Has WotC said that the Play Design team will be looking at Modern bans/unbans? My understanding is that the PD team will be looking primarily at the impact of new sets on Standard.
Dan Burdick said in an article that their main focus is on Standard and Limited, but that they will also be looking at everything they can. I would imagine that as they look to ban or unban cards for any format the PD team would be the main people involved to at least begin to look at feasibility, but with WotC you never really know.
Yeah, my interpretation of that is they're just focusing on the new sets, like you said in Standard and Limited. The "everything they can" part to me sounds like just blowing smoke.
Although I agree the team will primarily focus on Standard and Limited, it's unfair and not really supportable to assume "everything they can" is purely smoke-blowing. Recent M-Files articles indicate that even the last subpar D&D process looked at Modern, so I expect the new one will keep doing the same. Sure, it won't be in the spotlight as much as Standard and Limited, but even if they only look at 1-3 cards per set for Modern that would be awesome. Given the recent track record of considering Modern for D&D, and given this team's purpose at improving the overall testing process, there's no good reason to accuse them of lying/misleading here. Forums like ours are full of accusations like this and they are rarely reasonable. In most cases, big statements like this are well-intentioned and do play out to some extent, even if it isn't the extent we might prefer.
Yeah I think its more likely they will offer suggestions for "tweaks" to cards to be more Modern playable while still balanced in Standard. Don't really see them having much opportunity to Test for things like banned list issues.
But in all seriousness, you could easily swap Probe for Become Immense and be fine, especially with Push, Path, and Thoughtseize being the most played cards in the format
Can you imagine Grixis Shadow with the full playset of Gitaxian Probe available? I have, and in fact, I have tested it. It's disgustingly good. If it was unbanned, it would have to be rebanned, because Death's Shadow is not the problem(the problem is the fact that you can go at low life so quickly+get informations for free).
Even in Become Immense's case, this delve card is not the problem. Probe and fetchlands are.
With the multitude of ways decks can systematically wreck Shadow and the fact that Shadow has to cut 4 cards to make room for another playset of "2 damage to myself", I'm sure it'd be fine. This post reminds me of the cries about how broken Shadow is, despite it being mostly absent from prominent tournament Top 8s.
You are absolutely wrong. Updating Street Wraith into Gitaxian Probe and adding 2 - 3 Street Wraith in it means the deck would be easily Tier 0(more ways to lower life, getting free information for free)
And tbh, I don't think Grixis Shadow is broken atm, I think it's just a Tier 1 deck with problems, but Gitaxian Probe would push it too much(not theorycrafting here, I am talking after having tested the deck with the card, unlike you).
I know you want Probe to play Grixis Delver again(I want too), but this is not happening, because it would be just wrong for the reasons I stated.
Let's just look at the facts: Gitaxian Probe was in the format since the beginning of Modern and was never a problem in any deck. So if the card was inherently broken on its own, it would have been banned long ago. The "does too much for free" excuse is nonsense. The only reason it was banned was to specifically hit T4 violators like Infect and Zooicide, something which could be easily accomplished by targeting Become Immense (the #1 cause for Turn 4 violations). Never mind that Wizards completely ignores the future impact Fatal Push would have on those decks. Probe was just another wrong decision, made for lazy reasons, because Wizards was incapable identifying the correct problem card without killing the decks and totally unable to see or predict the impact of the ban alongside the obviously-powerful new card: Fatal Push.
Also, I don't know how much you played GDS yourself (I know you have switched to UW/Jeskai recently), but the life loss is a real thing. Adding in MORE life loss may add velocity to a small number of great opening hands, but is a real price to pay against a number of decks (also remember Probe is sorcery speed only). And these fanatical claims of a Tier 0 deck are completely unfounded. They're made worse by the fact that it does nothing to change the deck's gameplan, mode of attack, or do anything to improve its terrible matchups.
