Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
My point is that I'm wondering if you take Twin out of the equation, when has reactive blue EVER put up consistent results in Modern? The lack of this type of deck isn't new to the format, and it took a completely unfair combo interaction to make it good. Modern's simply not a good environment for blue and it never has been.
Maybe this is just a terminological disagreement. I don't care if Delver is the new top-tier viable blue deck of choice. Or Jeskai Nahiri. Or Copy Cat. Or the more traditional reactive decks like UW Control or Esper Control. I'd group any of those decks into a reactive blue category, but honestly, we can call that category whatever you want to call it. It's deliberately a huge category covering a lot of different blue decks, because any of them would be welcome. But whatever we call it, those decks would still all be bad right now and have still been bad since August 2016.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
Personally I don't see it as a problem for 2 reasons.
First, the Modern format uses cards from a certain point forward, and those cards for the most part adhere to the "new world order" of card design. That design philosophy very intentionally and clearly favors creatures and playing to the board over non-creature spells and reaction. It's almost an "if A=B and B=C then A=C" situation where if Modern = new card design and new card design = counters are bad, then what do you expect out of the format?
Second, I honestly don't think what they said in the ban announcement is the "real" reason they banned Twin. I think they did their best to come up with pertinent reasons that sounded good at the time, but I think the REAL reason is that they simply wanted pillars that they considered warping and unfair, even subjectively, like Storm, Pod, and Twin, out of the format.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
Because Modern is incredibly diverse right now. Way more than it was during any point Twin was legal for. I don't care if there aren't many counterspell decks so long as Modern has a ton of viable decks, and I bet Wizards doesn't care either. The Twin ban may have promoted diversity in a way they didn't intend (they were counting on a bunch of different blue decks to take up some piece of the metagame share left behind), but the format's diversity itself is currently undeniable.
Besides, reactive blue is still playable, even if it's not much more playable than Death & Taxes or another Tier 2 Modern deck. UW Control and Grixis Control are examples of reactive blue decks that have decent showings every once in awhile. No, they're not even close to Tier 1. But given how diverse Modern is, and considering how maintaining that diversity seems to be Wizards' primary goal for the format, I don't think that's an issue at all for them. Why would they want to jeopardize Modern's current dynamism by unbanning a card like Preordain or Jace that has the potential to go awry?
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
Because Modern is incredibly diverse right now. Way more than it was during any point Twin was legal for. I don't care if there aren't many counterspell decks so long as Modern has a ton of viable decks, and I bet Wizards doesn't care either. The Twin ban may have promoted diversity in a way they didn't intend (they were counting on a bunch of different blue decks to take up some piece of the metagame share left behind), but the format's diversity itself is currently undeniable.
Besides, reactive blue is still playable, even if it's not much more playable than Death & Taxes or another Tier 2 Modern deck. UW Control and Grixis Control are examples of reactive blue decks that have decent showings every once in awhile. No, they're not even close to Tier 1. But given how diverse Modern is, and considering how maintaining that diversity seems to be Wizards' primary goal for the format, I don't think that's an issue at all for them. Why would they want to jeopardize Modern's current dynamism by unbanning a card like Preordain or Jace that has the potential to go awry?
I think that is more due to the probe ban. A lot of tge decks that are doing well now whefe not held back by twin but the crazyness that was aggro combo. I know bant eladrazi, ad nauseam, and other new decks can exist in a world with twin but not one with probe infect, ur prowess, and all in deaths shadow.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
Because Modern is incredibly diverse right now. Way more than it was during any point Twin was legal for. I don't care if there aren't many counterspell decks so long as Modern has a ton of viable decks, and I bet Wizards doesn't care either. The Twin ban may have promoted diversity in a way they didn't intend (they were counting on a bunch of different blue decks to take up some piece of the metagame share left behind), but the format's diversity itself is currently undeniable.
Besides, reactive blue is still playable, even if it's not much more playable than Death & Taxes or another Tier 2 Modern deck. UW Control and Grixis Control are examples of reactive blue decks that have decent showings every once in awhile. No, they're not even close to Tier 1. But given how diverse Modern is, and considering how maintaining that diversity seems to be Wizards' primary goal for the format, I don't think that's an issue at all for them. Why would they want to jeopardize Modern's current dynamism by unbanning a card like Preordain or Jace that has the potential to go awry?
I think that is more due to the probe ban. A lot of tge decks that are doing well now whefe not held back by twin but the crazyness that was aggro combo. I know bant eladrazi, ad nauseam, and other new decks can exist in a world with twin but not one with probe infect, ur prowess, and all in deaths shadow.
Irrelevant point. Whatever the reason---which by the way is impossible to truly decipher without some messy, confidence-shaking slew of unbans, high-profile tournaments, and re-bans---Modern is very diverse right now. Wizards wants Modern to be diverse. I doubt Wizards will make any changes to Modern because a type of deck is not very well-represented. Non-Merfolk fish decks (D&T, Hatebears, etc.) are also under-represented right now, but I doubt that's reason enough to unban Stoneforge Mystic.
