One of the things I like about printing nonbasic land hate in the land slot is that it *doesn't* just go in every deck. In Modern you can't play manabases like Legacy's grixis delver -- no deathrite, no duals, no brainstorm. So land destruction lands in any quantity almost always go into 2 color decks, which helps create variety. If you want a better big mana matchup you are going to have a worse threat and answer suite.
A Tectonic Edge that had no 4-land rider (or with a "controls 2 non-basics" rider) is something I think would definitely liven up the meta. You'd see UW control locked into top tier as opposed to bouncing in and out, you might see a UR or UB Delver, etc.
I'd like to see them try a: Landy McLandkillenstein
{T}: Add (1)
{1}, {T}, Sacrifice {C}: Destroy target non-basic land if its controller controls 2 or more non-basic lands.
The upside to this is it'd not be completely busted in Standard and not good enough for legacy. I expect it would be popular in standard but far more vulnerable there where more basics see play and building even a 2-color manabase with colorless lands isn't always easy.
Landy McLandkillenstein
{T}: Add (1)
{1}, {T}, Sacrifice {C}: Destroy target non-basic land if its controller controls 2 or more non-basic lands.
The upside to this is it'd not be completely busted in Standard and not good enough for legacy. I expect it would be popular in standard but far more vulnerable there where more basics see play and building even a 2-color manabase with colorless lands isn't always easy.
I would be fine with this seeing print provided that they don't change the name you put for it.
I honestly think that your idea could be interesting if it were in the Modern eta. At the very least, I could create some interesting counter-play with fetch lands. You can sacrifice a fetch grabbing a basic to essentially counter the activated ability if you only have 1 other non-basic land.
As for it being a powerhouse in Standard, that would depend on the metagame it's printed in. IF Wizards sets up standard to be all about mono and 2 colour decks, that land could be mediocre to terrible.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
Yeah I think the current standard format is a bit land heavy (and has ramunap excavator, guh) but there are definitely standard formats where something like this would be fine or at least not defining.
It doesn't completely shatter 3-color manabases in modern either, just a little tug on the reins.
In general I am against the whole 'stony silence for lands' idea of a single card that just completely destroys them. It'd more desirable in my opinion to cut back the whole "overpowered sideboard hoser" strategy and try to adjust the metagame in more subtle ways.
We already have enough of that dynamic IMHO, with RIP-Dredge and Shatterstorm/Stony Sielnce-Affinity.
Hate ramp decks? Play Storm. Your midrange or control deck is not entitled to be 50/50 or better against the entire field.
no no no no
You clearly have it backwards and you have insulted the various midrange deities.
As penance, you shall print up some cheap nonbasic land hate, chop chop!
(or if you could get Eldrazi Temple banned that would be great, but they understand that miracles aren't your department)
Just leave it on the collection plate when you're done.
This. So much this. There are several decks which are very effective against Tron and Valakut strategies. Otherwise, these decks would be winning every event or putting 4-5 copies in every major event's top 8. Instead, you have a small group of players that want to basically nerf strategies that have an edge over their midrange 3 color goodstuffs decks. I have Storm. I will win these matchups more often than not. I also know I will get my ass kicked by Grixis Shadow more often than not. Every deck has a couple of bad matchups, so the reason why midrange decks are entitled to have zero escapes me.
Every deck has a couple of bad matchups, so the reason why midrange decks are entitled to have zero escapes me.
I think it's this very old-seated mentality of Jund/Abzan/GBx decks essentially being one of the gatekeepers of the format.
When I started playing Modern the mantra was if you can't beat [REDACTED] or GBx decks, then you've got no place in the format. Well the format has changed, and while [REDACTED] has been banned, GBx has been pushed down in power level. Now instead of being a gatekeeper, they're one of the decks trying to get through the gate.
I can see people being pissed that their deck that used to be such a staple of the format being brought so low. Especially when you consider that for people who have been playing for a long time, they'll most likely have spent a bunch of money to get their Goyfs, Bobs, Lilis, etc. It's an ego thing. I spent X to get an amazing deck. My deck is no longer as good because of Y. I need to remove Y as a variable so that I can justify spending X all those years ago.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
Has nothing to do with Midrange being a sacred cow. I hate midrange style play, its paint dry boring to me.
