(Twin had a 60/40 edge, roughly) but GBX is proactive
That's not true at all for overall match %.
Where did this come from, and what are the quantities and power of these stats?
The base numbers are just ballpark estimates regularly agreed upon by the people who played the decks. The rest is just simple probability based on those initial numbers. So the root isn't pulled from piles of statistical analysis of all games or anything, just showing in some numbers what match outcomes would be given those starting odds. I'd say 30/70 game 1 and 55/45 games 2 amd 3 was fairly accurate. Dunno what it would be today though. I originally made it as a way to illustrate that even though post board matchups might be in Twin's favor (tho was probably still closer to 50/50 or worse, IMO) it wasn't enough to overcome the massive game 1 disadvantage or produce an overall positive matchup (something people still convince themselves of). If someone can parse out all the data necessary to make accurate base values, I'm all for it! But this was just a numbers representation of commonly accepted values.
Why is there so much emotional attachment towards blue?
To me it is unreal how there continues to be a faction of players who will ***** and moan until the end of time about a single color not being good enough. You don't see this sort of complaining about white, which is another color that isn't exactly well-represented in Modern either. It seems like every time we talk about color + archetype strength and weaknesses, the discussion tends to devolve into "blue isn't good enough".
Why is this? Is is because blue has been historically the strongest color in the game and thus there has to be precedent for blue always being good? Is it because people get a rush from playing counterspells? (which happen to be one of the most powerful mechanics in the game, by the way) Is it because people enjoy card drawing and card selection that assuages the randomness of the game? (such as Preordain) Is it because people like always doing everything on their opponent's end step? Is it because blue has the stereotype of being the "intellectual color" that a large number of players align with due to the game's demographics?
I like playing blue myself, but it's become clear that there are a lot of people who have an absolutely massive amount of emotion invested into one color that MUST BE GOOD. Which I find quite ironic, given that blue is, philosophically speaking, the least emotional color out of the five.
The style of deck that we're bemoaning that isn't good in the format has been a staple part of magic since 1996-1997. It is also (reactive Ux control deck) the best type of deck to keep a format from degenerating. Me personally I enjoy the chess like nature of navigating a match against my opponent rather than be beholden to the top 10 or 12 cards of my deck playing itself against the opponents top 10 or so. I despise solitaire type gameplay in a format which is designed to be one human playing against another, not one person playing against their own deck. So the lack of options and viability for me to play the deck with the most choices and decisions in any given game is unfortunate. The reason why most people aren't *****ing about white is because the traditional white style decks are represented in gameplay in the format - Zoo, Affinity, Merfolk, etc. There is no viable deck in the format for people who like to play reactive control decks that have deck manipulation, card draw, and play at instant speed to have a good shot at T8'ing and winning an event. The one deck we did have was taken away from us (Twin) and we have had the most cards on the banlist than any other deck.
As for D&T. I'd like to see it get some of its legacy power level counterparts. SFM would help this deck a lot. So would a card better than GQ/TE, but worse than Wasteland. Recruiter and Prelate would be good too. Rishadan Port is probably too good, but really, I'm not opposed to having better white taxing effects in the format. (Mother of Runes will never get through standard - the card is too good there imho) Also, the Eldrazi decks do have some style similarities to D&T, (colorless seems to have usurped a lot of white imho) so they have viable options to choose from as well.
Oh yeah, Sensei's Top is on the banlist as well....man I'd love to get that one back.
i hope they reprint damnation because it's silly expensive and counterspell because blue decks are so bad atm the only reason damnation hasn't been topping every modern event is because it's too hard to get a playset and while theyre at it they should reprint zen fetches because modern is dying and why not throw in a masterpiece series with moxen or p9 then people will want to buy packs the only issue i see is standard getting a bit rough if counterspell is reprinted if counterspell is powerful in legacy can you imagine how powerful it will be in standard
i hope they reprint damnation because it's silly expensive and counterspell because blue decks are so bad atm the only reason damnation hasn't been topping every modern event is because it's too hard to get a playset and while theyre at it they should reprint zen fetches because modern is dying and why not throw in a masterpiece series with moxen or p9 then people will want to buy packs the only issue i see is standard getting a bit rough if counterspell is reprinted if counterspell is powerful in legacy can you imagine how powerful it will be in standard
I don't even know where to start.
Modern is dying? Do you not see it's numbers making a mockery of Standard? Other than a few delusional people who commonly post nonsensical things with no basis in reality, nobody says modern is dying...
i hope they reprint damnation because it's silly expensive and counterspell because blue decks are so bad atm the only reason damnation hasn't been topping every modern event is because it's too hard to get a playset and while theyre at it they should reprint zen fetches because modern is dying and why not throw in a masterpiece series with moxen or p9 then people will want to buy packs the only issue i see is standard getting a bit rough if counterspell is reprinted if counterspell is powerful in legacy can you imagine how powerful it will be in standard
Um...counterspell is not that powerful in Legacy, but it is a good role-player for Miracles. Also, that's not a good argument. Deathrite Shaman is perhaps the best creature in Legacy and it was a dud in standard. Cards can be powerful in different formats based on the context surrounding the format. Counterspell would be fine in Standard right now. UU is not trivial and the format is built on the backs of aggressive decks. It'd be good, but not something backbreaking. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever see it in Modern (vis a vis standard) because WoTC believes reprinting it will destroy the game, which is frankly silly, given that we just had 3 bannings of stupid threat cards (and Constrictor is just a dumb card). I don't mean to be overly aggressive (if it comes off that way) in my post just some thoughts.
i hope they reprint damnation because it's silly expensive and counterspell because blue decks are so bad atm the only reason damnation hasn't been topping every modern event is because it's too hard to get a playset and while theyre at it they should reprint zen fetches because modern is dying and why not throw in a masterpiece series with moxen or p9 then people will want to buy packs the only issue i see is standard getting a bit rough if counterspell is reprinted if counterspell is powerful in legacy can you imagine how powerful it will be in standard
Um...counterspell is not that powerful in Legacy, but it is a good role-player for Miracles. Also, that's not a good argument. Deathrite Shaman is perhaps the best creature in Legacy and it was a dud in standard. Cards can be powerful in different formats based on the context surrounding the format. Counterspell would be fine in Standard right now. UU is not trivial and the format is built on the backs of aggressive decks. It'd be good, but not something backbreaking. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever see it in Modern (vis a vis standard) because WoTC believes reprinting it will destroy the game, which is frankly silly, given that we just had 3 bannings of stupid threat cards (and Constrictor is just a dumb card). I don't mean to be overly aggressive (if it comes off that way) in my post just some thoughts.
