakut deck here and there.
2) Similarly there are 33 Inventors' Fair decks, 31 of which are Lantern Control.
Oh, and those two decks that everyone has been talking about? 92 Cathartic Reunion and 62 Blossoming Defense (most, but not all, of which are Dredge and Infect respectively).
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
Sfm
Jms
Bbe
I think dredge and infect are fine. As there is some sideboard support for these decks.
I feel taking more cards away only hurts modern as a hole.
When eye was banned I was pissed as I spent good money on a card and wizards just takes it away.
I just feel opening the banned cage helps the formate.
Bannings have never, should never, and will never be based on any monetary statistic. Eye deserved a ban.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
100% agree. Sorry just venting
Heck I could have sold them and double my money. Lol
But again banning jace and stoneforge in a formate because it was banned in standard makes no sence.
Modern is not standard.
Neither card have been seen in the formate so what proves the banned?
edit: id like tosee jace, bloodbraid and stoneforge unbanned too
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
it isn't about proving why they should be banned, but why they should be unbanned. when modern was formed, it was barely different from extended, where these cards proved to be too powerful and needed to be banned. therefore, it is hard to argue that they were a good ban for the time. today, both of these cards continue to be powerhouses in legacy. yes, legacy is most certainly a different format, but the fact that these cards are still big players in the format after nearly a decade of new printings shows they are indeed just as strong as they used to be.
now, this doesn't mean they need to stay banned, plenty of cards have been unbanned with little to no effect on the format! i would even call the ancestral visions unban a positive effect on the format! therefore, it is up to people like you and i to SHOW that these cards are safe for the format. saying that modern is not standard is obvious, but absolutely not a valid reason to unban anything. testing, such as that was done on modern nexus, is what we need to do. we need to also show that the card fits their past urban criteria, meaning the card does not slot into any existing tier 1 strategies and does not create any t4 violating decks. the urban should also help bolster struggling strategies or create new ones entirely. on a complete side note, the unban should achieve a goal, it should fix a stated problem in the format, not just be an urban for the sake of unbanning. GGT was an urban for the sake of unbanning something, it did not create any new, interesting decks, and it did not fix any problems in the format. the result of this was adding a ticking time bomb to the format, which has recently begun to detonate.
i believe that jace is similar to ggt in this way. while it clearly bolsters struggling strategies in the format, it does not do so in a way that fixes the stated problems with the format. if one believes the formats problems are that there are too many linear ago strategies, a jace urban does nothing to aid this. it simply adds a new time bomb to the format. if the format was to slow down with jace in it, a U based deck would absolutely DOMINATE the meta in my opinion. i do not believe this to be a good thing, i am strictly of the opinion that fair decks need a gentle nudge in the right direction, and jace is simply not a gentle nudge. what we need is the following
unban:
sfm
preordain
ban:
prized amalgam
print:
innocent blood
swords to plowshares
thats it, modern would be in a far better place if those were done
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR
Ok that's a solid idea! Here, let's have a conversation with Mr. Aaron F himself!
AF: We don't like consistency in Modern, so we have placed Preordain and Ponder on the banned list.
MTGSally: That's sorta ridiculous no?
AF: What do you mean?
MTGSally: Well... Burn has 30 redundant spells with the same function, and so does Infect and Boggles. So why do those decks get consistent play and new printings with each Standard set?
AF: Uhhhhh.....
MTGSally: Also, look at Dredge, they can potentially look over their top 18 cards! For just two mana!
AF: Uhhhh.....
MTGSally: Then there's Tron, Eldrazi, and Collected Company decks! They have tutors, the best cantrip in Modern belongs to GREEN, along with fast mana!!!!
AF: Ban Splinter Twin! Interview Over!
Eggs wasn't hit for being slow, it was hit for having long turns. If a match went to time and your 5 turns started that could be 20 minutes from an eggs player trying to kill you. Not the case with lantern. It's a similar, but important distinction to keep in mind here.
I don't feel unbanning cards like JMS or SFM fixes the issue I see. As there is still turn three kills. Infect and dredge.
What I see is it opens doors for people to brew decks that haven't been see in modern EVER.
I feel doing some major unbanned with out banned cards might help the formate. Let's see if infect or dredge can do what they do if there was a true control deck.
Plus just think of the excitement of modern as a hole if those two cards are taken out of there unjustly prision.
They where both banned when modern as a hole was different.
dredge will 100% do what its doing if jtms or sfm, or even both were unbanned. the deck preys upon this type of deck. as for turn 3 kills, you will never eliminate them all, at least without adding 50+ cards to the banlist. this is why the t4 rule isn't "can the deck conceivably win before t4, ever?" but "is it a top-tier deck that wins before t4 around 25% of the time".
in addition, it is quite hard to actually argue that those cards create new decks that haven't been in modern before, especially jace. jace quite clearly just goes straight into grins/jeskai, decks we have seen before. the decklists don't even really change, just cut a few cards and add a few jace. sfm has much more potential in this aspect, as there is potentially a puresteel paladin or some other form of W/x equipment matters deck that could easily end up in tier 2. the problem is there are several obvious homes for her that are currently viable in the format that are probably just better, hence hurting said fringe decks chances of actually breaking out.
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR
“Homo homini lupus est.”
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
Legacy: UW RiP/Helm, UR Sneak and Show
Yeah especially adding 5 spots. That could completely change your deck post board. Another reason is because you want play as uniform as possible from format to format.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate