Hoser sideboard cards are needed for certain matchups, especially those with a very high game 1 winning %(see affinity) and there are answers to those sideboard cards. Abrupt Decay, disenchant, wear//tear, fragmentize, etc. answer all the "offending" SB cards.
Hosers are not needed when there are plenty of similar effects, as I stated above, if you dont believe there is an issue, please dont respond. Thank you
Hahahaha so you post on here for a discussion about sideboard cards and sideboarding but when someone not agrees with you you tell them not to respond..:-/
Nice one mate.
Please read the initial post, if you dont believe there is a problem there is no reason to respond, this is only for people who would like to discus this issue. n1 Mate
The fact that you do not understand the following while the rest of us do really puzzles me:
Diversity reduction was the mere catalyst; the mere triggering event.
What numbers support this diversity reduction? GP Top 8s in 2015 had something like 30 different archetypes represented and 7 different winning decks across all 7 events (yes, 2 were Twin, but one was traditional UR, the other was Jeskai with Kiki Jiki, Resto Angel, and Elspeth). The overall collection of Tier 1 and 2 decks is about the same as it has been since after the ban, even with manipulation of cutoff numbers over the past year (lowering the % point where decks are classified). I suppose now that I'm done teaching for the year I have the time to crunch the numbers myself; at least through whatever relevant info is still available today now that Modern Nexus no longer does format updates. But from preliminary looks, the hard numbers now aren't really that much different than they were then. People keep making this claim about increased diversity, but I don't think I've seen anyone support that with numbers.
The real reason behind why most of the Control players on Jeskai, Grixis, UR or other control shells was jamming the combo in them and/or the real reason why so many players were sleeving up Splinter Twin to win GP's/PT's was that the deck had just a few to none bad matchups(Control decks that were Tier 2/3 only and BGx were and could be real even) And it had just a few bad matchups, because the 2 card combo was too good.
If it was so good, why wasn't it 20, 30, 50+% of the meta like every other diversity-ban deck? Pros sleeved it up because it preys on players that don't respect it and rewards careful play. There should be nothing wrong with a good deck that rewards good play and punishes bad play, like getting blown out trying to jam the combo turn 4. The myths and legends around this deck are greatly exaggerated, and even LESS relevant in the vicious and cutthroat meta we have now. Being in the format for 5 years it's not like the deck was some sleeper secret. If it was really as broken as people claim it was, it would have had metashare numbers to back that up, like every other banned deck. We have to face the reality that WOTC just didn't like the image of the deck; the idea of the deck, and especially didn't like the narrative it might have at the next PT. So they banned it, and then fed us a bunch of garbage BS reasons for doing so. (Though, the joke's on them for ruining Modern with Eldrazi anyway). Then we, the community, filled in the gaps with our misrepresented memories and retroactive justifications that were never actually made at the time (remember, this ban came as a shock to literally everyone). The feeling of justification now is one that has built up through people reiterating and exaggerating things, trying to make sense out of something that didn't make sense at the time. And now with the whole Saheeli/Guardian debacle, we have a whole new wave of retroactive opinions, despite vastly different circumstances at every possible level.
If the only thing the deck was guilty of was being "too good" then ban Deceiver Exarch and let the deck survive with a 2/1 or make massive concessions to run 3 colors in a weaker shell. This is not hard. But instead, in their infinite wisdom, they ripped out the deck's core and then had the audacity to even suggest that Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker would be fine as a replacement, or that "Temur Tempo" would be a great deck. Their ignorance of deck building and format metas seems to know no bounds, and this was a flagship example.
Now, I think with Fatal Push around we can really use it in the meta and I would welcome it back. As I told you during a GP in Twitch, I would still be playing Grixis Shadow, and I could have another good matchup against a ~10% of the meta deck with all of my Thoughtseize, Inquisition Of Kozilek, Fatal Push, Terminate, Stubborn Denial, Snapcaster Mage and some 6/6's that Roast can not kill and Remand is useless against them.
I agree. I think Shadow decks would rip Twin a new one. And Eldrazi would give it massive headaches. It would also likely bring back traditional Jund builds and help control to be relevant again.
You cannot welcome it back. It BREAKS control. Control needs to have a weakness in the early game. Twin eliminates that window when it can win w/ an "easy" button on turn 4. As somebody said on another thread it gives Control a dominant position over AGGRO and you cannot let Control have that position over aggro. With Twin in the format you have a 3-turn window to interact w/ the control deck before you are essentially locked out of victory, and that window goes down to 2 turns if you are on the draw.
Exaggerations like this show a massive lack of experience playing with or against the deck.
Quick question but has anyone figured out if Gideon of the Trials has any modern application? I've been eyeing him, he seems like he is good at being a meat shield, but I'm not sure if he could slow down an opponents game plan enough to make him worth including over some other options in a UW or WB build going more of a control route.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I have been playing a lot lately and it occurs to me that there as a lot of similar sideboard effects and some are clearly better than others. When I say this I mean some are total hosers and some are conditional and make it difficult for the enemy to recover from. I personally favor the conditional ones that make it difficult to come back from. I think it is pretty ridiculous that you can win a game against a match-up that is almost 50-50 then play a game in which your opponent can bring in a 3-4 copies of a card that if drawn make the match up 95-5 in their favor. There are plenty of sideboard hate cards, why do we have to be subject to the fact that people can just throw in a bunch of sideboard hate that wins them the game if drawn (and we all know they will mulligan to it). I'm sure everyone has had this experience and as much as it feels good to cast rest in peace against dredge, it ruins the fabric of the game and removes the skill aspect for variance. A few particular offenders are listed below with their similarly corresponding sideboard hate which do no make it impossible to win through but do make it difficult:
Rest in Peace- Grafdigger's Cage, Relic of Progenitus, Surgical Extraction
Stony Silence- Suppression Field, Harsh Mentor, Pithing Needle
Chalice of the Void- Any Counterspell that wouldn't be included in a main deck
These are just a few but there are a bunch more. I know everyone has been on the receiving end of these hoser sideboard cards and that at the same time certain match ups are inevitably better than others and need some help out of the side. I think the difference is that sideboards are not meant to make games based entirely on variance, but that is what the game has become in a sense.
Conclusions/Solutions:
Easiest:
Ban offending sideboard cards
Middle Difficulty/Not Ideal:
Create a restricted list for hoser sideboard cards
Hardest Difficulty/Hardest to Swallow but Makes the Most Sense:
Lessen the amount of sideboard cards from 15, could be either 10 or 8 or a similar number
Pleas Weigh In Below:
I'd like to hear what sideboard cards are an issue in your mind and what you think could be a possible solution. If you don't see this as an issue please don't waste the space commenting below.
I'm sorry, none of your posted ideas make sense for modern. (At least, as I see it.) The reason cards can be hosers is because the decks they are designed to hose are really strong. Strong to the point that the hoser cards keep them in check. Hitting RIP, for example, would also mean rebalencing all the decks that used to be hit by it. Dredge and BG/x grave strats would be the stand outs here. Nerfing all those decks is both lots of unesscessary work and very unfun for the people that play them. Looking at your examples, a few are so good that they seem hosers in themselves. (Cage vs Dredge.) Most, however, just seem too weak to be consistantly impactful. (Surgical vs Dredge, Needle vs Affinty, Chalice of the Void replacements vs Infect/Storm.)
In modern, there are lots of unfair strategies. Unless we start getting more Legacy-level answers, good hosers are what allow those decks to be strong enough for people to be able to like/use them without breaking the format.
Hoser sideboard cards are needed for certain matchups, especially those with a very high game 1 winning %(see affinity) and there are answers to those sideboard cards. Abrupt Decay, disenchant, wear//tear, fragmentize, etc. answer all the "offending" SB cards.
Hosers are not needed when there are plenty of similar effects, as I stated above, if you dont believe there is an issue, please dont respond. Thank you
Hahahaha so you post on here for a discussion about sideboard cards and sideboarding but when someone not agrees with you you tell them not to respond..:-/
Nice one mate.
Please read the initial post, if you dont believe there is a problem there is no reason to respond, this is only for people who would like to discus this issue. n1 Mate
Just learn how to sideboard and you don`t have to discuss these kind of things.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Reanimator
Modern - Burn
EDH - Neheb the Eternal
It was Wizards that made Modern less interactive in the first place. It was also Wizards that introduced stupid cards like Cathartic Reunion, Prized Amalgam, Blossoming Defence, Eldrazis, etc in Modern. It is Wizards that is giving a ton of threats in the linear decks, while giving only some options to the attrition decks and if there is a problem, they ban their way out of it, instead of think clever and "break the standard link" introducing some useful tools in Modern, or introduce more via Standard.
Having Splinter Twin around, even with Deceiver Exarch banned, would force all of the Dredge or other linear decks to have some interaction(eg Abrupt Decay in the mainboard) thus diluting their game plans, thus slowing down the format.
Wizards recent stance on development for Standard can't even hold decent FNM attendance. It's obvious this line of thinking has gone too far, and the effects are pronounced among store owners that I reconcile with on a constant basis.
Yeah, but I mean if you're going to play control one of the key difficulties of the deck design is how to close out the game.
In modern the problem is twofold - with Modern answers (in blue in particular) you're not really establishing control at any given point in time, mostly you're just buying time and often a step behind even with the best of efforts. Once you've "bought" time you have to ride a Colonade to victory or some such garbage, which is laughable by the standards of things that Tron, Dredge and whatnot can throw at you.