The company is likely to sit on this diversity for as long as it can while printing new cards and hoping the format opens itself up to under-represented archetypes naturally, without having to take any risks with unbans to artificially push a certain strategy.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
Because Modern is incredibly diverse right now. Way more than it was during any point Twin was legal for. I don't care if there aren't many counterspell decks so long as Modern has a ton of viable decks, and I bet Wizards doesn't care either. The Twin ban may have promoted diversity in a way they didn't intend (they were counting on a bunch of different blue decks to take up some piece of the metagame share left behind), but the format's diversity itself is currently undeniable.
Besides, reactive blue is still playable, even if it's not much more playable than Death & Taxes or another Tier 2 Modern deck. UW Control and Grixis Control are examples of reactive blue decks that have decent showings every once in awhile. No, they're not even close to Tier 1. But given how diverse Modern is, and considering how maintaining that diversity seems to be Wizards' primary goal for the format, I don't think that's an issue at all for them. Why would they want to jeopardize Modern's current dynamism by unbanning a card like Preordain or Jace that has the potential to go awry?
I think that is more due to the probe ban. A lot of tge decks that are doing well now whefe not held back by twin but the crazyness that was aggro combo. I know bant eladrazi, ad nauseam, and other new decks can exist in a world with twin but not one with probe infect, ur prowess, and all in deaths shadow.
Irrelevant point. Whatever the reason---which by the way is impossible to truly decipher without some messy, confidence-shaking slew of unbans, high-profile tournaments, and re-bans---Modern is very diverse right now. Wizards wants Modern to be diverse. I doubt Wizards will make any changes to Modern because a type of deck is not very well-represented. Non-Merfolk fish decks (D&T, Hatebears, etc.) are also under-represented right now, but I doubt that's reason enough to unban Stoneforge Mystic.
The company is likely to sit on this diversity for as long as it can while printing new cards and hoping the format opens itself up to under-represented archetypes naturally, without having to take any risks with unbans to artificially push a certain strategy.
Never mind the fact that Wizards said this a year ago: "While there are some control decks that would use Ancestral Vision, it is an underplayed portion of the metagame. To allow for an increase in the number of blue-based control or attrition decks, we are unbanning Ancestral Vision." http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/banned-and-restricted-announcement-2016-04-04
So clearly, they want that to happen and clearly it has been a massive failure.
And in this article, Wizards outlines their goals for Modern, which emphasize diversity and make no mention of reactive blue needing to be a pillar of the format. I think in Wizards' perfect world, reactive blue decks would be almost exactly as viable as BGx, which would be almost exactly as viable as D&T, which would be almost exactly as viable as Possibility Storm Combo. They want the format as diverse as possible, remember? If all decks were almost equal in power, Modern would be even more diverse than it is now! But they know they can't have everything and I bet, given how diverse Modern is right now, they're willing to cut their losses when it comes to reactive blue not having panned out as they may have hoped with the Twin ban.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
Yeah, I guess they said that in a B&R announcement for no reason, and that diversity doesn't include diversity among archetypes (which would include blue-based control and attrition).
And in this article, Wizards outlines their goals for Modern, which emphasize diversity and make no mention of reactive blue needing to be a pillar of the format. I think in Wizards' perfect world, reactive blue decks would be almost exactly as viable as BGx, which would be almost exactly as viable as D&T, which would be almost exactly as viable as Possibility Storm Combo. They want the format as diverse as possible, remember? If all decks were almost equal in power, Modern would be even more diverse than it is now! But they know they can't have everything and I bet, given how diverse Modern is right now, they're willing to cut their losses when it comes to reactive blue not having panned out as they may have hoped with the Twin ban.
I largely agree with this post and the ones before it, but disagree with your conclusion. Yes, Modern is very diverse now and that's great for players and Wizards. But that doesn't mean they are likely to just cut their losses and accept a lack of top-tier reactive blue in the format. They will probably continue to look for lower risk unbans to help out the color. Stoddard even said risk was an inherent part of unbanning and suggested Wizards has to take chances with unbans that might feel a bit risky. I don't think this will happen tomorrow because I think the majority of R&D discussion has been about the complete nightmare that is Standard, not fixing one issue in the otherwise spectacular Modern. I do think they will unban a card to help blue decks in April though, especially if the August 2016 - Present trend continues. Wizards made two unbans explicitly to help non-Twin blue decks, and made the Twin ban (in part) to help those decks as well. They also want the banlist to be as short as possible, and they are always looking to increase diversity. All of this points much more to a future unban than a series of "no changes" updates for the next year (or even 6 months).
And in this article, Wizards outlines their goals for Modern, which emphasize diversity and make no mention of reactive blue needing to be a pillar of the format. I think in Wizards' perfect world, reactive blue decks would be almost exactly as viable as BGx, which would be almost exactly as viable as D&T, which would be almost exactly as viable as Possibility Storm Combo. They want the format as diverse as possible, remember? If all decks were almost equal in power, Modern would be even more diverse than it is now! But they know they can't have everything and I bet, given how diverse Modern is right now, they're willing to cut their losses when it comes to reactive blue not having panned out as they may have hoped with the Twin ban.