No, I'm right there with you. I feel the same way. I even tried a Standard PPTQ today borrowing BG and yeah, Constrictor is dumb. It seems borderline bannable to me, but I shouldn't speak on a format I don't know - like when Standard players say all Delve and Phyrexian mana spells should be banned, which I just hate to hear.
Counterspell is exactly that - a role player in Miracles, a deck that I have tested a bunch and am just now (after half a year of testing on and off) feel almost comfortable to play at a tournament.
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)
Death's Shadow
Death's Shadow
Bant Eldrazi
Bant Eldrazi
Grixis Delver
Grixis Control
Abzan Midrange
Ad Nauseam
A good healthy top 8, if we leave the fact that DS is double and triple top8 ing a lot of events and it's starting to break out as the BEST DECK in Modern atm.
DS Jund is two weeks old. Let's maybe wait until July to start saying it's doing anything in "a lot" of tournaments. Doubly so when this thread and most of that awful Twitch chat wants to use its performance to justifying banning cards. Or, more generally, wants to ban everything from every deck that has more than a middling performance.
Double Grixis (Delver and Control) in top 8! That's sure an upset!
What do people make of it?
The color still needs help. This appearance doesn't overturn its horrible GP performance or bad performance since summer 2016. It doesn't need a double unban or anything drastic, but it does need assistance.
If only we were going to a plane where a Grixis colored planeswalker rules it as it's king... Maybe grixis would get more help
I mean, I can understand, a bit, how people would ask for Blue to get help. But asking for a specific combination of 3 colors to get help is a bit too much, especially when we just saw it put 2 guys in a top8.
I'm being sarcastic. Amonkhet is obviously going to give grixis some love since it's bolas's plane.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
Why is there so much emotional attachment towards blue?
To me it is unreal how there continues to be a faction of players who will ***** and moan until the end of time about a single color not being good enough. You don't see this sort of complaining about white, which is another color that isn't exactly well-represented in Modern either. It seems like every time we talk about color + archetype strength and weaknesses, the discussion tends to devolve into "blue isn't good enough".
Why is this? Is is because blue has been historically the strongest color in the game and thus there has to be precedent for blue always being good? Is it because people get a rush from playing counterspells? (which happen to be one of the most powerful mechanics in the game, by the way) Is it because people enjoy card drawing and card selection that assuages the randomness of the game? (such as Preordain) Is it because people like always doing everything on their opponent's end step? Is it because blue has the stereotype of being the "intellectual color" that a large number of players align with due to the game's demographics?
I like playing blue myself, but it's become clear that there are a lot of people who have an absolutely massive amount of emotion invested into one color that MUST BE GOOD. Which I find quite ironic, given that blue is, philosophically speaking, the least emotional color out of the five.
Speaking for myself, I'll say I have no emotional attachment to blue. I do, however, have an attachment to Wizards' stated format intentions. They wanted to open up competitive blue options by banning Twin. Instead, they closed those options. They then wanted to help the lagging reactive blue decks with two unbans. Those unbans didn't help at all. If Wizards was serious about its goal of opening up competitive reactive blue space, they either need to unban Twin, unban some non-Twin blue cards, or get some new/reprinted cards in this format. The status quo is not what they promised.
This issue is compacted by the new world order in terms of their card design. Wizards really wants to make creatures/planeswalkers really good and make answers very specific. This makes it hard for anything but "charm" type noncreature/non planeswalker spells to come to modern.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
i hope they reprint damnation because it's silly expensive and counterspell because blue decks are so bad atm the only reason damnation hasn't been topping every modern event is because it's too hard to get a playset and while theyre at it they should reprint zen fetches because modern is dying and why not throw in a masterpiece series with moxen or p9 then people will want to buy packs the only issue i see is standard getting a bit rough if counterspell is reprinted if counterspell is powerful in legacy can you imagine how powerful it will be in standard
Um...counterspell is not that powerful in Legacy, but it is a good role-player for Miracles. Also, that's not a good argument. Deathrite Shaman is perhaps the best creature in Legacy and it was a dud in standard. Cards can be powerful in different formats based on the context surrounding the format. Counterspell would be fine in Standard right now. UU is not trivial and the format is built on the backs of aggressive decks. It'd be good, but not something backbreaking. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever see it in Modern (vis a vis standard) because WoTC believes reprinting it will destroy the game, which is frankly silly, given that we just had 3 bannings of stupid threat cards (and Constrictor is just a dumb card). I don't mean to be overly aggressive (if it comes off that way) in my post just some thoughts.
It is silly that they think that counterspells ruin the game. Just look at the top 8 match between grixis and bant eldrazi and it clearly shows how counterspells in general are not that good. Counterspells are only good when ahead on board or in parity. Commiting 2 mana to counter something every turn can back fire badly and then you lose out on using all your mana in the next untap step. Counterspells were good back then because you had good instants to use just in case countering was not the best use of your mana for that turn cycle. This is why you see Wafo tapa playing think twice in his modern control decks even though think twice is a very unpowered card. Heck counter magic is not really strong in the other eternal formats except for stopping degenerate things with force or mental misstep.
I am sure blue needs its identity back and that is being the color of consistency and card advantage. When the two best cards in modern representing these qualities of blue being serum visions and ancestral vision we have a problem. After seeing ds aggro's consistency with baubles, wraiths, and Traverse I think blue needs some of that love back since that what the color is about. I am all for a Preordain unban and some combo becomes too good it is really that they are playing some degenerate card that was waiting for a home. Another thing is with how efficient the wincons are nowadays blue can an upgrade to their finishers. Not to the level of goyf or death's shadow but something that is good enough.