Just flip the 'why is midrange entitled to no bad match ups' around to 'why should any deck not have hate'.
Thats the question being asked here. Why should decks which depend on specific lands and the leverage those lands provide, not be subject to hate, on the level of Rest in Peace for Dredge, and Stony for Affinity?
I dont care about Midrange. I dont care about decks that get hosed by Torpor Orb and I dont care about decks that get run out of the brackets by RIP and Stony.
Why are people so up in arms about hate that would just join the ranks of other hard hate cards?
Why is ETron entitled to dodging hate?
EDIT: And before you all point out Seas and Blood Moon, I'm talking 'scoop it up if you dont answer it' kind of hate. Hate like Choke, and Boil.
Why is Jund entitled to dodge hate?
Why is UW Control entitled to dodge hate?
Why is Merfolk entitled to dodge hate?
Not all strategies have to be hateable. I don't know where that idea comes from.
Cavern, Uncounterable, Protection from Blue....there is UW hate. Merfolk, if it make an issue could easily be handled, they are not doing anything special without Vial.
Jund? We already looked at Discard hate, so...yeah.
EDIT: And before you all point out Seas and Blood Moon, I'm talking 'scoop it up if you dont answer it' kind of hate. Hate like Choke, and Boil.
I don't necessarily disagree that a land hoser should be printed, but there are other decks that dodge hate as well. Ad Nauseam is a deck that comes to mind. Ad Nauseam is a deck that some decks simply can't afford to play hate for, or else they give up too much in other matchups. There's plenty of times that players have just conceded the match to Ad Nauseam. I've done it. For some decks, you just have to deal with the fact that there will be poor matchups. You can go overboard and overside with them in mind at small tournaments. It can work. It rarely works at a large tournament like a 15 round GP.
I wouldn't mind better land hate being printed, although I doubt Wizards will do it. But you can never say never. I just don't think Stony Silence or Rest in Peace should be brought up. These types of hosers are important in the meta now, but I feel that Wizards is really shying away from those types of HARD hosers. It kind of sucks to me too, but I've learned to deal with it. (in my day, we had Black Knight, White Knight, Karma, Flashfires, Deathgrip, Tsunami, etc., etc.)
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)
Why is Jund entitled to dodge hate?
Why is UW Control entitled to dodge hate?
Why is Merfolk entitled to dodge hate?
Not all strategies have to be hateable. I don't know where that idea comes from.
Cavern, Uncounterable, Protection from Blue....there is UW hate. Merfolk, if it make an issue could easily be handled, they are not doing anything special without Vial.
Jund? We already looked at Discard hate, so...yeah.
I think the question was more, "Why does there have to be hate on the level of Stony Silence of RiP for [insert strategy here]."
This is why this conversation just looks like a bunch of people whining about wanting to make their problem match ups better. Your argument is that, "well why is there not this uber hate card for this type of strategy?" The problem is you can apply that to literally every single deck in Modern that doesn't get hit by RiP and Stony Silence. You know why? Because those too cards are so damn narrow.
And the fact that you are talking about wanting hate like Choke or Boil....why? I repeat what I said in my lengthy-ish post on the last page: With RiP and Stony, the player is at least able to still play magic while the hate cards are in play. But with land hate, you literally destroy that player's ability to play the game. And if all you want is to make your opponent's not play magic, don't come out to a tournament, just stay at home and goldfish. Everyone wins in that scenario.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
I think people are misunderstanding things. I think most of the peoples thoughts asking for better land hate has nothing to do with them playing Midrange or Control and being salty that "big mana" decks are strong in the current metagame, rather, it has more to do with wanting more answers for the format as a whole.
But you see, if you are asking for an answer to something, it means you see it as a problem. You aren't going to ask for an answer to something if you don't see it as a problem that needs to be fixed. For example no one is asking for better lifegain cards in Modern, we don't need them. If however, Burn was a deck that people saw as an inherently problem deck in the format, that could be a conversation we'd be having.
Saying you want there to be more land hate in Modern isn't just generally asking for more answers in Modern because you want more answers to things in Modern. You are specifically saying, "land strategies are a problem I don't think we have the correct answers to deal with, and thus we need more ways to fix this problem I see with the format."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
Just flip the 'why is midrange entitled to no bad match ups' around to 'why should any deck not have hate'.