So not only do you have a weaker early game than the old control decks your endgame is also poor. Naturally players will jam things like Twin in to give them some inevitability.
You just can't afford to durdle against most Modern decks, if you can win you need to win now now now.
This is super obvious when watching a match of U Tron vs U/W control where the latter is basically climbing a sheer cliff to maintain parity. And then they tap out for Gideon or something like that and you just lol and use 10 mana to slam and activate a mindslaver in response.
What I'm saying is that normal control (as in not cheating on mana) needs a finisher like Twin to be good in modern, among other things. Either its a combo or your permission spells are so good you can eventually terrorize them and beat them with a bear. The stuff inbetween is bound to be some sort of wonky compromise that's neither here nor there.
I think control players in general would prefer better permission to more I win wombos, if the choice were given to them. Espcially considering that many, (or even the majority,) of twin builds had a tempo/midrange back up plan, not a control one.
I never played Twin, I never wanted to play it, even though I had most of the deck, I would not play it if it were unbanned tomorrow. I play decks with great matchup against it, i play decks that can't beat it. The deck being or not being in the format would have little to no impact on my gaming experience in any direction, I don't care about it as a deck. However, I care about it symbolically. I am radically in favor of unbans, if I had my way, probably a third of the cards on the list would come off, and only Grapeshot would be banned new. Make of all of this what you will.
I want Twin unbanned. The deck was as far as I could tell, pretty objectively the best in the format at the time, not by any crazy margin, and most decks had game against it, but it was. Let's say for the sake of argument that it was banworthy when it was banned, even though it wasn't, but saying it was. That means nothing now. I am not even sure that Twin would be very good right now, at all. DS decks (which are NOT banworthy, with my statements about being impartial to Twin being relevant verbatim here)are the current top dogs, similar to what Twin was. UR Twin player sits down across from Grixis Shadow....that's going to be brutal for them, I see Twin having a Tron v Jund matchup there, not good.
DS decks aside, Fatal Push has made Modern unrecognizable to the Twin days. People talk about banning Exarch so Twin gets wrecked by Bolt, with Push, it doesn't even matter. I see it like Valakut. It did some stuff back in the day, it would be a factor in Modern, but the format is nothing like where it did bad things and it wouldn't be a problem. Like GGT before Wizards did everything in their power to boost Dredge.
All that said, I would rather have Preordain, maybe even Ponder if we can have it, and of course Counterspell. but if we get all of that, I still say Twin is fine. Tron still flounders against it, my Dimir Control still beats it down on the playground. From turn 4, play as though they have the combo unless you KNOW otherwise due to IoK. It's really good, but not close to the most busted stuff in the format
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
If the two-card combo of Vizier + Druid are ok for modern, Twin should also be ok.
Vizier can even kill a turn earlier and the deck plays a lot of tutoring effects to find the pieces.
Someone explain how this deck is ok but Twin is not
I've explained this about 5 times now but in addition to it really being a 3 card combo, Twin got to play its combo in a shell of control spells and play almost entirely at instant speed. The difference is quite substantial.
The druid combo, because it requires 3 pieces, functionally has to be played with collected company which has deck building constraints that prevent it from playing much interaction.
I can go away for months at a time and know that when I come back to this thread, people will still be talking about Twin. Never fails.
Anyway, I think you hit the nail on the head regarding the Twin vs Druid/Vizier combo comparison. Personally, I think the only reason the combo is viable is because it slots almost perfectly into Modern Elves. There's only so much creature removal an opponent can pack, so it comes down to picking your poison: Take out the combo enablers and let them go wide as is the typical Elves gameplan, or use your removal on Dorks/ramp and hope you can close out the game before they get the combo out. By themselves, Druid/Vizier combo is nowhere near the level of Twin/Exarch; despite getting sick and tired of the constant beating of this dead horse, I hope WoTC comes to their senses and un-bans Twin sooner than later. With the current state of Modern being the most diverse it has been in some time, I don't know if that would encourage or discourage a possible un-ban. While on the subject of bans, any talk of a Druid/Vizier ban in Modern is just silly; just a few months ago people were calling for a Mox Opal ban to nerf "OP" Cheeri0s decks....an archetype that has faded back into obscurity.
...despite getting sick and tired of the constant beating of this dead horse, I hope WoTC comes to their senses and un-bans Twin sooner than later. With the current state of Modern being the most diverse it has been in some time, I don't know if that would encourage or discourage a possible un-ban.
Historical precedent overwhelmingly suggests the former (then again, how many posters in this thread give a damn about historical precedent?). Since Wizards has recently expressed an interest in addressing Modern's color diversity issues via the banlist, though, Stoneforge Mystic is a way more likely unban---way more likely meaning very likely and not very unlikely (unlike Twin).