Edit: if we cannot improve our wincons then wotc should print better instant speed draw or flash creatures to makes counters actually good otherwise a good wincon and consistency tools will suffice.
i hope they reprint damnation because it's silly expensive and counterspell because blue decks are so bad atm the only reason damnation hasn't been topping every modern event is because it's too hard to get a playset and while theyre at it they should reprint zen fetches because modern is dying and why not throw in a masterpiece series with moxen or p9 then people will want to buy packs the only issue i see is standard getting a bit rough if counterspell is reprinted if counterspell is powerful in legacy can you imagine how powerful it will be in standard
I don't even know where to start.
Modern is dying? Do you not see it's numbers making a mockery of Standard? Other than a few delusional people who commonly post nonsensical things with no basis in reality, nobody says modern is dying...
Bingo. Hell, my LGS is now going on four straight weeks of FNMs where standard attendance has been lower than both modern and LEGACY. This is just anecdotal evidence from a podunk shop in Ohio, but the general consensus is that if any format is "dying" (a more appropriate term would be" in need of assistance") then it's standard considering WoTC literally announced how they're gonna start shilling extra hard to boost up attendance/interest. This trite "modern is dying" narrative needs to end; fear-mongering from mtg youtubers/other content creators is the only reason I can think of for why this misperception continues to exist. If everything on Youtube were true then we'd all be playing Frontier, enemy fetches would've been printed in every single set going back to BFZ, and the world would be ruled by a secret group of lizard-people.
Um...counterspell is not that powerful in Legacy, but it is a good role-player for Miracles. Also, that's not a good argument. Deathrite Shaman is perhaps the best creature in Legacy and it was a dud in standard. Cards can be powerful in different formats based on the context surrounding the format. Counterspell would be fine in Standard right now. UU is not trivial and the format is built on the backs of aggressive decks. It'd be good, but not something backbreaking. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever see it in Modern (vis a vis standard) because WoTC believes reprinting it will destroy the game, which is frankly silly, given that we just had 3 bannings of stupid threat cards (and Constrictor is just a dumb card). I don't mean to be overly aggressive (if it comes off that way) in my post just some thoughts.
The funny thing is that we literally had Counterspell in Standard like 2 years ago. Silumgar's Scorn was just counterspell in the Esper Dragons deck more often than not, and it was completely fine.
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
Here's the amalgamated top 32s of the GP and Open:
Death Shadow - 13 (20.3%)
Bant Eldrazi - 5 (7.8%)
Burn - 4 (6.2%)
Abzan Midrange - 3 (4.7%)
Grixis Control - 3 (4.7%)
Abzan Company - 3 (4.7%)
Titanshift - 3 (4.7%)
Jund - 3 (4.7%)
Infect - 3 (4.7%)
Eldrazi Tron - 3 (4.7%)
Ad Nauseum - 2 (3.1%)
Merfolk - 2 (3.1%)
Affinity - 2 (3.1%)
8-Rack - 2 (3.1%)
Dredge - 2 (3.1%)
Amulet Titan - 2 (3.1%)
Grixis Delver - 1 (1.5%)
RG Zoo - 1 (1.5%)
RG Ponza - 1 (1.5%)
GB Tron - 1 (1.5%)
Goryo's Vengeance - 1 (1.5%)
Eldrazi & Taxes - 1 (1.5%)
4c Company - 1 (1.5%)
Breach Titan - 1 (1.5%)
Elves - 1 (1.5%)
A few notes on what stands out to me:
We might have a new tier 0 deck. The Death Shadow deck dominated both tournaments. It looked really good on camera as well, so expect it to spike on MTGO and locally. I predict it hits 20% meta share in a month or two.
GBx below 10%. I can't remember the last time GBx was below 10%. Granted, this is just 2 top 32s, but I would still expect more. My guess is Death Shadow leached some Jund players since the decks share so many cards.
Blue decks just a little over 6%. I was worried after the GP. The Open just confirmed it. Even though two blue decks made top 8, those were the only two in the top 32. Blue decks in generally did not perform well.
Eldrazi decks performed well. At the GP it was Eldrazi Tron, and at the Open it was Bant Eldrazi. I'm guessing it's partially because it's the best deck against Fatal Push.
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
GBx below 10%. I can't remember the last time GBx was below 10%. Granted, this is just 2 top 32s, but I would still expect more. My guess is Death Shadow leached some Jund players since the decks share so many cards.
Is Death's Shadow not a GBx deck? At least, it's a lot more like one than previous iterations.
It's actually a pretty interesting question, come to think of it.
Shadow is definitely a GBx deck, and while there's a little bit of a shift in the mentality you have to take to approach how it operates, I believe most Jund/Junk players who were good with those decks will easily transition. Switch around some bolts for tarfires, some terminates for fatal pushes, and it really is almost the same deck minus the 8 cantrips and sequencing damage to yourself.
I'd be very quick to halt you on that 0 tier deck. It did not look like an unstoppable monster, and it is reasonably interacted with, unlike Eldrazi or Dredge decks. We saw Junk beat the holy hell out of it games 1 and game 3.
If we start calling every new deck a tier 0 deck we're never going to have new decks bust into this format. Jund is also the most popular deck in modern, it's not hard to believe a lot of them bought Death Shadow pieces for like 100 in total to play the deck. I think it was also the most played deck so those numbers could transition well to day 2.
"We also look for decks that hold a large enough percentage of the competitive field to reduce the diversity of the format.
Antonio Del Moral León won Pro Tour Fate Reforged playing Splinter Twin, and Jelger Wiegersma finished third; Splinter Twin has won two of the four Modern Pro Tours. Splinter Twin reached the Top 8 of the last six Modern Grand Prix. The last Modern Grand Prix in Pittsburgh had three Splinter Twin decks in the Top 8, including Alex Bianchi's winning deck."
I can understand that they don't want it in the format because it won too much, right there.
Then they should have weakened the deck by banning Exarch instead of nuking it from existence. I can say it's pretty sickening to see Bant Eldrazi still comfortably sitting in the Tier 1 chair after being the most disgusting and broken deck Modern has ever seen. Yet Twin, the most borderline and arguably incorrect ban Modern has ever had, gets completely destroyed with no suitable replacement for more than a year. Not to mention ruining all other blue decks while they're at it; a direct OPPOSITE result to their stated goal. Every aspect of the ban was a failure and they should just own up to it and put Twin back in the format where it belongs.