Banning Probe completely destroyed multiple decks that didn't need to be destroyed, including ones that weren't even the focus of the ban. Become Immense dealt with the targeted decks without screwing over other players. I don't think Probe will ever be released, based on their stubbornness to take away all reasonable card draw, but it was an innocent card that was incorrectly targeted for the sins of extremely specific decks that could have been hit more elegantly. Like many of their bans, it was sloppy, lazy, and careless.
Edit: all this aside, this is why I am so thrilled about the Play Design team. Hopefully with the help of actually knowledgeable and skillful players, we can avoid stupid decisions like this moving forward.
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Oh, and WotC is full of smart, hard working people who try their best and make a great product that we all enjoy
Probe was a great ban. I'm all for seeing zero mana cards that promote all in combo and creature-combo decks get banned. The probe ban helped modern biggest flaw which is non games.
The big problem with the Gitaxian Probe ban is that basically every single deck at the time that got usage out of that card was weak to Fatal Push. Death's Shadow Zoo? Infect? Kiln Fiend? Pyromancer Delver? Fatal Push is stellar against all of those decks. Banning Gitaxian Probe without first observing Fatal Push's impact does seem questionable in retrospect.
The big problem with the Gitaxian Probe ban is that basically every single deck at the time that got usage out of that card was weak to Fatal Push. Death's Shadow Zoo? Infect? Kiln Fiend? Pyromancer Delver? Fatal Push is stellar against all of those decks. Banning Gitaxian Probe without first observing Fatal Push's impact does seem questionable in retrospect.
If push had text letting you draw it from your deck on turn 0 I would agree with you
Because Path isnt also an answer, or even bolt in some cases, and they will ALWAYS have a turn 3 kill lined up....
That's exactly my point - path and bolt existed then and aggro-combo was still a problem. Changing the colour on the 1 mana answer you don't have doesn't help you at all...
What value does modern get from probe being legal? Best case is delver and young pyromancer builds get better. Let's be honest though it's really just enabling all in hyper aggro which is a negative on a already fast format. Probe also just makes games play out worse due to the free information
Because Path isnt also an answer, or even bolt in some cases, and they will ALWAYS have a turn 3 kill lined up....
That's exactly my point - path and bolt existed then and aggro-combo was still a problem. Changing the colour on the 1 mana answer you don't have doesn't help you at all...
Because Path isnt also an answer, or even bolt in some cases, and they will ALWAYS have a turn 3 kill lined up....
That's exactly my point - path and bolt existed then and aggro-combo was still a problem. Changing the colour on the 1 mana answer you don't have doesn't help you at all...
Disagree. Goyf would also disagree.
You seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing Fatal Push had no effect on the meta. This is not the case. I am arguing that the perfect information provided by Gitaxian Probe fueled turn 4 violations because it worked so well in aggro-combo decks.
1 removal spell is the difference between a turn 2/3 win and a card advantage blowout loss when you're a aggro-combo mage and you decide to swing. Wouldn't it be nice to know if they had removal for free while advancing your gameplan? Because no matter how good the answers in a format are, you can't cast them if you don't have them in your hand. Whenever they aren't in your hand the potential for a quick death skyrockets in a format with probe. Probe wasn't strong because of a lack of answers for low-cost creatures.
What value does modern get from probe being legal? Best case is delver and young pyromancer builds get better. Let's be honest though it's really just enabling all in hyper aggro which is a negative on a already fast format. Probe also just makes games play out worse due to the free information
I largely disagree with Z in most cases, so if we actually agree on something, you can take that to the bank. Here, we're on the same page. Probe does not improve Modern from a metagame, matchup, or even skill perspective. It just enables a few broken decks and dramatically improves Grixis DS. No thanks.
What value does modern get from probe being legal? Best case is delver and young pyromancer builds get better. Let's be honest though it's really just enabling all in hyper aggro which is a negative on a already fast format. Probe also just makes games play out worse due to the free information
I largely disagree with Z in most cases, so if we actually agree on something, you can take that to the bank. Here, we're on the same page. Probe does not improve Modern from a metagame, matchup, or even skill perspective. It just enables a few broken decks and dramatically improves Grixis DS. No thanks.
Completely agree with you guys and Leo above. Perfect information and +1 Storm/Prowess/Delve for free? **** that, I'm glad it's gone.