I largely agree with this post and the ones before it, but disagree with your conclusion. Yes, Modern is very diverse now and that's great for players and Wizards. But that doesn't mean they are likely to just cut their losses and accept a lack of top-tier reactive blue in the format. They will probably continue to look for lower risk unbans to help out the color. Stoddard even said risk was an inherent part of unbanning and suggested Wizards has to take chances with unbans that might feel a bit risky. I don't think this will happen tomorrow because I think the majority of R&D discussion has been about the complete nightmare that is Standard, not fixing one issue in the otherwise spectacular Modern. I do think they will unban a card to help blue decks in April though, especially if the August 2016 - Present trend continues. Wizards made two unbans explicitly to help non-Twin blue decks, and made the Twin ban (in part) to help those decks as well. They also want the banlist to be as short as possible, and they are always looking to increase diversity. All of this points much more to a future unban than a series of "no changes" updates for the next year (or even 6 months).
I agree and think they are likely to consider unbanning Preo or JTMS in April (the traditional unban month) if the format remains this hostile to blue decks. But I really think it has to remain hostile. If Storm or AN creep up past 5% and start Top 8ing high-profile events, or if Grixis/UW Control creep up past 5% and start Top 8ing high-profile events (very unlikely, but if), I think these respective unbans come right off the table for Wizards, who will in that case be content to let these decks sit in Tier 2 and slowly receive whatever buffs they'll eventually get from Standard cards.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
I do not see Preordain coming back to Modern anytime soon given Wizards's stance on card-filtering effects. I have always thought that the solution was painfully obvious and may actually be perfect for Standard at this point: re-print Opt. It is a card that is reactive, does less than Preordain, and has not been relevant in years.
I do not see Preordain coming back to Modern anytime soon given Wizards's stance on card-filtering effects. I have always thought that the solution was painfully obvious and may actually be perfect for Standard at this point: re-print Opt. It is a card that is reactive, does less than Preordain, and has not been relevant in years.
Opt sucks though, what Modern decks would even play it? It's a good deal worse than Serum Visions.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
Am I the only person seeing aggro take up over 40% of the meta and BGx reaching 16-17%+ of the meta and thinking...hey that's not healthy. Sure, modern is diverse in the sense that the title of the deck is different from other decks, but in archetype representation and play-style it is far from healthy. When you have Combo and Control decks making up a laughable % of the meta by definition it's not healthy. Those are 2 pillars of archetypes since Magic's inception. So, Magic is healthy when 2 of the archetypes the game is known for is *****...wonderful. If this game continues to go in the direction of being a cheap knock-off of Hearthstone, Pokemon, and Yugi-oh then I suppose it's just not for me anymore. Especially not when the one format that I do enjoy is gated off due to the ******* Reserved List. Blargh.
I mean you look at the direction and you see standard from the past 3 years and compare it to those other CG's on the market and it's hilarious. Why would anyone want to play Magic when it's a worse balanced game than the aforementioned...I guess people don't really because it's getting slaughtered by those other games. By all means, continue on. If by April nothing changes and Amonkhet continues their R&D pitch then WoTC is just telling me to go **** off. So that's what I'll do. I'll play some Cube with my friends every now and then, but I can take a hint when your skull is beaten into pulp.
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
I disagree with this, heavily. BGx and other archetypes do not have the same kind of infatuation in the playerbase that blue does to generate substantial outrage if they ever became weak.
They shouldn't feel the same. BGx has been good the whole time in Modern, outside of during Eldrazi. Despite what players will tell you, it was pretty damn good still even during the Birthing Pod era. Sure, that matchup was somewhat tough, but it had game vs. everything else and did better vs. Twin and Affinity than Pod did. Not to mention, BGx was stupid during the BGx Deathrite Shaman/Tectonic Edge and Ajundi days.
Twin players never had this. Twin was never as dominant as BGx if you go through the meta since the beginning. Twin is not even true Control, so Control players still never had a deck even close to the level that BGx has.
Reactive control was better when Twin was around because it had a good matchup against Twin.
Control decks were good against Twin. It doesn't mean that they were good vs. the rest of the meta. Beating the top deck is not good enough in a format as varied as Modern. I know Tron players that claim to have hardly ever have lost to Control decks. Do you want a deck that beats Twin and hope to see it in 50% of the rounds or a deck that does super well vs. the field? (hint...Twin)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I do not see Preordain coming back to Modern anytime soon given Wizards's stance on card-filtering effects. I have always thought that the solution was painfully obvious and may actually be perfect for Standard at this point: re-print Opt. It is a card that is reactive, does less than Preordain, and has not been relevant in years.
Opt sucks though, what Modern decks would even play it? It's a good deal worse than Serum Visions.