-> That is a silly question. It implies the assumption that all decks should be easily hateable. Can you give a compelling argument why all decks being easily hateable leads to a good meta? Also your answer about Jund hate didn't make sense. You specifically state we are talking about "answer it or lose" cards. Are you seriously suggesting people can effectively hate out jund/k using anti-discard like leyline of sanctity?
Thats the question being asked here. Why should decks which depend on specific lands and the leverage those lands provide, not be subject to hate, on the level of Rest in Peace for Dredge, and Stony for Affinity?
-> Because there is not really a metagame reason for them to be? Dredge and Affinity are subject to stringent hate because of their fantastic game 1 win-rates. Do ramp decks have amazing g1 win rates generally? Doesn't seem like the data bears that out. They have multiple game one weaknesses to things like burn, affinity, hatebears, etc.
Why are people so up in arms about hate that would just join the ranks of other hard hate cards?
-> Because it's not required. We generally dont super good answers to decks which aren't getting a bit out of control. Also, the general answer for such deck tends to be a banning anyway.
-> Better than blood moon land hate would certainly weaken all land-based decks, reducing the diversity of the meta. Why would you play a slow land based deck when all your positive matchups turn negative post board.
-> To turn the question around, why do you want it so much? You need a better reason than "it doesn't exist". If the contention is that one deck is dominating... that doesn't seem to be true? If your contention is that midrange is unfairly disadvantaged we could argue that I suppose.
Why is ETron entitled to dodging hate?
-> Again, you need a compelling argument to print a huge nerf to a deck. The argument "currently I can't instakill it" is not a compelling argument.
EDIT: And before you all point out Seas and Blood Moon, I'm talking 'scoop it up if you dont answer it' kind of hate. Hate like Choke, and Boil.
Honestly, I see it as (tron) a potential problem. It's something that is unique in what it does, and with the fact we have a long Dev cycle I would rather have better answers now, than not.
That's all.
And no, playing the game is not a sacred cow either. I have no issue with prison or lock decks, or things like Turns that prevent one from playing.
I agree it may be a potential problem, but I'm not really that worried to be honest. The colorless gimmick sets are already over (Both Eldrazi and Artifact), and they've printed all the famous colorless planeswalkers (Ugin, Karn). I doubt theyll print another big mana colorless set for quite a while.
Meanwhile a choke style card vs. tron specifically doesn't seem to affect the metagame in a nice way. It eliminates 2 decks for no apparent compensation. If we dislike Eldrazi Tron in particular, it seems more reasonable to do something like nerf it through an ancillary card like cavern of souls.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern UWUW ControlUW UGWSpiritsUGW GHardened ScalesG WGRUKiki PodWGRU [RIP]
Yes, you have top tier strategies built around exploiting nonbasic lands. There should be more than one card in modern that can be sideboarded to effectively attack all nonbasic-based decks. Not as pure mana denial, but as a specific measure against the abilities of those nonbasics. We dont have 50 card sideboards to work with, and options are great. Some decks would use blood moon because they can and moon is king. Others might still use fulminator because they can exploit it being a creature, others might go with seas because they can leverage the card type or flickering it or islandwalking. Just like some play revelry, some play dsphere, some play stony, some play creeping corrosion, some play vandalblast, etc.
And metagaming is the biggest joke in magic. Step one: predict the future. Step two: only draw the prominent matchups from your predicted future. That is, nailing step one is a one in a million shot, and when it works you gain a 5 percent advantage due to step two being a one in a zillion shot.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
* Esper Draw-Go
* Tezzeret Whir
* Blue Tron
Yes, you have top tier strategies built around exploiting nonbasic lands. There should be more than one card in modern that can be sideboarded to effectively attack all nonbasic-based decks. Not as pure mana denial, but as a specific measure against the abilities of those nonbasics. We dont have 50 card sideboards to work with, and options are great. Some decks would use blood moon because they can and moon is king. Others might still use fulminator because they can exploit it being a creature, others might go with seas because they can leverage the card type or flickering it or islandwalking. Just like some play revelry, some play dsphere, some play stony, some play creeping corrosion, some play vandalblast, etc.