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
Because Path isnt also an answer, or even bolt in some cases, and they will ALWAYS have a turn 3 kill lined up....
That's exactly my point - path and bolt existed then and aggro-combo was still a problem. Changing the colour on the 1 mana answer you don't have doesn't help you at all...
Disagree. Goyf would also disagree.
You seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing Fatal Push had no effect on the meta. This is not the case. I am arguing that the perfect information provided by Gitaxian Probe fueled turn 4 violations because it worked so well in aggro-combo decks.
1 removal spell is the difference between a turn 2/3 win and a card advantage blowout loss when you're a aggro-combo mage and you decide to swing. Wouldn't it be nice to know if they had removal for free while advancing your gameplan? Because no matter how good the answers in a format are, you can't cast them if you don't have them in your hand. Whenever they aren't in your hand the potential for a quick death skyrockets in a format with probe. Probe wasn't strong because of a lack of answers for low-cost creatures.
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful/ in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
Weird how Become Immense stopped being a problem after they banned probe, eh?
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful/ in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
Weird how Become Immense stopped being a problem after they banned probe, eh?
If you have the option to target a specific deck (or decks) with card A and card B, and both cards hit the same deck(s), but one hits 3 other non-problem decks too, which option do you think would be a better choice? Which do you think would be the "surgical" choice? What decks that were running Probe were ever a problem, outside of Zooicide and Infect?
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful/ in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
Weird how Become Immense stopped being a problem after they banned probe, eh?
If you have the option to target a specific deck (or decks) with card A and card B, and both cards hit the same deck(s), but one hits 3 other non-problem decks too, which option do you think would be a better choice? Which do you think would be the "surgical" choice? What decks that were running Probe were ever a problem, outside of Zooicide and Infect?
That thought process led to the banning of bbe before they tealized it wasn't enough and took drs too without unbanning bbe.
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful/ in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
Weird how Become Immense stopped being a problem after they banned probe, eh?
If you have the option to target a specific deck (or decks) with card A and card B, and both cards hit the same deck(s), but one hits 3 other non-problem decks too, which option do you think would be a better choice? Which do you think would be the "surgical" choice? What decks that were running Probe were ever a problem, outside of Zooicide and Infect?
That thought process led to the banning of bbe before they tealized it wasn't enough and took drs too without unbanning bbe.
So their ban decisions are poorly thought-out, untested, and sloppy? Color me shocked.
Again, thank goodness the Play Design team can help weigh in on these decisions that can have huge impacts on our format.
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful/ in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
Weird how Become Immense stopped being a problem after they banned probe, eh?
If you have the option to target a specific deck (or decks) with card A and card B, and both cards hit the same deck(s), but one hits 3 other non-problem decks too, which option do you think would be a better choice? Which do you think would be the "surgical" choice? What decks that were running Probe were ever a problem, outside of Zooicide and Infect?
You remove the card(s) at the root of the problem you are trying to solve. In this instance it was t4 violators in an aggro-combo focused meta. The subtle aspect I mentioned earlier refers to how the card was not the most obvious choice to slow the meta and but rather it was the best choice to achieve that goal. Surgical may be a silly adjective to apply to a ban as there will always be damage but at the time of the ban it was not clear which decks would survive, probe was not a lynchpin card but rather a hyper-efficient enabler (too efficent for WotC.) Surgical meant it was a precise and hopefully non-fatal extraction from certain decks, which is a fair impression to have at the time of the ban not knowing delver and infect etc. would get hit hard (delver shares also suffering from GDS being awesome, I don't think it's that bad of a deck.)
Let's also not forget that people did not like how prominent infect, zooicide and bloo were at the time (yourself included) and the meta is now slower and more interactive.
You remove the card(s) at the root of the problem you are trying to solve. In this instance it was t4 violators in an aggro-combo focused meta. The subtle aspect I mentioned earlier refers to how the card was not the most obvious choice to slow the meta and but rather it was the best choice to achieve that goal.