What? Opt is way better in control decks than Serum Visions. Being able to hold up interaction and then filter is good, especially in a format where the first few turns of the game are so important. You know how awkward it is to have Serum Visions in your hand and a piece of interaction like Spell Snare? Or on T2 you have Serum Visions or Logic Knot/whatever other counter? Then on 4 mana you hold up Cryptic? It's the reason why TT is actually good in the sense that it gives the deck options for your mana while still holding up interaction while a card that is better for CA like Take Inventory is laughable. If only they gave us 'fixed' AK (only checking your GY) instead of the idiotic Take Inventory, just like they ****ed us over when they gave us Steam Augury instead of Fact or Fiction.
Still, it is instant-speed, which at least gives it some niche, especially for a midrange/control build. Wizards has made it very clear that an abundance of good card-filtering effects was bad for the health of the Modern format. If I were I betting man, I would wager that JTMS is let back into the format before Preordain is given another chance.
You think Wizards is still super strict about that "card-filtering" idea that they had before? I think they change their minds like women change outfits. Remember that Sword of the Meek was supposed to break Lantern Control? Remember Jace, the Mind Sculptor had a "grave" in Modern, yet they talked about it recently?
In a format where Ancient Stirrings is easily the best card-filtering effect, I doubt Preordain is considered too much better than that. I mean, I understand that Stirrings can't be played in any deck, but yet 2-3 of the 4 decks that play Stirrings are actually much better than any deck in Modern that currently runs Serum Visions or Sleight of Hand. That's just facts, unless you can tell me a Serum Visions deck better than Bant Eldrazi or Tron (stirrings decks).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I do not see Preordain coming back to Modern anytime soon given Wizards's stance on card-filtering effects. I have always thought that the solution was painfully obvious and may actually be perfect for Standard at this point: re-print Opt. It is a card that is reactive, does less than Preordain, and has not been relevant in years.
Opt sucks though, what Modern decks would even play it? It's a good deal worse than Serum Visions.
What? Opt is way better in control decks than Serum Visions. Being able to hold up interaction and then filter is good, especially in a format where the first few turns of the game are so important. You know how awkward it is to have Serum Visions in your hand and a piece of interaction like Spell Snare? Or on T2 you have Serum Visions or Logic Knot/whatever other counter? Then on 4 mana you hold up Cryptic? It's the reason why TT is actually good in the sense that it gives the deck options for your mana while still holding up interaction while a card that is better for CA like Take Inventory is laughable. If only they gave us 'fixed' AK (only checking your GY) instead of the idiotic Take Inventory, just like they ****ed us over when they gave us Steam Augury instead of Fact or Fiction.
TT is played because it's instant-speed card advantage that also hedges against effects that make you discard. Opt is not card advantage, and scry 1 is so laughable that it's not good card selection, either. At least Visions does what you put it into the deck to do. Opt just does way too little for the mana, like Peek. Bauble is already a functional Opt for most fetch-heavy decks in Modern (even those not in blue) and they still don't play it.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
I do not see Preordain coming back to Modern anytime soon given Wizards's stance on card-filtering effects. I have always thought that the solution was painfully obvious and may actually be perfect for Standard at this point: re-print Opt. It is a card that is reactive, does less than Preordain, and has not been relevant in years.
Opt sucks though, what Modern decks would even play it? It's a good deal worse than Serum Visions.
What? Opt is way better in control decks than Serum Visions. Being able to hold up interaction and then filter is good, especially in a format where the first few turns of the game are so important. You know how awkward it is to have Serum Visions in your hand and a piece of interaction like Spell Snare? Or on T2 you have Serum Visions or Logic Knot/whatever other counter? Then on 4 mana you hold up Cryptic? It's the reason why TT is actually good in the sense that it gives the deck options for your mana while still holding up interaction while a card that is better for CA like Take Inventory is laughable. If only they gave us 'fixed' AK (only checking your GY) instead of the idiotic Take Inventory, just like they ****ed us over when they gave us Steam Augury instead of Fact or Fiction.
TT is good because it's instant-speed card advantage that also hedges against effects that make you discard. Opt is not card advantage, and scry 1 is so laughable that it's not good card selection, either. At least Visions does what you put it into the deck to do. Opt just does way too little for the mana, like Peek. Bauble is already a functional Opt for most fetch-heavy decks in Modern (even those not in blue) and they still don't play it.
I wasn't comparing TT to Opt, I was comparing TT to a strictly better CA tool on rate in Take Inventory to illustrate why Instant speed is worth WAY more than Scry 1. Serum Visions is awkward in a control deck. Opt is not. The reason why Ponder sees play in Miracles in Modern is on the back of Force of Will as you're not 'shields down' while you filter. I don't want to say you don't know what you're talking about, but you don't. When you're playing cards like Spell Snare, Logic Knot, and Cryptic Command (and Snapcaster is often a 3 mana play), the last thing you want to be doing is taking a turn off to cast a random draw spell to scry 2. I actually think SV is a trap for modern control decks to be honest. Given the card pool and options Thought Scour is just a lot better of an option fueling stuff like Knot and giving selection for Snapcaster. So, yeah, the point is that Opt is a way better option for control decks than SV. SV is obviously better for combo decks because they're proactive decks that just want to see the most cards they can and SV is better for that.