Hmm, where do I start? Lets start with your claim that Eldrazie was by far the most disgusting deck Modern has ever seen. That crown belongs to either Cloudpost, Shoal Infect, Philly Storm or even Dredge (talking the Magic Online Championship Dredge list). Heck, even something like DRS BBE Jund was more disgusting than Eldrazis and would have dismantled that deck with ease (as you can see in the NBL Modern "results" ^^ ).
Also, regarding your statement, that Twin was the most incorrect ban Modern has ever seen, I have to disagree kindly. Wild Nacatl would take the crown here, if we are talking about the whole format than it would be Sword of the Meek and Bitterblossom. Sure, GGT would take the crown, if Inistrad 2.0 didn't happen, but w/e.
There might be a future, where Twin gets unbanned, but this will take for sure another 3-4 years. Btw. this is also true for things like DRS, GSZ or even Pod. Cause one thing is for sure, the powerlevel won't get lower by adding more sets to the format and thus we might get room for those power cards.
Reactive Blue decks are NOT healthy. Look at the current Miracles meta in Legacy. If your deck can't beat Miracles, it's not a deck. Having a super blue police deck isn't as great as you think. You're either playing the deck or you're going to find a way to beat that deck. Or even worse, you have to run blue or your deck is crap.
How is this proof reactive Blue decks aren't healthy? The problem with Miracles (if there is one) isn't that it's a reactive Blue deck, it's that it occupies a rather high metagame share. That's totally incidental to what kind of deck it is. Eldrazi occupied an overly large metagame share too, by that logic aggro decks aren't healthy.
It's not only Miracles. Again if your'e not running blue, the deck is garbage in Legacy. I think only 4 other decks aren't running blue are doing okay, D&T, Eldrazi, BR Reanimator, Lands. And Eldrazi is already going away and losing favor. I would hate for Modern to become Legacy Light. The biggest appeal to me in Modern is seeing all these other colors do the things they do.
You are forgetting several decks, which are doing good in the current Legacy meta: Aggro Loam, Elves (which have a really bad Miracles match-up btw), Burn (yes, it is a thing) and Turbo Depths. Heck, I hear the statement way to often, that if you are not running Brainstorm.deck you cannot win anything which is not true, especially after the DTT ban. I know, when you are not actively playing the format you get the feeling that no brainstorm = lose is a given fact but it is simply not true.
Hence, please do not make statements like this which are simply not true. Blue as a colour IS strong (comparable with B in Modern) but not the *play blue and rofl win everything vs non blue decks*. Most of the times, it is exactly the opposite way, that the blueless decks have a great blue deck match-up.
yea, because good creature hate is why blue is bad..........
If you're going to just string a bunch of words with no meaning don't bother replying. Just state you want a strong deck with at least 70% of the cards being blue. That would actually help the rest of use out instead of writing a bunch of ellipses that mean nothing. We're not mind readers.
Do you want Force of Will, Brainstorm and Counterspell or stuff like it in Modern? Daze is already too much despite it being a horrible top deck and counter late game. Having cantrips does nothing for a blue based deck. Blue becomes a secondary or tertiary color if you want better cantrips. And that's not what I think your'e arguing for.
If you want counterspells, I already disagree with having anything even close to to the power of Counterspell. 3 Mana being the hard counter is fine. 2 mana conditional counters are good. Legacy Light is not what modern wants to be.
Cancel stops everything, it's slow though. That's why it's unplayed. So clearly there needs to be something from blue to help stop early game. Because according to you, Blue has answers for early game, if so, blue is fine and you just need to jam in 4 Cancels instead. If people insist on having a Force of Will type card, I would make it like Foil but with only islands cards. That way it forces people to have to play solely blue and all the weaknesses it brings.
There are two statements, which are just wrong.
The first one is about Daze. Daze was only, and I repeat myself here, ONLY problematic because of Infect and not any other deck. Daze would help Delver esque decks a ton while being fairly useless in the U based combo decks.
The second one is that you make a direct link from a POSSIBLE good early game to a good general match-up. The UW Control deck I was playing a few years ago had a great aggro match-up, since I had 6 1 mana Removal spells + 3 Sweepers + 4 Wall of Omnes + great early counter spells (Spell Snare, Spell Pierce, Dispel, Mana Leak, Remand,...). However, the trade off for this good early game was the mid to late game. My late game was so abyssal that I had to race BGx to not just get outvalued in the late game. The counters I run helped in the early, but when we are in turn 6 a Remand looks really bad and is just a 2 mana cycle card. That Spell Pierce or Leak won't get better in the lategame is also obvious.
However, at the same time I could build the deck to utterly crush everything in the mid to late game, but the early game was so abyssal, that I would lose to close to every aggro or combo deck.
Now, the logical answer would be to build it somewhere in between. However, now we are getting in the exact problems U based Control has in Modern, deck space, card filtering and answers. You cannot slam every single answer in your deck to find it reliable, since you simply do not have the deck space. If we would have good card filtering, than it problem gets less problematic, since we can dig for those "Silverbullets" actively and have a good shot finding them. However, the next problem are the answers itself. Most of the answers have a drawback of some kind, which is, don't get me wrong, good. However, when you have to play 20 answer spells and each single one has a medium to big drawback all those drawbacks start to pile up and you have to ask yourself the question, is it even worth to run so many drawbacks just to get a somewhat stable answer suite together?
There already exist spells, which would "fix" that problem in a non problematic fashion. Stifle and Daze are for the tempo esque decks, Prohibit for the more U Midrange/Control decks. Are those spells broken? No. Would they fix fundamental issues? Somewhat but they would make those respective decks more playable.
tl,dr.: The problem with Control esque decks (and also tempo decks) are the cumulative drawbacks from the answer suite you have to play, decreasing those drawbacks would already help a ton to enable such decks.
Greetings,
Kathal
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What I play or have:
Modern/Legacy
either funpolice (Delver, Deathcloud, UW Control) or the fun decks (especially those ft. Griselbrand)
We might have a new tier 0 deck. The Death Shadow deck dominated both tournaments. It looked really good on camera as well, so expect it to spike on MTGO and locally. I predict it hits 20% meta share in a month or two.