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 understand that color balance is a good thing, but I think reprinting cards like Mother of Runes or Counterspell would be a much safer option than unbanning super powerful cards like JTMS or SFM.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
Yeah, but I mean if you're going to play control one of the key difficulties of the deck design is how to close out the game.
In modern the problem is twofold - with Modern answers (in blue in particular) you're not really establishing control at any given point in time, mostly you're just buying time and often a step behind even with the best of efforts. Once you've "bought" time you have to ride a Colonade to victory or some such garbage, which is laughable by the standards of things that Tron, Dredge and whatnot can throw at you.
So not only do you have a weaker early game than the old control decks your endgame is also poor. Naturally players will jam things like Twin in to give them some inevitability.
You just can't afford to durdle against most Modern decks, if you can win you need to win now now now.
This is super obvious when watching a match of U Tron vs U/W control where the latter is basically climbing a sheer cliff to maintain parity. And then they tap out for Gideon or something like that and you just lol and use 10 mana to slam and activate a mindslaver in response.
What I'm saying is that normal control (as in not cheating on mana) needs a finisher like Twin to be good in modern, among other things. Either its a combo or your permission spells are so good you can eventually terrorize them and beat them with a bear. The stuff inbetween is bound to be some sort of wonky compromise that's neither here nor there.
I think control players in general would prefer better permission to more I win wombos, if the choice were given to them. Espcially considering that many, (or even the majority,) of twin builds had a tempo/midrange back up plan, not a control one.
The only counter that currently exists that would make a difference is mental misstep and most I believe would not want that. I would rather take the good proactive gameplan to go with my interactive blue shell. Even with good counter magic modern is too diverse to not be playing to win or execute your own game plan in a reasonable amount of time.
The fact that you do not understand the following while the rest of us do really puzzles me:
Diversity reduction was the mere catalyst; the mere triggering event.
What numbers support this diversity reduction? GP Top 8s in 2015 had something like 30 different archetypes represented and 7 different winning decks across all 7 events (yes, 2 were Twin, but one was traditional UR, the other was Jeskai with Kiki Jiki, Resto Angel, and Elspeth). The overall collection of Tier 1 and 2 decks is about the same as it has been since after the ban, even with manipulation of cutoff numbers over the past year (lowering the % point where decks are classified). I suppose now that I'm done teaching for the year I have the time to crunch the numbers myself; at least through whatever relevant info is still available today now that Modern Nexus no longer does format updates. But from preliminary looks, the hard numbers now aren't really that much different than they were then. People keep making this claim about increased diversity, but I don't think I've seen anyone support that with numbers.
The real reason behind why most of the Control players on Jeskai, Grixis, UR or other control shells was jamming the combo in them and/or the real reason why so many players were sleeving up Splinter Twin to win GP's/PT's was that the deck had just a few to none bad matchups(Control decks that were Tier 2/3 only and BGx were and could be real even) And it had just a few bad matchups, because the 2 card combo was too good.
If it was so good, why wasn't it 20, 30, 50+% of the meta like every other diversity-ban deck? Pros sleeved it up because it preys on players that don't respect it and rewards careful play. There should be nothing wrong with a good deck that rewards good play and punishes bad play, like getting blown out trying to jam the combo turn 4. The myths and legends around this deck are greatly exaggerated, and even LESS relevant in the vicious and cutthroat meta we have now. Being in the format for 5 years it's not like the deck was some sleeper secret. If it was really as broken as people claim it was, it would have had metashare numbers to back that up, like every other banned deck. We have to face the reality that WOTC just didn't like the image of the deck; the idea of the deck, and especially didn't like the narrative it might have at the next PT. So they banned it, and then fed us a bunch of garbage BS reasons for doing so. (Though, the joke's on them for ruining Modern with Eldrazi anyway). Then we, the community, filled in the gaps with our misrepresented memories and retroactive justifications that were never actually made at the time (remember, this ban came as a shock to literally everyone). The feeling of justification now is one that has built up through people reiterating and exaggerating things, trying to make sense out of something that didn't make sense at the time. And now with the whole Saheeli/Guardian debacle, we have a whole new wave of retroactive opinions, despite vastly different circumstances at every possible level.
If the only thing the deck was guilty of was being "too good" then ban Deceiver Exarch and let the deck survive with a 2/1 or make massive concessions to run 3 colors in a weaker shell. This is not hard. But instead, in their infinite wisdom, they ripped out the deck's core and then had the audacity to even suggest that Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker would be fine as a replacement, or that "Temur Tempo" would be a great deck. Their ignorance of deck building and format metas seems to know no bounds, and this was a flagship example.
Now, I think with Fatal Push around we can really use it in the meta and I would welcome it back. As I told you during a GP in Twitch, I would still be playing Grixis Shadow, and I could have another good matchup against a ~10% of the meta deck with all of my Thoughtseize, Inquisition Of Kozilek, Fatal Push, Terminate, Stubborn Denial, Snapcaster Mage and some 6/6's that Roast can not kill and Remand is useless against them.