It's also why I don't really care for preordain coming off because it won't do much for the archetype, though it will help combo which does need some help so I'm not opposed, but the 3 cards that will have a difference for control in the format is Sensei's Top, DTT, and Jace (more or less in that order). If we get the same *****ty counterspells and draw spells we've gotten in the last 5 years in Amonkhet I'm out. A person can only take so much abuse.
You think Wizards is still super strict about that "card-filtering" idea that they had before?
When I have to wait 2 decades before potentially seeing an Opt reprint, yes, I do. This is the type of spell that Wizards should have jumped on with their decision to make scry evergreen, since it is simple yet never had the privilege of being printed with the keyword.
I wasn't comparing TT to Opt, I was comparing TT to a strictly better CA tool on rate in Take Inventory to illustrate why Instant speed is worth WAY more than Scry 1. Serum Visions is awkward in a control deck. Opt is not. The reason why Ponder sees play in Miracles in Modern is on the back of Force of Will as you're not 'shields down' while you filter. I don't want to say you don't know what you're talking about, but you don't. When you're playing cards like Spell Snare, Logic Knot, and Cryptic Command (and Snapcaster is often a 3 mana play), the last thing you want to be doing is taking a turn off to cast a random draw spell to scry 2. I actually think SV is a trap for modern control decks to be honest. Given the card pool and options Thought Scour is just a lot better of an option fueling stuff like Knot and giving selection for Snapcaster. So, yeah, the point is that Opt is a way better option for control decks than SV. SV is obviously better for combo decks because they're proactive decks that just want to see the most cards they can and SV is better for that.
It's also why I don't really care for preordain coming off because it won't do much for the archetype, though it will help combo which does need some help so I'm not opposed, but the 3 cards that will have a difference for control in the format is Sensei's Top, DTT, and Jace (more or less in that order). If we get the same *****ty counterspells and draw spells we've gotten in the last 5 years in Amonkhet I'm out. A person can only take so much abuse.
Early game: helps you hit your land drops.
Late game: helps you draw business.
Scry 1 is not enough of a scry to make Opt reliable at either of these goals. If you play Opt instead you have to add more lands, and at that point you're almost certainly better off playing Think Twice. Visions plays a crucial role in Ux Control decks by allowing them to run fewer lands and more actual spells than decks that want to cast cards that cost 5+ should be able to.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
When I mentioned Opt, I was not talking about it as a Serum Visions replacement; Serum Visions is better and I doubt those who bring up Preordain are talking about it as a replacement, either. However, I feel Opt is good enough to be run alongside Serum Visions, especially considering the fact that it can be EOT flashed back via Snapcaster Mage. Sleight of Hand has always seemed like a "meh" secondary filtering effect, but Opt with its instant speed and Snapcaster friendliness would give a small kick to decks that use these effects.
I wasn't comparing TT to Opt, I was comparing TT to a strictly better CA tool on rate in Take Inventory to illustrate why Instant speed is worth WAY more than Scry 1. Serum Visions is awkward in a control deck. Opt is not. The reason why Ponder sees play in Miracles in Modern is on the back of Force of Will as you're not 'shields down' while you filter. I don't want to say you don't know what you're talking about, but you don't. When you're playing cards like Spell Snare, Logic Knot, and Cryptic Command (and Snapcaster is often a 3 mana play), the last thing you want to be doing is taking a turn off to cast a random draw spell to scry 2. I actually think SV is a trap for modern control decks to be honest. Given the card pool and options Thought Scour is just a lot better of an option fueling stuff like Knot and giving selection for Snapcaster. So, yeah, the point is that Opt is a way better option for control decks than SV. SV is obviously better for combo decks because they're proactive decks that just want to see the most cards they can and SV is better for that.
It's also why I don't really care for preordain coming off because it won't do much for the archetype, though it will help combo which does need some help so I'm not opposed, but the 3 cards that will have a difference for control in the format is Sensei's Top, DTT, and Jace (more or less in that order). If we get the same *****ty counterspells and draw spells we've gotten in the last 5 years in Amonkhet I'm out. A person can only take so much abuse.
Early game: helps you hit your land drops.
Late game: helps you draw business.
Scry 1 is not enough of a scry to make Opt reliable at either of these goals. If you play Opt instead you have to add more lands, and at that point you're almost certainly better off playing Think Twice. Visions plays a crucial role in Ux Control decks by allowing them to run fewer lands and more actual spells than decks that want to cast cards that cost 5+ should be able to.
If you're spending some of the first 4 turns of the game taking your shields down (When do you get to cast SV when you have Snare, 2 mana counter, removal, snap, and Cryptic in your hand? - Opt gives flexibility, SV does not) to hit land drops, you should just play more lands. At least preordain gets you the card you need right then and there way better than SV's random draw, and even then I'd rather have Opt in a control shell. Opt is also better at hitting land drops than Serum Visions as you get to see 2 cards right away rather than 1 so if you're playing the card for that reason, it's just way worse and this isn't even taking into account INSTANT ******* SPEED, that you seem to just nonchalantly dismiss. Opt also plays a lot better with Snapcaster than Serum Visions...(go figure it's that instant speed thing you keep ignoring)
I understand exactly what SV does and how it PLAYS in a control deck in CONTEXT of what other cards are in your deck. Opt is a far superior card for control decks than Serum Visions. Serum Visions is a far better card in Combo decks. What about these things do you not understand?