It will not be Tier 0. Even a 20% deck isn't actually Tier 0; see TC Delver, DRS BGx, Pod, and others. These decks, despite holding around 20% shares, were more in the Tier .5 category. This is an important distinction. Decks sometimes rise to Tier .5 before falling to Tier 1. At one point, Bant Eldrazi pushed this share before falling to Tier 1. Burn did too. True Tier 0 decks start higher and stay higher.
That said, if DS Jund sustains a 20% share it will get hit with a ban, Tier 0 or Tier .5 or whatever. That share is just too high for Wizards and would fall squarely in the banning range.
GBx below 10%. I can't remember the last time GBx was below 10%. Granted, this is just 2 top 32s, but I would still expect more. My guess is Death Shadow leached some Jund players since the decks share so many cards.
DS Jund is BGx. If anything, it shows just how strong this color pairing is and how crappy some of the competitors are. Like blue, which you correctly highlight in your post as being terrible.
Is Jace the only way to make Blue good in Modern? Can't unban the cantrips as that makes combo too good; we just saw Ad Nauseam win and wouldn't want them to get Preordain.
I do think Force of Will would be too strong, but maybe a better Disrupting Shoal that goes through Standard first?
GBx below 10%. I can't remember the last time GBx was below 10%. Granted, this is just 2 top 32s, but I would still expect more. My guess is Death Shadow leached some Jund players since the decks share so many cards.
Is Death's Shadow not a GBx deck? At least, it's a lot more like one than previous iterations.
It's actually a pretty interesting question, come to think of it.
Personally I would rate it as a Aggro Midrange deck. It employs early interaction in form of, most of the times multiple, discard spells and can slam "protected" high value beaters afterwards. Due to the nature of the deck however, it is more in the Aggro department, since it can actually take the Aggro role quite good with an early big Goyf or Death Shadow. The trade of for this better aggro is of course the late game. Jund and Junk can grind way better due to the access to both Manlands as high impact CMC cards like Huntmaster and Rhino. DSJ can trick a little bit by using Traverse to grab more copies of their good creatures but in general it will still lose the mid to late game vs those "pure" Midrange decks.
Am I the only person that thinks Mox Opal and SSG fit the ban criteria? I even like the decks these cards are part of but find them to hedge out literally 20+ decks that could find new footing with them gone.
And Death's Shadow is only doing well because people have broken a tutor. Color me surprised that a 1 mana tutor is broken in a format where you can turn it on without issue. Pair it with a deck that proactively strips other decks ability to play their game and you have a very consistent version of Jund. Shocking that Jund is good...
You can beat Jund as mentioned previously. It takes effort and people changing decks. Which is a HUGE expense in Modern so it doesn't happen without a ton of people fighting it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In case I didn't tell you, I don't care about your opinion I just want your facts. And not the facts that make you seem smart. I want the ones that are actual facts.
Banning Opal and SSG make a lot of decks unplayable.
Cheerios, Lantern, Affinity, Ad Nauseam, Living End, and probably Goryo's Vengeance.
None of those decks are oppressive in the metagame, but none of them are fun to play against either. I wouldn't mind none of them being viable as I hate losing on T2 or T3 when I haven't even had a chance to play yet.
Am I the only person that thinks Mox Opal and SSG fit the ban criteria? I even like the decks these cards are part of but find them to hedge out literally 20+ decks that could find new footing with them gone
You are not the only one but you and the others who want it are unreasonable and off-base. Please point to the tournament finishes, particularly from the last month after the January bans, that suggest these cards are problematic. People keep claiming they are causing format problems and yet the decks using these cards just aren't performing. This suggests people have a subjective and biased view of what they personally think is "acceptable" in Modern and just want to advance that view without actually citing any numbers.
As for the argument that they are pushing out other strategies, a) which strategies?, b) how do you know those strategies would thrive with the cards gone?, and c) what about the literally dozens of other Modern cards pushing out other decks? Jund pushes out plenty of decks that can't beat it. Same with Tron. Same with Burn. Modern can't be a race to the bottom where we ban every competitive deck just to open up all the untiered crap. Every format will have competitive decks that are better than alternatives. That's the nature of competitive Magic and has been since the game started. It's only a problem if there isn't diversity at the competitive level, which there currently is in spades (unless you want to play reactive blue, in which case you're stuck in Tier 2 or lower on sub-par decks).
Players often talk about how these fast decks are bad for the game and create an unpleasant experience. They also never back this assertion up with any evidence. You know what's equally, if not more, offputting to new players? Constant bans. Constant talk about bans. Constant fear that your deck will be banned. If we're operating in an argumentation area where we aren't citing numbers, there is no way that "unpleasant fast decks" is more of a toll on the Modern playerbase than "constant bans and ban mentality." Those are at least equal and the latter is almost certainly more harmful.
Am I the only person that thinks Mox Opal and SSG fit the ban criteria? I even like the decks these cards are part of but find them to hedge out literally 20+ decks that could find new footing with them gone
You are not the only one but you and the others who want it are unreasonable and off-base. Please point to the tournament finishes, particularly from the last month after the January bans, that suggest these cards are problematic. People keep claiming they are causing format problems and yet the decks using these cards just aren't performing. This suggests people have a subjective and biased view of what they personally think is "acceptable" in Modern and just want to advance that view without actually citing any numbers.
As for the argument that they are pushing out other strategies, a) which strategies?, b) how do you know those strategies would thrive with the cards gone?, and c) what about the literally dozens of other Modern cards pushing out other decks? Jund pushes out plenty of decks that can't beat it. Same with Tron. Same with Burn. Modern can't be a race to the bottom where we ban every competitive deck just to open up all the untiered crap. Every format will have competitive decks that are better than alternatives. That's the nature of competitive Magic and has been since the game started. It's only a problem if there isn't diversity at the competitive level, which there currently is in spades (unless you want to play reactive blue, in which case you're stuck in Tier 2 or lower on sub-par decks).
Players often talk about how these fast decks are bad for the game and create an unpleasant experience. They also never back this assertion up with any evidence. You know what's equally, if not more, offputting to new players? Constant bans. Constant talk about bans. Constant fear that your deck will be banned. If we're operating in an argumentation area where we aren't citing numbers, there is no way that "unpleasant fast decks" is more of a toll on the Modern playerbase than "constant bans and ban mentality." Those are at least equal and the latter is almost certainly more harmful.