And metagaming is the biggest joke in magic. Step one: predict the future. Step two: only draw the prominent matchups from your predicted future. That is, nailing step one is a one in a million shot, and when it works you gain a 5 percent advantage due to step two being a one in a zillion shot.
Bad, after reading discussion on the UB Tezz thread this really does feel like it's coming from a place of wanting to eliminate bad matchups rather than format balancing. There are options for affecting lands, lots of them, and lots of tier 1 and 2 decks run them effectively - but none will change your tron matchups into good ones with the decks you (we) run.
Should there really be multiple cards that can effectively attack all nonbasic abilities? I think that statement is bigger than you think it is.
Tezz is a super fun, powerful and underexplored deck with tiering potential imo but it pretty much can't beat Gx Tron without compromising the deck by overtuning and that's okay.
Metagaming can certainly help, although people tend to make it seem easier than it really is. It can be as one dimensional as guessing what people pack hate for, but it can be a lot more than that with hype, new printings and recent results. The words are simple but the concept can be really hard. Metagaming is not a sole defining factor for winning a tournament, but it is one of those intangible elements that influences success where less critical observers might only see luck.
p.s. don't know how many welding jars you run but they help huge in titanshift. I am 2 mb 1 sb.
Bring on the answers. The players against answers for big mana deck just don't want more bad matchups
Just make a 1R- Enchantment All non-basic lands are mountains.
The issue with Blood Moon is that people think it's too slow. Make it 2 mana and now it's a great answer for all the Big Mana decks, Midrange and control. Makes sideboarding really easy.
Honestly, I see it as (tron) a potential problem. It's something that is unique in what it does, and with the fact we have a long Dev cycle I would rather have better answers now, than not.
That's all.
And no, playing the game is not a sacred cow either. I have no issue with prison or lock decks, or things like Turns that prevent one from playing.
For me, I don't view Tron as a problem in itself. There are ample ways for fair deck to attack a Tron engine, whether through deck choice (e.g. combo, D&T), colorless hate (e.g. Quarter), and/or on-color hate (e.g. Seas, Fulminator, Moon with a clock, etc.). People who are complaining solely about Tron are mischaracterizing the matchup.
The problem arises when you have limited hate slots and try to shore up your matchups against Tron, E-Tron, AND Titanshift all at the same time. That's a big challenge because hate cards against one are often bad against the other. Contrast with a generic answer like Push or Bolt that is generally strong against all decks of a certain type (aggro, in those cases). There isn't a land-hate equivalent.
I think it's reasonable for players to want better generic answers to land-based decks. It's not reasonable to want those decks banned when their only sin is beating your pet strategy. But insofar as people just want more hate options, it's a fine request.
If blood moon cost 2, there would be a tier 1 prison deck based on it, you can bet on that, and it would necessitate the banning of SSG if t1 blood moon was only a 2 card combo. That's way over the top.
Why is Jund entitled to dodge hate?
Why is UW Control entitled to dodge hate?
Why is Merfolk entitled to dodge hate?
Not all strategies have to be hateable. I don't know where that idea comes from.
UW has all kinds of hate. Anything that's uncounterable or has hexproof is hate. Jund and Merfolk attack on a fair axis and can be hated out by normal cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WoTC, thank you for finally announcing the Modern format, an eternal format where everyone can participate.
I really cannot understand why the prospect of a G enchantment that turns all nonbasic lands into rainbow lands is worriesome. You can't lock people out of playing magic with it the way you do with blood moon (colourless mana symbols of eldrazi notwithstanding which is one very specific mechanic/tribe - and hey, play some wastes/mind stones and problem solved), but it can be played in non-red decks as a way to slow/stop valakut, temple, tron and hell even cavern of souls and manlands if you care to. It non-bo's with nykthos so cannot build devotion, crap in multiples, takes the pain off your opponent's fetchlands, and may not even be good enough at doing what we hope it would do in the first place since it can just be blown up turn 2 by natures claim / revelry anyways.
Blood moon already exists. This card is less powerful and more narrow in just about every meaningful way, while being easily countered by decks that would need to get rid of it (again, eldrazi tron probably has to adapt somehow but welcome to reality with your all colourless deck).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
* Esper Draw-Go
* Tezzeret Whir
* Blue Tron
Hate should be allowed to exist in any format where there is large potential for symmetry of strategies. Midrange doesn't have any symmetry, just some stronger level of consistency.