If you just want to play 4snapcasters.dec, then maybe you'll have a little trouble.
This sentence basically undermines the rest of your post. Snapcaster Mage is either the first or second best creature in Modern. The fact that "you'll have a little trouble" trying to play a 4 Snapcaster Mage deck tells you all you need to know about the shells he goes in. Nobody ever says, "If you just want to play 4tarmogoyf.dec, then maybe you'll have a little trouble."
if 5% of day 1 decks are blue, then the odds of showing up on day 2 are not with blue.
If only 5% of the field are showing up Day 1 on a blue deck, it's because they are perceived as being really really bad. Sometimes common perceptions of decks can be wrong, but the aggregate community is generally pretty good at discerning where the power lies in a format, especially in a format as slow moving as Modern.
Why persist in talking about blue? People are aware of delver/tempo/aggro in blue. Thats not what people are driving at, I bet I could find 10 posts in the last 3 pages that spell it out as REACTIVE blue.
Go nuts with your aggro/tempo plan, thats still not the topic at hand.
Honestly, I would be fine with it if the good blue decks we got were Delver style tempo decks. I just want anything to play my Snapcasters in where I don't feel like I'm giving up win percentages to play my preferred archetype.
I'm saying that the Day 1 numbers don't matter. If a deck is on the radar like Grixis (literally two appearances in a T8 in the past month) but doesn't show up elsewhere at the Day 2 or T32 level, it's not a good deck. It means those T8s were exceptions. It's the same effect as Skred Red or Elves or Lantern Control winning a GP. They are cool anomalies, maybe even temporarily well-positioned decks, but not good decks overall. When decks are actually good, people pick them up after their breakout success story. This is even true of complicated decks like the challenging Amulet Bloom; once it had the breakout performance, people learned it.
Blue decks aren't hard to play because they are complicated. They aren't absent on Day 2 and in the T32 because they are sleepers. They are hard to play because they aren't good. They are absent because, despite many knowing about them, they are worse than other options.
I miss when Keranos was a good card. That's all there is to say there.
Umphff, me too man. Keranos is my second favorite card of all time behind Snapcaster, lol. I swear to the god I don't believe in, if Amonkhet masterpieces are Gods and they have a masterpiece Keranos, I'm driving to Seattle to give WotC my bank account info.
Besides, reactive blue is still playable, even if it's not much more playable than Death & Taxes or another Tier 2 Modern deck. UW Control and Grixis Control are examples of reactive blue decks that have decent showings every once in awhile. No, they're not even close to Tier 1. But given how diverse Modern is, and considering how maintaining that diversity seems to be Wizards' primary goal for the format, I don't think that's an issue at all for them. Why would they want to jeopardize Modern's current dynamism by unbanning a card like Preordain or Jace that has the potential to go awry?
Even if we accepted this and moved on, things are only going to get worse for the blue decks without either unbans or a change in Standard design philosophy. Mana Leak is a ****in terrible card, and they won't even print that in Standard anymore. Meanwhile, Green and Black keep getting more and more upgrades to their creature suite. Something has to give.
If Storm or AN creep up past 5% and start Top 8ing high-profile events, or if Grixis/UW Control creep up past 5% and start Top 8ing high-profile events (very unlikely, but if), I think these respective unbans come right off the table for Wizards
If Storm or AN started becoming problems, unbanning something to power up the fair blue decks would be the perfect thing to do, since the fair blue decks prey on combo decks like Storm and Ad Naus.
I do not see Preordain coming back to Modern anytime soon given Wizards's stance on card-filtering effects. I have always thought that the solution was painfully obvious and may actually be perfect for Standard at this point: re-print Opt. It is a card that is reactive, does less than Preordain, and has not been relevant in years.
Eh, I don't know how many decks would play it. It's worse than SV for sure, and worse than Thoughtscour in decks playing Delve cards.
I understand exactly what SV does and how it PLAYS in a control deck in CONTEXT of what other cards are in your deck. Opt is a far superior card for control decks than Serum Visions. Serum Visions is a far better card in Combo decks. What about these things do you not understand?
Yeah, I don't really agree with this either. Modern decks aren't going to kill you on turn 2 or 3, so playing SV on turn 1 is pretty much a free roll. Sure, I don't want to play it turn 2 to hold up a counterspell, but turn 3 I can play one and still hold up counters as well. Having your cantrip dig 3 instead of 2 is a big deal, though. It means you'll find whatever you're looking for a turn faster for each SV you cast, and that one turn can often make the difference between winning or losing.
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First, the Modern format uses cards from a certain point forward, and those cards for the most part adhere to the "new world order" of card design. That design philosophy very intentionally and clearly favors creatures and playing to the board over non-creature spells and reaction. It's almost an "if A=B and B=C then A=C" situation where if Modern = new card design and new card design = counters are bad, then what do you expect out of the format?