Is performing the only criteria for bans though?
Playing against Goryo's Vengeance and Cheerios and losing T2 on the draw isn't fun. You literally just played a land and passed.
Affinity, Living End, and Ad Nausesam are all slower decks that are easier to disrupt.
Even if these decks only kill you 20% on T2, that is still to much for most people. The main problem people don't like modern is there is so much variance and you can't control bad matchups or T2 kills. Why not take some of that variance out by banning these cards?
Banning Opal and SSG make a lot of decks unplayable.
Cheerios, Lantern, Affinity, Ad Nauseam, Living End, and probably Goryo's Vengeance.
None of those decks are oppressive in the metagame, but none of them are fun to play against either. I wouldn't mind none of them being viable as I hate losing on T2 or T3 when I haven't even had a chance to play yet.
Speak for yourself, I would play against Affinity, Cheeri0s, and Ad Naus all day long and have a lot of fun. The other 3 can go die in a ditch for sure but there's probably someone who has fun against those (Excluding Lantern).
Death Shadow is only 6% of the mtgo share, when we see a broken deck it usually hits at least 10%
Obviously, it's super early and mtgo isn't everything, but it's often a good indicator.
We saw Shadow decks have uphill battles against Eldrazi, Junk, Company--this isn't the 0 tier deck you guys think it is, we saw Eye of Ugin Eldrazi decks thrash everything and everyone, and dredge was really oppressive in how it eliminated graveyard strategies and even other fast decks. The only thing I think Death Shadow oppressed is regular Jund itself, and now we have Death Shadow Jund and Junk which are significantly different decks
Junk is solid, and this is probably the worst I've seen Jund do in a while
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The base numbers are just ballpark estimates regularly agreed upon by the people who played the decks. The rest is just simple probability based on those initial numbers. So the root isn't pulled from piles of statistical analysis of all games or anything, just showing in some numbers what match outcomes would be given those starting odds. I'd say 30/70 game 1 and 55/45 games 2 amd 3 was fairly accurate. Dunno what it would be today though. I originally made it as a way to illustrate that even though post board matchups might be in Twin's favor (tho was probably still closer to 50/50 or worse, IMO) it wasn't enough to overcome the massive game 1 disadvantage or produce an overall positive matchup (something people still convince themselves of). If someone can parse out all the data necessary to make accurate base values, I'm all for it! But this was just a numbers representation of commonly accepted values.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
The style of deck that we're bemoaning that isn't good in the format has been a staple part of magic since 1996-1997. It is also (reactive Ux control deck) the best type of deck to keep a format from degenerating. Me personally I enjoy the chess like nature of navigating a match against my opponent rather than be beholden to the top 10 or 12 cards of my deck playing itself against the opponents top 10 or so. I despise solitaire type gameplay in a format which is designed to be one human playing against another, not one person playing against their own deck. So the lack of options and viability for me to play the deck with the most choices and decisions in any given game is unfortunate. The reason why most people aren't *****ing about white is because the traditional white style decks are represented in gameplay in the format - Zoo, Affinity, Merfolk, etc. There is no viable deck in the format for people who like to play reactive control decks that have deck manipulation, card draw, and play at instant speed to have a good shot at T8'ing and winning an event. The one deck we did have was taken away from us (Twin) and we have had the most cards on the banlist than any other deck.
As for D&T. I'd like to see it get some of its legacy power level counterparts. SFM would help this deck a lot. So would a card better than GQ/TE, but worse than Wasteland. Recruiter and Prelate would be good too. Rishadan Port is probably too good, but really, I'm not opposed to having better white taxing effects in the format. (Mother of Runes will never get through standard - the card is too good there imho) Also, the Eldrazi decks do have some style similarities to D&T, (colorless seems to have usurped a lot of white imho) so they have viable options to choose from as well.
Oh yeah, Sensei's Top is on the banlist as well....man I'd love to get that one back.
I don't even know where to start.
Modern is dying? Do you not see it's numbers making a mockery of Standard? Other than a few delusional people who commonly post nonsensical things with no basis in reality, nobody says modern is dying...
Spirits
Um...counterspell is not that powerful in Legacy, but it is a good role-player for Miracles. Also, that's not a good argument. Deathrite Shaman is perhaps the best creature in Legacy and it was a dud in standard. Cards can be powerful in different formats based on the context surrounding the format. Counterspell would be fine in Standard right now. UU is not trivial and the format is built on the backs of aggressive decks. It'd be good, but not something backbreaking. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever see it in Modern (vis a vis standard) because WoTC believes reprinting it will destroy the game, which is frankly silly, given that we just had 3 bannings of stupid threat cards (and Constrictor is just a dumb card). I don't mean to be overly aggressive (if it comes off that way) in my post just some thoughts.
No, I'm right there with you. I feel the same way. I even tried a Standard PPTQ today borrowing BG and yeah, Constrictor is dumb. It seems borderline bannable to me, but I shouldn't speak on a format I don't know - like when Standard players say all Delve and Phyrexian mana spells should be banned, which I just hate to hear.
Counterspell is exactly that - a role player in Miracles, a deck that I have tested a bunch and am just now (after half a year of testing on and off) feel almost comfortable to play at a tournament.
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'm being sarcastic. Amonkhet is obviously going to give grixis some love since it's bolas's plane.
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
This issue is compacted by the new world order in terms of their card design. Wizards really wants to make creatures/planeswalkers really good and make answers very specific. This makes it hard for anything but "charm" type noncreature/non planeswalker spells to come to modern.
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
It is silly that they think that counterspells ruin the game. Just look at the top 8 match between grixis and bant eldrazi and it clearly shows how counterspells in general are not that good. Counterspells are only good when ahead on board or in parity. Commiting 2 mana to counter something every turn can back fire badly and then you lose out on using all your mana in the next untap step. Counterspells were good back then because you had good instants to use just in case countering was not the best use of your mana for that turn cycle. This is why you see Wafo tapa playing think twice in his modern control decks even though think twice is a very unpowered card. Heck counter magic is not really strong in the other eternal formats except for stopping degenerate things with force or mental misstep.