Maybe we need only another bloodmoon? 3 mana but colorless? So it can be used more and big mana becomes more problems?
Blood Moon causes too much incidental damage to other decks, will never be in Standard, and leads to non-games. I already suggested an alternative that I think would fit the land-hate role without wrecking other decks. Modify cost as needed.
Prismatic Moon 1G or 2G
Enchantment
Nonbasic lands lose all abilities and have T: add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
This provides a blanket Moon effect without shutting down an entire deck, allows counterplay, and could easily get through Standard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
no no no no
You clearly have it backwards and you have insulted the various midrange deities.
As penance, you shall print up some cheap nonbasic land hate, chop chop!
(or if you could get Eldrazi Temple banned that would be great, but they understand that miracles aren't your department)
Just leave it on the collection plate when you're done.
A Tectonic Edge that had no 4-land rider (or with a "controls 2 non-basics" rider) is something I think would definitely liven up the meta. You'd see UW control locked into top tier as opposed to bouncing in and out, you might see a UR or UB Delver, etc.
I'd like to see them try a:
Landy McLandkillenstein
{T}: Add (1)
{1}, {T}, Sacrifice {C}: Destroy target non-basic land if its controller controls 2 or more non-basic lands.
The upside to this is it'd not be completely busted in Standard and not good enough for legacy. I expect it would be popular in standard but far more vulnerable there where more basics see play and building even a 2-color manabase with colorless lands isn't always easy.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I would be fine with this seeing print provided that they don't change the name you put for it.
I honestly think that your idea could be interesting if it were in the Modern eta. At the very least, I could create some interesting counter-play with fetch lands. You can sacrifice a fetch grabbing a basic to essentially counter the activated ability if you only have 1 other non-basic land.
As for it being a powerhouse in Standard, that would depend on the metagame it's printed in. IF Wizards sets up standard to be all about mono and 2 colour decks, that land could be mediocre to terrible.
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
It doesn't completely shatter 3-color manabases in modern either, just a little tug on the reins.
In general I am against the whole 'stony silence for lands' idea of a single card that just completely destroys them. It'd more desirable in my opinion to cut back the whole "overpowered sideboard hoser" strategy and try to adjust the metagame in more subtle ways.
We already have enough of that dynamic IMHO, with RIP-Dredge and Shatterstorm/Stony Sielnce-Affinity.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
This. So much this. There are several decks which are very effective against Tron and Valakut strategies. Otherwise, these decks would be winning every event or putting 4-5 copies in every major event's top 8. Instead, you have a small group of players that want to basically nerf strategies that have an edge over their midrange 3 color goodstuffs decks. I have Storm. I will win these matchups more often than not. I also know I will get my ass kicked by Grixis Shadow more often than not. Every deck has a couple of bad matchups, so the reason why midrange decks are entitled to have zero escapes me.
I think it's this very old-seated mentality of Jund/Abzan/GBx decks essentially being one of the gatekeepers of the format.
When I started playing Modern the mantra was if you can't beat [REDACTED] or GBx decks, then you've got no place in the format. Well the format has changed, and while [REDACTED] has been banned, GBx has been pushed down in power level. Now instead of being a gatekeeper, they're one of the decks trying to get through the gate.
I can see people being pissed that their deck that used to be such a staple of the format being brought so low. Especially when you consider that for people who have been playing for a long time, they'll most likely have spent a bunch of money to get their Goyfs, Bobs, Lilis, etc. It's an ego thing. I spent X to get an amazing deck. My deck is no longer as good because of Y. I need to remove Y as a variable so that I can justify spending X all those years ago.
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
Just flip the 'why is midrange entitled to no bad match ups' around to 'why should any deck not have hate'.
Thats the question being asked here. Why should decks which depend on specific lands and the leverage those lands provide, not be subject to hate, on the level of Rest in Peace for Dredge, and Stony for Affinity?
I dont care about Midrange. I dont care about decks that get hosed by Torpor Orb and I dont care about decks that get run out of the brackets by RIP and Stony.
Why are people so up in arms about hate that would just join the ranks of other hard hate cards?