Second, I honestly don't think what they said in the ban announcement is the "real" reason they banned Twin. I think they did their best to come up with pertinent reasons that sounded good at the time, but I think the REAL reason is that they simply wanted pillars that they considered warping and unfair, even subjectively, like Storm, Pod, and Twin, out of the format.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
Besides, reactive blue is still playable, even if it's not much more playable than Death & Taxes or another Tier 2 Modern deck. UW Control and Grixis Control are examples of reactive blue decks that have decent showings every once in awhile. No, they're not even close to Tier 1. But given how diverse Modern is, and considering how maintaining that diversity seems to be Wizards' primary goal for the format, I don't think that's an issue at all for them. Why would they want to jeopardize Modern's current dynamism by unbanning a card like Preordain or Jace that has the potential to go awry?
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
I think that is more due to the probe ban. A lot of tge decks that are doing well now whefe not held back by twin but the crazyness that was aggro combo. I know bant eladrazi, ad nauseam, and other new decks can exist in a world with twin but not one with probe infect, ur prowess, and all in deaths shadow.
The company is likely to sit on this diversity for as long as it can while printing new cards and hoping the format opens itself up to under-represented archetypes naturally, without having to take any risks with unbans to artificially push a certain strategy.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
Never mind the fact that Wizards said this a year ago:
"While there are some control decks that would use Ancestral Vision, it is an underplayed portion of the metagame. To allow for an increase in the number of blue-based control or attrition decks, we are unbanning Ancestral Vision."
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/banned-and-restricted-announcement-2016-04-04
So clearly, they want that to happen and clearly it has been a massive failure.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I largely agree with this post and the ones before it, but disagree with your conclusion. Yes, Modern is very diverse now and that's great for players and Wizards. But that doesn't mean they are likely to just cut their losses and accept a lack of top-tier reactive blue in the format. They will probably continue to look for lower risk unbans to help out the color. Stoddard even said risk was an inherent part of unbanning and suggested Wizards has to take chances with unbans that might feel a bit risky. I don't think this will happen tomorrow because I think the majority of R&D discussion has been about the complete nightmare that is Standard, not fixing one issue in the otherwise spectacular Modern. I do think they will unban a card to help blue decks in April though, especially if the August 2016 - Present trend continues. Wizards made two unbans explicitly to help non-Twin blue decks, and made the Twin ban (in part) to help those decks as well. They also want the banlist to be as short as possible, and they are always looking to increase diversity. All of this points much more to a future unban than a series of "no changes" updates for the next year (or even 6 months).
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
I mean you look at the direction and you see standard from the past 3 years and compare it to those other CG's on the market and it's hilarious. Why would anyone want to play Magic when it's a worse balanced game than the aforementioned...I guess people don't really because it's getting slaughtered by those other games. By all means, continue on. If by April nothing changes and Amonkhet continues their R&D pitch then WoTC is just telling me to go **** off. So that's what I'll do. I'll play some Cube with my friends every now and then, but I can take a hint when your skull is beaten into pulp.
They shouldn't feel the same. BGx has been good the whole time in Modern, outside of during Eldrazi. Despite what players will tell you, it was pretty damn good still even during the Birthing Pod era. Sure, that matchup was somewhat tough, but it had game vs. everything else and did better vs. Twin and Affinity than Pod did. Not to mention, BGx was stupid during the BGx Deathrite Shaman/Tectonic Edge and Ajundi days.
Twin players never had this. Twin was never as dominant as BGx if you go through the meta since the beginning. Twin is not even true Control, so Control players still never had a deck even close to the level that BGx has.
Control decks were good against Twin. It doesn't mean that they were good vs. the rest of the meta. Beating the top deck is not good enough in a format as varied as Modern. I know Tron players that claim to have hardly ever have lost to Control decks. Do you want a deck that beats Twin and hope to see it in 50% of the rounds or a deck that does super well vs. the field? (hint...Twin)
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)What? Opt is way better in control decks than Serum Visions. Being able to hold up interaction and then filter is good, especially in a format where the first few turns of the game are so important. You know how awkward it is to have Serum Visions in your hand and a piece of interaction like Spell Snare? Or on T2 you have Serum Visions or Logic Knot/whatever other counter? Then on 4 mana you hold up Cryptic? It's the reason why TT is actually good in the sense that it gives the deck options for your mana while still holding up interaction while a card that is better for CA like Take Inventory is laughable. If only they gave us 'fixed' AK (only checking your GY) instead of the idiotic Take Inventory, just like they ****ed us over when they gave us Steam Augury instead of Fact or Fiction.
In a format where Ancient Stirrings is easily the best card-filtering effect, I doubt Preordain is considered too much better than that. I mean, I understand that Stirrings can't be played in any deck, but yet 2-3 of the 4 decks that play Stirrings are actually much better than any deck in Modern that currently runs Serum Visions or Sleight of Hand. That's just facts, unless you can tell me a Serum Visions deck better than Bant Eldrazi or Tron (stirrings decks).