I agree. I think Shadow decks would rip Twin a new one. And Eldrazi would give it massive headaches. It would also likely bring back traditional Jund builds and help control to be relevant again.
You cannot welcome it back. It BREAKS control. Control needs to have a weakness in the early game. Twin eliminates that window when it can win w/ an "easy" button on turn 4. As somebody said on another thread it gives Control a dominant position over AGGRO and you cannot let Control have that position over aggro. With Twin in the format you have a 3-turn window to interact w/ the control deck before you are essentially locked out of victory, and that window goes down to 2 turns if you are on the draw.
Exaggerations like this show a massive lack of experience playing with or against the deck.
Yea considering that burn was one of the tougher matchups ffor twin and the fact that you do not always have the combo.
Yeah, but I mean if you're going to play control one of the key difficulties of the deck design is how to close out the game.
In modern the problem is twofold - with Modern answers (in blue in particular) you're not really establishing control at any given point in time, mostly you're just buying time and often a step behind even with the best of efforts. Once you've "bought" time you have to ride a Colonade to victory or some such garbage, which is laughable by the standards of things that Tron, Dredge and whatnot can throw at you.
So not only do you have a weaker early game than the old control decks your endgame is also poor. Naturally players will jam things like Twin in to give them some inevitability.
You just can't afford to durdle against most Modern decks, if you can win you need to win now now now.
This is super obvious when watching a match of U Tron vs U/W control where the latter is basically climbing a sheer cliff to maintain parity. And then they tap out for Gideon or something like that and you just lol and use 10 mana to slam and activate a mindslaver in response.
What I'm saying is that normal control (as in not cheating on mana) needs a finisher like Twin to be good in modern, among other things. Either its a combo or your permission spells are so good you can eventually terrorize them and beat them with a bear. The stuff inbetween is bound to be some sort of wonky compromise that's neither here nor there.
Control is certainly lacking better answers and better win cons.
And it doesn't help when we have soo much Tron lands In this format atm.
I understand that color balance is a good thing, but I think reprinting cards like Mother of Runes or Counterspell would be a much safer option than unbanning super powerful cards like JTMS or SFM.
I fail to see how sfm is a super powerful card. If t3 batterskull was SOOO powerful decks like titan breach that already ramp to 5 on t3 would be playing it.
I understand that color balance is a good thing, but I think reprinting cards like Mother of Runes or Counterspell would be a much safer option than unbanning super powerful cards like JTMS or SFM.
I fail to see how sfm is a super powerful card. If t3 batterskull was SOOO powerful decks like titan breach that already ramp to 5 on t3 would be playing it.
Yeah because Titan shift can tutor up the artifact with its summoners pacts....
Please notice the deck diversity as well as the power level of the decks.
Its clear no one deck is too powerful therefore showing no bans are really needed at this point nor do i feel any unbans are needed.
Modern is healthy as can be and quite frankly i havent seen a top 8 as diverse as this in a long long time.
Any thoughts?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern RUAffinityUR GMono Green StompyG CEldrazi TronC URWJeskai GeistWRU WRBoros BurnRW BRWMardu PyromancerWRB
Modern is healthy as can be and quite frankly i havent seen a top 8 as diverse as this in a long long time.
I agree. I think it's been about since 2015, back when our evil, disgusting, and deservedly-banned Twin was still in the format.
GP Copenhagen 2015
1. Merfolk
2. Scapeshift
3-4. Jund
3-4. Merfolk
5-8. Grixis Control
5-8. Mono White D&T
5-8. UR Twin
5-8. Grixis Delver
GP Porto Alegre 2015
1. Naya Zoo
2. Burn
3-4. Knightfall
3-4. Burn
5-8. Bogles
5-8. Tron
5-8. Living End
5-8. UR Twin
GP Charlotte 2015
1. Elves
2. UR Twin
3-4. Ad Nauseam
3-4. Affinity
5-8. Burn
5-8. Goryo's Vengeance
5-8. Abzan CoCo
5-8. UR Twin
GP Oklahoma 2015
1. Lantern Control
2. UR Twin
3-4. Affinity
3-4. Elves
5-8. Bloom Titan
5-8. Merfolk
5-8. Mono Red Aggro
5-8. Scapeshift
Even some of the less-than-diverse Top 8s weren't even the fault of the filthy Twin decks, but Affinity and BGx.