Why is ETron entitled to dodging hate?
EDIT: And before you all point out Seas and Blood Moon, I'm talking 'scoop it up if you dont answer it' kind of hate. Hate like Choke, and Boil.
Spirits
Cavern, Uncounterable, Protection from Blue....there is UW hate. Merfolk, if it make an issue could easily be handled, they are not doing anything special without Vial.
Jund? We already looked at Discard hate, so...yeah.
Spirits
I don't necessarily disagree that a land hoser should be printed, but there are other decks that dodge hate as well. Ad Nauseam is a deck that comes to mind. Ad Nauseam is a deck that some decks simply can't afford to play hate for, or else they give up too much in other matchups. There's plenty of times that players have just conceded the match to Ad Nauseam. I've done it. For some decks, you just have to deal with the fact that there will be poor matchups. You can go overboard and overside with them in mind at small tournaments. It can work. It rarely works at a large tournament like a 15 round GP.
I wouldn't mind better land hate being printed, although I doubt Wizards will do it. But you can never say never. I just don't think Stony Silence or Rest in Peace should be brought up. These types of hosers are important in the meta now, but I feel that Wizards is really shying away from those types of HARD hosers. It kind of sucks to me too, but I've learned to deal with it. (in my day, we had Black Knight, White Knight, Karma, Flashfires, Deathgrip, Tsunami, etc., etc.)
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 think the question was more, "Why does there have to be hate on the level of Stony Silence of RiP for [insert strategy here]."
This is why this conversation just looks like a bunch of people whining about wanting to make their problem match ups better. Your argument is that, "well why is there not this uber hate card for this type of strategy?" The problem is you can apply that to literally every single deck in Modern that doesn't get hit by RiP and Stony Silence. You know why? Because those too cards are so damn narrow.
And the fact that you are talking about wanting hate like Choke or Boil....why? I repeat what I said in my lengthy-ish post on the last page: With RiP and Stony, the player is at least able to still play magic while the hate cards are in play. But with land hate, you literally destroy that player's ability to play the game. And if all you want is to make your opponent's not play magic, don't come out to a tournament, just stay at home and goldfish. Everyone wins in that scenario.
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
But you see, if you are asking for an answer to something, it means you see it as a problem. You aren't going to ask for an answer to something if you don't see it as a problem that needs to be fixed. For example no one is asking for better lifegain cards in Modern, we don't need them. If however, Burn was a deck that people saw as an inherently problem deck in the format, that could be a conversation we'd be having.
Saying you want there to be more land hate in Modern isn't just generally asking for more answers in Modern because you want more answers to things in Modern. You are specifically saying, "land strategies are a problem I don't think we have the correct answers to deal with, and thus we need more ways to fix this problem I see with the format."
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
-> That is a silly question. It implies the assumption that all decks should be easily hateable. Can you give a compelling argument why all decks being easily hateable leads to a good meta? Also your answer about Jund hate didn't make sense. You specifically state we are talking about "answer it or lose" cards. Are you seriously suggesting people can effectively hate out jund/k using anti-discard like leyline of sanctity?
Thats the question being asked here. Why should decks which depend on specific lands and the leverage those lands provide, not be subject to hate, on the level of Rest in Peace for Dredge, and Stony for Affinity?
-> Because there is not really a metagame reason for them to be? Dredge and Affinity are subject to stringent hate because of their fantastic game 1 win-rates. Do ramp decks have amazing g1 win rates generally? Doesn't seem like the data bears that out. They have multiple game one weaknesses to things like burn, affinity, hatebears, etc.
Why are people so up in arms about hate that would just join the ranks of other hard hate cards?
-> Because it's not required. We generally dont super good answers to decks which aren't getting a bit out of control. Also, the general answer for such deck tends to be a banning anyway.
-> Better than blood moon land hate would certainly weaken all land-based decks, reducing the diversity of the meta. Why would you play a slow land based deck when all your positive matchups turn negative post board.
-> To turn the question around, why do you want it so much? You need a better reason than "it doesn't exist". If the contention is that one deck is dominating... that doesn't seem to be true? If your contention is that midrange is unfairly disadvantaged we could argue that I suppose.
Why is ETron entitled to dodging hate?