I am sure blue needs its identity back and that is being the color of consistency and card advantage. When the two best cards in modern representing these qualities of blue being serum visions and ancestral vision we have a problem. After seeing ds aggro's consistency with baubles, wraiths, and Traverse I think blue needs some of that love back since that what the color is about. I am all for a Preordain unban and some combo becomes too good it is really that they are playing some degenerate card that was waiting for a home. Another thing is with how efficient the wincons are nowadays blue can an upgrade to their finishers. Not to the level of goyf or death's shadow but something that is good enough.
Edit: if we cannot improve our wincons then wotc should print better instant speed draw or flash creatures to makes counters actually good otherwise a good wincon and consistency tools will suffice.
Bingo. Hell, my LGS is now going on four straight weeks of FNMs where standard attendance has been lower than both modern and LEGACY. This is just anecdotal evidence from a podunk shop in Ohio, but the general consensus is that if any format is "dying" (a more appropriate term would be" in need of assistance") then it's standard considering WoTC literally announced how they're gonna start shilling extra hard to boost up attendance/interest. This trite "modern is dying" narrative needs to end; fear-mongering from mtg youtubers/other content creators is the only reason I can think of for why this misperception continues to exist. If everything on Youtube were true then we'd all be playing Frontier, enemy fetches would've been printed in every single set going back to BFZ, and the world would be ruled by a secret group of lizard-people.
Link to Discord server where anybody from MTGS can keep up with thread topics while everything is being sorted out with the new site.
RGTron
UGInfect
URStorm
WUBRAd Nauseam
BRGrishoalbrand
URGScapeshift
WBGAbzan Company
WUBRGAmulet Titan
BRGLiving End
WGBogles
The funny thing is that we literally had Counterspell in Standard like 2 years ago. Silumgar's Scorn was just counterspell in the Esper Dragons deck more often than not, and it was completely fine.
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
A few notes on what stands out to me:
We might have a new tier 0 deck. The Death Shadow deck dominated both tournaments. It looked really good on camera as well, so expect it to spike on MTGO and locally. I predict it hits 20% meta share in a month or two.
GBx below 10%. I can't remember the last time GBx was below 10%. Granted, this is just 2 top 32s, but I would still expect more. My guess is Death Shadow leached some Jund players since the decks share so many cards.
Blue decks just a little over 6%. I was worried after the GP. The Open just confirmed it. Even though two blue decks made top 8, those were the only two in the top 32. Blue decks in generally did not perform well.
Eldrazi decks performed well. At the GP it was Eldrazi Tron, and at the Open it was Bant Eldrazi. I'm guessing it's partially because it's the best deck against Fatal Push.
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
Is Death's Shadow not a GBx deck? At least, it's a lot more like one than previous iterations.
It's actually a pretty interesting question, come to think of it.
I'd be very quick to halt you on that 0 tier deck. It did not look like an unstoppable monster, and it is reasonably interacted with, unlike Eldrazi or Dredge decks. We saw Junk beat the holy hell out of it games 1 and game 3.
If we start calling every new deck a tier 0 deck we're never going to have new decks bust into this format. Jund is also the most popular deck in modern, it's not hard to believe a lot of them bought Death Shadow pieces for like 100 in total to play the deck. I think it was also the most played deck so those numbers could transition well to day 2.
Hmm, where do I start? Lets start with your claim that Eldrazie was by far the most disgusting deck Modern has ever seen. That crown belongs to either Cloudpost, Shoal Infect, Philly Storm or even Dredge (talking the Magic Online Championship Dredge list). Heck, even something like DRS BBE Jund was more disgusting than Eldrazis and would have dismantled that deck with ease (as you can see in the NBL Modern "results" ^^ ).
Also, regarding your statement, that Twin was the most incorrect ban Modern has ever seen, I have to disagree kindly. Wild Nacatl would take the crown here, if we are talking about the whole format than it would be Sword of the Meek and Bitterblossom. Sure, GGT would take the crown, if Inistrad 2.0 didn't happen, but w/e.
There might be a future, where Twin gets unbanned, but this will take for sure another 3-4 years. Btw. this is also true for things like DRS, GSZ or even Pod. Cause one thing is for sure, the powerlevel won't get lower by adding more sets to the format and thus we might get room for those power cards.
You are forgetting several decks, which are doing good in the current Legacy meta: Aggro Loam, Elves (which have a really bad Miracles match-up btw), Burn (yes, it is a thing) and Turbo Depths. Heck, I hear the statement way to often, that if you are not running Brainstorm.deck you cannot win anything which is not true, especially after the DTT ban. I know, when you are not actively playing the format you get the feeling that no brainstorm = lose is a given fact but it is simply not true.
Hence, please do not make statements like this which are simply not true. Blue as a colour IS strong (comparable with B in Modern) but not the *play blue and rofl win everything vs non blue decks*. Most of the times, it is exactly the opposite way, that the blueless decks have a great blue deck match-up.
There are two statements, which are just wrong.
The first one is about Daze. Daze was only, and I repeat myself here, ONLY problematic because of Infect and not any other deck. Daze would help Delver esque decks a ton while being fairly useless in the U based combo decks.
The second one is that you make a direct link from a POSSIBLE good early game to a good general match-up. The UW Control deck I was playing a few years ago had a great aggro match-up, since I had 6 1 mana Removal spells + 3 Sweepers + 4 Wall of Omnes + great early counter spells (Spell Snare, Spell Pierce, Dispel, Mana Leak, Remand,...). However, the trade off for this good early game was the mid to late game. My late game was so abyssal that I had to race BGx to not just get outvalued in the late game. The counters I run helped in the early, but when we are in turn 6 a Remand looks really bad and is just a 2 mana cycle card. That Spell Pierce or Leak won't get better in the lategame is also obvious.
However, at the same time I could build the deck to utterly crush everything in the mid to late game, but the early game was so abyssal, that I would lose to close to every aggro or combo deck.