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)Edit--- In what universe are these sexist analogies necessary?
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
I wasn't comparing TT to Opt, I was comparing TT to a strictly better CA tool on rate in Take Inventory to illustrate why Instant speed is worth WAY more than Scry 1. Serum Visions is awkward in a control deck. Opt is not. The reason why Ponder sees play in Miracles in Modern is on the back of Force of Will as you're not 'shields down' while you filter. I don't want to say you don't know what you're talking about, but you don't. When you're playing cards like Spell Snare, Logic Knot, and Cryptic Command (and Snapcaster is often a 3 mana play), the last thing you want to be doing is taking a turn off to cast a random draw spell to scry 2. I actually think SV is a trap for modern control decks to be honest. Given the card pool and options Thought Scour is just a lot better of an option fueling stuff like Knot and giving selection for Snapcaster. So, yeah, the point is that Opt is a way better option for control decks than SV. SV is obviously better for combo decks because they're proactive decks that just want to see the most cards they can and SV is better for that.
It's also why I don't really care for preordain coming off because it won't do much for the archetype, though it will help combo which does need some help so I'm not opposed, but the 3 cards that will have a difference for control in the format is Sensei's Top, DTT, and Jace (more or less in that order). If we get the same *****ty counterspells and draw spells we've gotten in the last 5 years in Amonkhet I'm out. A person can only take so much abuse.
When I have to wait 2 decades before potentially seeing an Opt reprint, yes, I do. This is the type of spell that Wizards should have jumped on with their decision to make scry evergreen, since it is simple yet never had the privilege of being printed with the keyword.
Early game: helps you hit your land drops.
Late game: helps you draw business.
Scry 1 is not enough of a scry to make Opt reliable at either of these goals. If you play Opt instead you have to add more lands, and at that point you're almost certainly better off playing Think Twice. Visions plays a crucial role in Ux Control decks by allowing them to run fewer lands and more actual spells than decks that want to cast cards that cost 5+ should be able to.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
If you're spending some of the first 4 turns of the game taking your shields down (When do you get to cast SV when you have Snare, 2 mana counter, removal, snap, and Cryptic in your hand? - Opt gives flexibility, SV does not) to hit land drops, you should just play more lands. At least preordain gets you the card you need right then and there way better than SV's random draw, and even then I'd rather have Opt in a control shell. Opt is also better at hitting land drops than Serum Visions as you get to see 2 cards right away rather than 1 so if you're playing the card for that reason, it's just way worse and this isn't even taking into account INSTANT ******* SPEED, that you seem to just nonchalantly dismiss. Opt also plays a lot better with Snapcaster than Serum Visions...(go figure it's that instant speed thing you keep ignoring)
I understand exactly what SV does and how it PLAYS in a control deck in CONTEXT of what other cards are in your deck. Opt is a far superior card for control decks than Serum Visions. Serum Visions is a far better card in Combo decks. What about these things do you not understand?
This sentence basically undermines the rest of your post. Snapcaster Mage is either the first or second best creature in Modern. The fact that "you'll have a little trouble" trying to play a 4 Snapcaster Mage deck tells you all you need to know about the shells he goes in. Nobody ever says, "If you just want to play 4tarmogoyf.dec, then maybe you'll have a little trouble."
If only 5% of the field are showing up Day 1 on a blue deck, it's because they are perceived as being really really bad. Sometimes common perceptions of decks can be wrong, but the aggregate community is generally pretty good at discerning where the power lies in a format, especially in a format as slow moving as Modern.
Honestly, I would be fine with it if the good blue decks we got were Delver style tempo decks. I just want anything to play my Snapcasters in where I don't feel like I'm giving up win percentages to play my preferred archetype.
Hold on, making this my signature lol.
Umphff, me too man. Keranos is my second favorite card of all time behind Snapcaster, lol. I swear to the god I don't believe in, if Amonkhet masterpieces are Gods and they have a masterpiece Keranos, I'm driving to Seattle to give WotC my bank account info.
Even if we accepted this and moved on, things are only going to get worse for the blue decks without either unbans or a change in Standard design philosophy. Mana Leak is a ****in terrible card, and they won't even print that in Standard anymore. Meanwhile, Green and Black keep getting more and more upgrades to their creature suite. Something has to give.
If Storm or AN started becoming problems, unbanning something to power up the fair blue decks would be the perfect thing to do, since the fair blue decks prey on combo decks like Storm and Ad Naus.
Eh, I don't know how many decks would play it. It's worse than SV for sure, and worse than Thoughtscour in decks playing Delve cards.
Yeah, I don't really agree with this either. Modern decks aren't going to kill you on turn 2 or 3, so playing SV on turn 1 is pretty much a free roll. Sure, I don't want to play it turn 2 to hold up a counterspell, but turn 3 I can play one and still hold up counters as well. Having your cantrip dig 3 instead of 2 is a big deal, though. It means you'll find whatever you're looking for a turn faster for each SV you cast, and that one turn can often make the difference between winning or losing.
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