-> Again, you need a compelling argument to print a huge nerf to a deck. The argument "currently I can't instakill it" is not a compelling argument.
EDIT: And before you all point out Seas and Blood Moon, I'm talking 'scoop it up if you dont answer it' kind of hate. Hate like Choke, and Boil.
UWUW ControlUW
UGWSpiritsUGW
GHardened ScalesG
WGRUKiki PodWGRU [RIP]
That's all.
And no, playing the game is not a sacred cow either. I have no issue with prison or lock decks, or things like Turns that prevent one from playing.
Spirits
Meanwhile a choke style card vs. tron specifically doesn't seem to affect the metagame in a nice way. It eliminates 2 decks for no apparent compensation. If we dislike Eldrazi Tron in particular, it seems more reasonable to do something like nerf it through an ancillary card like cavern of souls.
UWUW ControlUW
UGWSpiritsUGW
GHardened ScalesG
WGRUKiki PodWGRU [RIP]
And metagaming is the biggest joke in magic. Step one: predict the future. Step two: only draw the prominent matchups from your predicted future. That is, nailing step one is a one in a million shot, and when it works you gain a 5 percent advantage due to step two being a one in a zillion shot.
* Esper Draw-Go
* Tezzeret Whir
* Blue Tron
Bad, after reading discussion on the UB Tezz thread this really does feel like it's coming from a place of wanting to eliminate bad matchups rather than format balancing. There are options for affecting lands, lots of them, and lots of tier 1 and 2 decks run them effectively - but none will change your tron matchups into good ones with the decks you (we) run.
Should there really be multiple cards that can effectively attack all nonbasic abilities? I think that statement is bigger than you think it is.
Tezz is a super fun, powerful and underexplored deck with tiering potential imo but it pretty much can't beat Gx Tron without compromising the deck by overtuning and that's okay.
Metagaming can certainly help, although people tend to make it seem easier than it really is. It can be as one dimensional as guessing what people pack hate for, but it can be a lot more than that with hype, new printings and recent results. The words are simple but the concept can be really hard. Metagaming is not a sole defining factor for winning a tournament, but it is one of those intangible elements that influences success where less critical observers might only see luck.
p.s. don't know how many welding jars you run but they help huge in titanshift. I am 2 mb 1 sb.
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
Just make a 1R- Enchantment All non-basic lands are mountains.
The issue with Blood Moon is that people think it's too slow. Make it 2 mana and now it's a great answer for all the Big Mana decks, Midrange and control. Makes sideboarding really easy.
check below for my simple yet admittedly brilliant solution to all of life's problems!
For me, I don't view Tron as a problem in itself. There are ample ways for fair deck to attack a Tron engine, whether through deck choice (e.g. combo, D&T), colorless hate (e.g. Quarter), and/or on-color hate (e.g. Seas, Fulminator, Moon with a clock, etc.). People who are complaining solely about Tron are mischaracterizing the matchup.
The problem arises when you have limited hate slots and try to shore up your matchups against Tron, E-Tron, AND Titanshift all at the same time. That's a big challenge because hate cards against one are often bad against the other. Contrast with a generic answer like Push or Bolt that is generally strong against all decks of a certain type (aggro, in those cases). There isn't a land-hate equivalent.
I think it's reasonable for players to want better generic answers to land-based decks. It's not reasonable to want those decks banned when their only sin is beating your pet strategy. But insofar as people just want more hate options, it's a fine request.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
UW has all kinds of hate. Anything that's uncounterable or has hexproof is hate. Jund and Merfolk attack on a fair axis and can be hated out by normal cards.
Blood moon already exists. This card is less powerful and more narrow in just about every meaningful way, while being easily countered by decks that would need to get rid of it (again, eldrazi tron probably has to adapt somehow but welcome to reality with your all colourless deck).
* Esper Draw-Go
* Tezzeret Whir
* Blue Tron
Blood Moon causes too much incidental damage to other decks, will never be in Standard, and leads to non-games. I already suggested an alternative that I think would fit the land-hate role without wrecking other decks. Modify cost as needed.
Prismatic Moon 1G or 2G
Enchantment
Nonbasic lands lose all abilities and have T: add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
This provides a blanket Moon effect without shutting down an entire deck, allows counterplay, and could easily get through Standard.