Now, the logical answer would be to build it somewhere in between. However, now we are getting in the exact problems U based Control has in Modern, deck space, card filtering and answers. You cannot slam every single answer in your deck to find it reliable, since you simply do not have the deck space. If we would have good card filtering, than it problem gets less problematic, since we can dig for those "Silverbullets" actively and have a good shot finding them. However, the next problem are the answers itself. Most of the answers have a drawback of some kind, which is, don't get me wrong, good. However, when you have to play 20 answer spells and each single one has a medium to big drawback all those drawbacks start to pile up and you have to ask yourself the question, is it even worth to run so many drawbacks just to get a somewhat stable answer suite together?
There already exist spells, which would "fix" that problem in a non problematic fashion. Stifle and Daze are for the tempo esque decks, Prohibit for the more U Midrange/Control decks. Are those spells broken? No. Would they fix fundamental issues? Somewhat but they would make those respective decks more playable.
tl,dr.: The problem with Control esque decks (and also tempo decks) are the cumulative drawbacks from the answer suite you have to play, decreasing those drawbacks would already help a ton to enable such decks.
Greetings,
Kathal
Modern/Legacy
either funpolice (Delver, Deathcloud, UW Control) or the fun decks (especially those ft. Griselbrand)
It will not be Tier 0. Even a 20% deck isn't actually Tier 0; see TC Delver, DRS BGx, Pod, and others. These decks, despite holding around 20% shares, were more in the Tier .5 category. This is an important distinction. Decks sometimes rise to Tier .5 before falling to Tier 1. At one point, Bant Eldrazi pushed this share before falling to Tier 1. Burn did too. True Tier 0 decks start higher and stay higher.
That said, if DS Jund sustains a 20% share it will get hit with a ban, Tier 0 or Tier .5 or whatever. That share is just too high for Wizards and would fall squarely in the banning range.
DS Jund is BGx. If anything, it shows just how strong this color pairing is and how crappy some of the competitors are. Like blue, which you correctly highlight in your post as being terrible.
I do think Force of Will would be too strong, but maybe a better Disrupting Shoal that goes through Standard first?
Personally I would rate it as a Aggro Midrange deck. It employs early interaction in form of, most of the times multiple, discard spells and can slam "protected" high value beaters afterwards. Due to the nature of the deck however, it is more in the Aggro department, since it can actually take the Aggro role quite good with an early big Goyf or Death Shadow. The trade of for this better aggro is of course the late game. Jund and Junk can grind way better due to the access to both Manlands as high impact CMC cards like Huntmaster and Rhino. DSJ can trick a little bit by using Traverse to grab more copies of their good creatures but in general it will still lose the mid to late game vs those "pure" Midrange decks.
In general, those articles are a great tool to actually rate decks properly (4 article series, this is the 4th part): http://modernnexus.com/wheel-of-fortune-riding-the-archetype-spectrum/
Greetings,
Kathal
Modern/Legacy
either funpolice (Delver, Deathcloud, UW Control) or the fun decks (especially those ft. Griselbrand)
And Death's Shadow is only doing well because people have broken a tutor. Color me surprised that a 1 mana tutor is broken in a format where you can turn it on without issue. Pair it with a deck that proactively strips other decks ability to play their game and you have a very consistent version of Jund. Shocking that Jund is good...
You can beat Jund as mentioned previously. It takes effort and people changing decks. Which is a HUGE expense in Modern so it doesn't happen without a ton of people fighting it.
Cockatrice username: Blackcat77
Cheerios, Lantern, Affinity, Ad Nauseam, Living End, and probably Goryo's Vengeance.
None of those decks are oppressive in the metagame, but none of them are fun to play against either. I wouldn't mind none of them being viable as I hate losing on T2 or T3 when I haven't even had a chance to play yet.
You are not the only one but you and the others who want it are unreasonable and off-base. Please point to the tournament finishes, particularly from the last month after the January bans, that suggest these cards are problematic. People keep claiming they are causing format problems and yet the decks using these cards just aren't performing. This suggests people have a subjective and biased view of what they personally think is "acceptable" in Modern and just want to advance that view without actually citing any numbers.
As for the argument that they are pushing out other strategies, a) which strategies?, b) how do you know those strategies would thrive with the cards gone?, and c) what about the literally dozens of other Modern cards pushing out other decks? Jund pushes out plenty of decks that can't beat it. Same with Tron. Same with Burn. Modern can't be a race to the bottom where we ban every competitive deck just to open up all the untiered crap. Every format will have competitive decks that are better than alternatives. That's the nature of competitive Magic and has been since the game started. It's only a problem if there isn't diversity at the competitive level, which there currently is in spades (unless you want to play reactive blue, in which case you're stuck in Tier 2 or lower on sub-par decks).
Players often talk about how these fast decks are bad for the game and create an unpleasant experience. They also never back this assertion up with any evidence. You know what's equally, if not more, offputting to new players? Constant bans. Constant talk about bans. Constant fear that your deck will be banned. If we're operating in an argumentation area where we aren't citing numbers, there is no way that "unpleasant fast decks" is more of a toll on the Modern playerbase than "constant bans and ban mentality." Those are at least equal and the latter is almost certainly more harmful.
Is performing the only criteria for bans though?
Playing against Goryo's Vengeance and Cheerios and losing T2 on the draw isn't fun. You literally just played a land and passed.
Affinity, Living End, and Ad Nausesam are all slower decks that are easier to disrupt.
Even if these decks only kill you 20% on T2, that is still to much for most people. The main problem people don't like modern is there is so much variance and you can't control bad matchups or T2 kills. Why not take some of that variance out by banning these cards?
Speak for yourself, I would play against Affinity, Cheeri0s, and Ad Naus all day long and have a lot of fun. The other 3 can go die in a ditch for sure but there's probably someone who has fun against those (Excluding Lantern).
Obviously, it's super early and mtgo isn't everything, but it's often a good indicator.
We saw Shadow decks have uphill battles against Eldrazi, Junk, Company--this isn't the 0 tier deck you guys think it is, we saw Eye of Ugin Eldrazi decks thrash everything and everyone, and dredge was really oppressive in how it eliminated graveyard strategies and even other fast decks. The only thing I think Death Shadow oppressed is regular Jund itself, and now we have Death Shadow Jund and Junk which are significantly different decks
Junk is solid, and this is probably the worst I've seen Jund do in a while