GP Signapore 2015
1. Affinity
2. Affinity
3-4. Jund
3-4. Jund
5-8. Abzan Midrange
5-8. Abzan CoCo
5-8. Temur Delver
5-8. UR Twin
In fact, the only GP that had lots of Twin (Pittsburgh, the one with 3 Twins in the Top 8, the event that likely solidified the ban a month before the announcement) was actually heralded as a beacon of format health by Modern Nexus: "Grand Prix Pittsburgh was easily one of my favorite Modern events of 2015, and potentially its best. Within the tournament’s context, it showcased a diverse field with ample innovation (the continued rise of Grixis Midrange) and plenty of old favorites (Twin: the hero Modern deserves). Even outside of Pittsburgh, the Grand Prix showcased Modern’s self-regulating nature as the linear nightmare of StarCityGames’ Dallas and Grand Prix Porto Alegre crumbled under the Modern mainstays of Jund, Affinity, and Twin."
So sure, I guess diversity and health now is just barely reaching what it was when Twin was still in the format. It only took a year and a half, multiple extraneous bannings, and there's still no competitively viable control or reactive tempo decks playable. But I guess Modern is doing great because there's so many ways you can kill your opponents quickly and through high variance.
So sure, I guess diversity and health now is just barely reaching what it was when Twin was still in the format. It only took a year and a half, multiple extraneous bannings, and there's still no competitively viable control or reactive tempo decks playable. But I guess Modern is doing great because there's so many ways you can kill your opponents quickly and through high variance.
Without even getting into whether or not "reactive tempo" is even a real thing, if it was, Grixis DS and DSJ would almost certainly fall into that category.
So sure, I guess diversity and health now is just barely reaching what it was when Twin was still in the format. It only took a year and a half, multiple extraneous bannings, and there's still no competitively viable control or reactive tempo decks playable. But I guess Modern is doing great because there's so many ways you can kill your opponents quickly and through high variance.
Without even getting into whether or not "reactive tempo" is even a real thing, if it was, Grixis DS and DSJ would almost certainly fall into that category.
When your goal is to win by discarding the opponent's hand and riding a high-value threat to victory, your game plan lines up more with Jund than Delver. After Twin, I spent more than a year playing Delver and now Shadow, the decks are nothing alike.
So sure, I guess diversity and health now is just barely reaching what it was when Twin was still in the format. It only took a year and a half, multiple extraneous bannings, and there's still no competitively viable control or reactive tempo decks playable. But I guess Modern is doing great because there's so many ways you can kill your opponents quickly and through high variance.
Without even getting into whether or not "reactive tempo" is even a real thing, if it was, Grixis DS and DSJ would almost certainly fall into that category.
When your goal is to win by discarding the opponent's hand and riding a high-value threat to victory, your game plan lines up more with Jund than Delver. After Twin, I spent more than a year playing Delver and now Shadow, the decks are nothing alike.
This. Shadow actually has a lot of tempo negative plays with all the discard and the o ly real similarity to a fully powered delver deck is that they use undercosted creatures. No discard deck can be considered tempo because the whole premise of tempo decks is to negate the opponents mana usage by either restricting the mana or answering threats that were paid for for less mana.
I understand that color balance is a good thing, but I think reprinting cards like Mother of Runes or Counterspell would be a much safer option than unbanning super powerful cards like JTMS or SFM.
I fail to see how sfm is a super powerful card. If t3 batterskull was SOOO powerful decks like titan breach that already ramp to 5 on t3 would be playing it.
Yeah because Titan shift can tutor up the artifact with its summoners pacts....
If it's as powerful as people on here think they would def play 4 batterskull and then have 8 titans available yes. Pact wouldn't need to go get it there were/are plenty of lists playing walkers that, guess what, can't be gotten with pact.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Please read the initial post, if you dont believe there is a problem there is no reason to respond, this is only for people who would like to discus this issue. n1 Mate
If it was so good, why wasn't it 20, 30, 50+% of the meta like every other diversity-ban deck? Pros sleeved it up because it preys on players that don't respect it and rewards careful play. There should be nothing wrong with a good deck that rewards good play and punishes bad play, like getting blown out trying to jam the combo turn 4. The myths and legends around this deck are greatly exaggerated, and even LESS relevant in the vicious and cutthroat meta we have now. Being in the format for 5 years it's not like the deck was some sleeper secret. If it was really as broken as people claim it was, it would have had metashare numbers to back that up, like every other banned deck. We have to face the reality that WOTC just didn't like the image of the deck; the idea of the deck, and especially didn't like the narrative it might have at the next PT. So they banned it, and then fed us a bunch of garbage BS reasons for doing so. (Though, the joke's on them for ruining Modern with Eldrazi anyway). Then we, the community, filled in the gaps with our misrepresented memories and retroactive justifications that were never actually made at the time (remember, this ban came as a shock to literally everyone). The feeling of justification now is one that has built up through people reiterating and exaggerating things, trying to make sense out of something that didn't make sense at the time. And now with the whole Saheeli/Guardian debacle, we have a whole new wave of retroactive opinions, despite vastly different circumstances at every possible level.