If it was not the most obvious choice, perhaps it was not the best choice either.
Surgical may be a silly adjective to apply to a ban as there will always be damage
Aggreed. And needles collateral damaged could have been completely avoided with a different, perhaps more obvious choice.
but at the time of the ban it was not clear which decks would survive,
It was pretty clear that the decks which played Probe and were weak to the brand-new Fatal Push would either have to significantly change or die. Infect, for example, has exactly 0 placements of any kind at any level of competition on MTG Top 8 for more than the past two months. Delver has less than 10.
probe was not a lynchpin card but rather a hyper-efficient enabler (too efficent for WotC.)
Was literally never a problem in any number of other decks until specifically these decks. Being "too efficient" is a blatant cop-out excuse. If that were actually the case, it would have been banned back in 2011.
Surgical meant it was a precise and hopefully non-fatal extraction from certain decks, which is a fair impression to have at the time of the ban not knowing delver and infect etc. would get hit hard
It's like a patient went in for surgery to remove a tumor on his pancreas, but instead they removed the entire pancreas and two or three other organs just for good measure. Perhaps if they put better thought and foresight into these massive decisions, they wouldn't have so much unneeded collateral damage.
Let's also not forget that people did not like how prominent infect, zooicide and bloo were at the time (yourself included) and the meta is now slower and more interactive.
The ends do not justify the means. I agree that Infect and Zooicide were problems. And they were problems because of their quick kills, which were accomplished because of Become Immense. Bloo was a great deck, but it was also extremely fragile and had zero finishes in any meaningful tournament and unregistered percentage of the metagame. Not really a problem, I think. A similar outcome could have just as easily been achieved by banning BI.
Clearly we hold different opinions on this. I do not think it is to either of our benefits to continue this conversation further as we are both just repeating ourselves.
I'm all about game quality and the average game of modern improved for me when zooicide, infect left the meta. Diversity is nice and all but modern is already fast, and these decks made the format faster so I have very little sympathy for these decks
I think modern is actually much faster than legacy but ok
Yup... Totally hate those Turn 0/1 beats in Modern. Pretty hard to take anything you say seriously when you truthfully believe this. You have a small point when it comes to hand disruption that is completely and utterly ruined by this gem.
Yeah I think its more likely they will offer suggestions for "tweaks" to cards to be more Modern playable while still balanced in Standard. Don't really see them having much opportunity to Test for things like banned list issues.
Other people have described the probe ban as surgical and subtle and completely successful in it's goals. You make valid points but your post succumbs to your habit of presenting any opposing viewpoint as naive and moronic. Even with push's presence, you can't always have it in your hand and any time you don't have it a probe will show the aggro-combo mage it is safe and contribute to another possible turn 4 violation. This is always be the primary problem with the card when coupled with cantriping and no mana cost.
Oh, and WotC is full of smart, hard working people who try their best and make a great product that we all enjoy
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
If push had text letting you draw it from your deck on turn 0 I would agree with you
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
Spirits
That's exactly my point - path and bolt existed then and aggro-combo was still a problem. Changing the colour on the 1 mana answer you don't have doesn't help you at all...
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
Disagree. Goyf would also disagree.
Spirits
You seem to be under the impression that I'm arguing Fatal Push had no effect on the meta. This is not the case. I am arguing that the perfect information provided by Gitaxian Probe fueled turn 4 violations because it worked so well in aggro-combo decks.
1 removal spell is the difference between a turn 2/3 win and a card advantage blowout loss when you're a aggro-combo mage and you decide to swing. Wouldn't it be nice to know if they had removal for free while advancing your gameplan? Because no matter how good the answers in a format are, you can't cast them if you don't have them in your hand. Whenever they aren't in your hand the potential for a quick death skyrockets in a format with probe. Probe wasn't strong because of a lack of answers for low-cost creatures.
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
I largely disagree with Z in most cases, so if we actually agree on something, you can take that to the bank. Here, we're on the same page. Probe does not improve Modern from a metagame, matchup, or even skill perspective. It just enables a few broken decks and dramatically improves Grixis DS. No thanks.