If the only thing the deck was guilty of was being "too good" then ban Deceiver Exarch and let the deck survive with a 2/1 or make massive concessions to run 3 colors in a weaker shell. This is not hard. But instead, in their infinite wisdom, they ripped out the deck's core and then had the audacity to even suggest that Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker would be fine as a replacement, or that "Temur Tempo" would be a great deck. Their ignorance of deck building and format metas seems to know no bounds, and this was a flagship example.
I agree. I think Shadow decks would rip Twin a new one. And Eldrazi would give it massive headaches. It would also likely bring back traditional Jund builds and help control to be relevant again.
Exaggerations like this show a massive lack of experience playing with or against the deck.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
exactly, terrible comparison.
I'm sorry, none of your posted ideas make sense for modern. (At least, as I see it.) The reason cards can be hosers is because the decks they are designed to hose are really strong. Strong to the point that the hoser cards keep them in check. Hitting RIP, for example, would also mean rebalencing all the decks that used to be hit by it. Dredge and BG/x grave strats would be the stand outs here. Nerfing all those decks is both lots of unesscessary work and very unfun for the people that play them. Looking at your examples, a few are so good that they seem hosers in themselves. (Cage vs Dredge.) Most, however, just seem too weak to be consistantly impactful. (Surgical vs Dredge, Needle vs Affinty, Chalice of the Void replacements vs Infect/Storm.)
In modern, there are lots of unfair strategies. Unless we start getting more Legacy-level answers, good hosers are what allow those decks to be strong enough for people to be able to like/use them without breaking the format.
Just learn how to sideboard and you don`t have to discuss these kind of things.
Modern - Burn
EDH - Neheb the Eternal
Wizards recent stance on development for Standard can't even hold decent FNM attendance. It's obvious this line of thinking has gone too far, and the effects are pronounced among store owners that I reconcile with on a constant basis.
I think control players in general would prefer better permission to more I win wombos, if the choice were given to them. Espcially considering that many, (or even the majority,) of twin builds had a tempo/midrange back up plan, not a control one.
I want Twin unbanned. The deck was as far as I could tell, pretty objectively the best in the format at the time, not by any crazy margin, and most decks had game against it, but it was. Let's say for the sake of argument that it was banworthy when it was banned, even though it wasn't, but saying it was. That means nothing now. I am not even sure that Twin would be very good right now, at all. DS decks (which are NOT banworthy, with my statements about being impartial to Twin being relevant verbatim here)are the current top dogs, similar to what Twin was. UR Twin player sits down across from Grixis Shadow....that's going to be brutal for them, I see Twin having a Tron v Jund matchup there, not good.
DS decks aside, Fatal Push has made Modern unrecognizable to the Twin days. People talk about banning Exarch so Twin gets wrecked by Bolt, with Push, it doesn't even matter. I see it like Valakut. It did some stuff back in the day, it would be a factor in Modern, but the format is nothing like where it did bad things and it wouldn't be a problem. Like GGT before Wizards did everything in their power to boost Dredge.
All that said, I would rather have Preordain, maybe even Ponder if we can have it, and of course Counterspell. but if we get all of that, I still say Twin is fine. Tron still flounders against it, my Dimir Control still beats it down on the playground. From turn 4, play as though they have the combo unless you KNOW otherwise due to IoK. It's really good, but not close to the most busted stuff in the format
I can go away for months at a time and know that when I come back to this thread, people will still be talking about Twin. Never fails.
Anyway, I think you hit the nail on the head regarding the Twin vs Druid/Vizier combo comparison. Personally, I think the only reason the combo is viable is because it slots almost perfectly into Modern Elves. There's only so much creature removal an opponent can pack, so it comes down to picking your poison: Take out the combo enablers and let them go wide as is the typical Elves gameplan, or use your removal on Dorks/ramp and hope you can close out the game before they get the combo out. By themselves, Druid/Vizier combo is nowhere near the level of Twin/Exarch; despite getting sick and tired of the constant beating of this dead horse, I hope WoTC comes to their senses and un-bans Twin sooner than later. With the current state of Modern being the most diverse it has been in some time, I don't know if that would encourage or discourage a possible un-ban. While on the subject of bans, any talk of a Druid/Vizier ban in Modern is just silly; just a few months ago people were calling for a Mox Opal ban to nerf "OP" Cheeri0s decks....an archetype that has faded back into obscurity.
Link to Discord server where anybody from MTGS can keep up with thread topics while everything is being sorted out with the new site.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
The only counter that currently exists that would make a difference is mental misstep and most I believe would not want that. I would rather take the good proactive gameplan to go with my interactive blue shell. Even with good counter magic modern is too diverse to not be playing to win or execute your own game plan in a reasonable amount of time.
edit: disregard I got ninja'd
Yea considering that burn was one of the tougher matchups ffor twin and the fact that you do not always have the combo.