Considering the result of the ban (along side printing of Push) outright destroyed multiple decks, and AF's own words tell us that they (at least publically) hold the opinion that they would rather weaken a deck without "nuking it out of existence," I'd say it was less successful than a "surgical and subtle" ban should be. The Probe ban destroyed no less than 5 decks, though two "survived" by morphing into very different decks with different construction and gameplan. To me, the Probe ban looks like a big sloppy hammer that happened to get lucky that a after a couple months we found suitable shells for a two of the killed decks.
I'll say this again: Gitaxian Probe, a "free" cantrip + Peek, was never a problem in Modern whatsoever, until it was being abused by T4 violators. The sins lie with the T4-violating decks, not in Probe. Those decks could have actually been surgically hit with a ban of Become Immense, since surgical precision usually implies a lack of collateral damage and a surviving patient. Not a shotgun trying to blast 2 decks and hitting an additional 3 innocents in the crossfire. That's not the image I think of when I think of "surgical" or "subtle."
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Ah ok, I can get behind that idea.
Spirits
Weird how Become Immense stopped being a problem after they banned probe, eh?
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
If you have the option to target a specific deck (or decks) with card A and card B, and both cards hit the same deck(s), but one hits 3 other non-problem decks too, which option do you think would be a better choice? Which do you think would be the "surgical" choice? What decks that were running Probe were ever a problem, outside of Zooicide and Infect?
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
That thought process led to the banning of bbe before they tealized it wasn't enough and took drs too without unbanning bbe.
So their ban decisions are poorly thought-out, untested, and sloppy? Color me shocked.
Again, thank goodness the Play Design team can help weigh in on these decisions that can have huge impacts on our format.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
You remove the card(s) at the root of the problem you are trying to solve. In this instance it was t4 violators in an aggro-combo focused meta. The subtle aspect I mentioned earlier refers to how the card was not the most obvious choice to slow the meta and but rather it was the best choice to achieve that goal. Surgical may be a silly adjective to apply to a ban as there will always be damage but at the time of the ban it was not clear which decks would survive, probe was not a lynchpin card but rather a hyper-efficient enabler (too efficent for WotC.) Surgical meant it was a precise and hopefully non-fatal extraction from certain decks, which is a fair impression to have at the time of the ban not knowing delver and infect etc. would get hit hard (delver shares also suffering from GDS being awesome, I don't think it's that bad of a deck.)
Let's also not forget that people did not like how prominent infect, zooicide and bloo were at the time (yourself included) and the meta is now slower and more interactive.
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
If it was not the most obvious choice, perhaps it was not the best choice either.
Aggreed. And needles collateral damaged could have been completely avoided with a different, perhaps more obvious choice.
It was pretty clear that the decks which played Probe and were weak to the brand-new Fatal Push would either have to significantly change or die. Infect, for example, has exactly 0 placements of any kind at any level of competition on MTG Top 8 for more than the past two months. Delver has less than 10.
Was literally never a problem in any number of other decks until specifically these decks. Being "too efficient" is a blatant cop-out excuse. If that were actually the case, it would have been banned back in 2011.
It's like a patient went in for surgery to remove a tumor on his pancreas, but instead they removed the entire pancreas and two or three other organs just for good measure. Perhaps if they put better thought and foresight into these massive decisions, they wouldn't have so much unneeded collateral damage.
The ends do not justify the means. I agree that Infect and Zooicide were problems. And they were problems because of their quick kills, which were accomplished because of Become Immense. Bloo was a great deck, but it was also extremely fragile and had zero finishes in any meaningful tournament and unregistered percentage of the metagame. Not really a problem, I think. A similar outcome could have just as easily been achieved by banning BI.
Clearly we hold different opinions on this. I do not think it is to either of our benefits to continue this conversation further as we are both just repeating ourselves.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Yup... Totally hate those Turn 0/1 beats in Modern. Pretty hard to take anything you say seriously when you truthfully believe this. You have a small point when it comes to hand disruption that is completely and utterly ruined by this gem.
Modern
Modern