Control is certainly lacking better answers and better win cons.
And it doesn't help when we have soo much Tron lands In this format atm.
decks playing:
none
I fail to see how sfm is a super powerful card. If t3 batterskull was SOOO powerful decks like titan breach that already ramp to 5 on t3 would be playing it.
Yeah because Titan shift can tutor up the artifact with its summoners pacts....
2802 players - 28/05/17
1
BW Eldrazi Aggro
Joe Soh
2
Dredge
Terumasa Kojima
3-4
Death's Shadow
Park Bi-o
3-4
Eldra Tron
Fumiyasu Suzuike
5-8
Ad Nauseam
Tomoya Tsubouchi
5-8
Affinity
Takeshi Kagawa
5-8
UWx Midrange
Akio Chiba
5-8
UWx Midrange
Ryoichi Tamada
These are the results of the most recent GP
Please notice the deck diversity as well as the power level of the decks.
Its clear no one deck is too powerful therefore showing no bans are really needed at this point nor do i feel any unbans are needed.
Modern is healthy as can be and quite frankly i havent seen a top 8 as diverse as this in a long long time.
Any thoughts?
RUAffinityUR
GMono Green StompyG
CEldrazi TronC
URWJeskai GeistWRU
WRBoros BurnRW
BRWMardu PyromancerWRB
I agree. I think it's been about since 2015, back when our evil, disgusting, and deservedly-banned Twin was still in the format.
GP Copenhagen 2015
1. Merfolk
2. Scapeshift
3-4. Jund
3-4. Merfolk
5-8. Grixis Control
5-8. Mono White D&T
5-8. UR Twin
5-8. Grixis Delver
GP Porto Alegre 2015
1. Naya Zoo
2. Burn
3-4. Knightfall
3-4. Burn
5-8. Bogles
5-8. Tron
5-8. Living End
5-8. UR Twin
GP Charlotte 2015
1. Elves
2. UR Twin
3-4. Ad Nauseam
3-4. Affinity
5-8. Burn
5-8. Goryo's Vengeance
5-8. Abzan CoCo
5-8. UR Twin
GP Oklahoma 2015
1. Lantern Control
2. UR Twin
3-4. Affinity
3-4. Elves
5-8. Bloom Titan
5-8. Merfolk
5-8. Mono Red Aggro
5-8. Scapeshift
Even some of the less-than-diverse Top 8s weren't even the fault of the filthy Twin decks, but Affinity and BGx.
GP Signapore 2015
1. Affinity
2. Affinity
3-4. Jund
3-4. Jund
5-8. Abzan Midrange
5-8. Abzan CoCo
5-8. Temur Delver
5-8. UR Twin
In fact, the only GP that had lots of Twin (Pittsburgh, the one with 3 Twins in the Top 8, the event that likely solidified the ban a month before the announcement) was actually heralded as a beacon of format health by Modern Nexus: "Grand Prix Pittsburgh was easily one of my favorite Modern events of 2015, and potentially its best. Within the tournament’s context, it showcased a diverse field with ample innovation (the continued rise of Grixis Midrange) and plenty of old favorites (Twin: the hero Modern deserves). Even outside of Pittsburgh, the Grand Prix showcased Modern’s self-regulating nature as the linear nightmare of StarCityGames’ Dallas and Grand Prix Porto Alegre crumbled under the Modern mainstays of Jund, Affinity, and Twin."
So sure, I guess diversity and health now is just barely reaching what it was when Twin was still in the format. It only took a year and a half, multiple extraneous bannings, and there's still no competitively viable control or reactive tempo decks playable. But I guess Modern is doing great because there's so many ways you can kill your opponents quickly and through high variance.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Without even getting into whether or not "reactive tempo" is even a real thing, if it was, Grixis DS and DSJ would almost certainly fall into that category.
When your goal is to win by discarding the opponent's hand and riding a high-value threat to victory, your game plan lines up more with Jund than Delver. After Twin, I spent more than a year playing Delver and now Shadow, the decks are nothing alike.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
This. Shadow actually has a lot of tempo negative plays with all the discard and the o ly real similarity to a fully powered delver deck is that they use undercosted creatures. No discard deck can be considered tempo because the whole premise of tempo decks is to negate the opponents mana usage by either restricting the mana or answering threats that were paid for for less mana.
I think this most recent GP coyld arguably the most diverse its been even considering those 2015 GPs.
RUAffinityUR
GMono Green StompyG
CEldrazi TronC
URWJeskai GeistWRU
WRBoros BurnRW
BRWMardu PyromancerWRB
If it's as powerful as people on here think they would def play 4 batterskull and then have 8 titans available yes. Pact wouldn't need to go get it there were/are plenty of lists playing walkers that, guess what, can't be gotten with pact.