I find it hard to believe that someone at Wizards is not looking at Modern as well. So, that means that since January, Wizards has felt that Modern does not need any bans or unbans and it is likely because this is where they want the format to be (or close to it). Obviously not everyone will agree with this but I doubt we have seen no changes in Modern just because Wizards isn't looking at it.
Your not going to convince the haters. They are still too bitter over the [Redacted] ban to listen to logic. To them, "No changes" will always mean WotC isn't looking at Modern. Forget that even if WotC was doing an incredibly deep analysis of Modern the announcement would still read the same.
So, this is all about 3 people in here who don't like Modern at all. Couldn't care less though.
Modern is more diverse than ever. There is strategic diversity and there is also diversity within every archetype, a thing that never existed in Modern(as I describe earlier you can choose one of many ramp decks, one of many control decks, you can choose one of many midrange, aggro, combo, tempo, etc)
I remember ktkenshinx making an excellent comment about Modern firing on 6 out of 7 cylinders; leaving Control archetype outside. I think we can somewhat say Modern is firing on all cylinders now. And this is courtesy of Death's Shadow mainly.
You can't complain about people posting the same things over and over and then do that exact same thing. We get it, you think modern is diverse, move on man. The discussion is flowing.
The post was not the same Especially the last paragraph, was something nobody had said until now.
no your posts are all basically: "modern is amazing and diverse (rose tinted glasses). And dont listen to haters cuz there are few on this forum and they don't matter and are wrong"
So it sounds like diversity is the same as it has always been or at least generally there. My own anecdotal evidence is otherwise, but that's why we don't use anecdotal evidence. What I don't understand is what this is supposed to mean good or bad for anyone. The format is just as diverse as it always has been which means that it should be just as difficult or easy to sideboard or metagame. Which means, at least in my opinion, the format used to be good and still is.
The issue is that most of the previous "best decks" all attacked on a traditional axis, and were all relatively easy to interact with using basic, maindeckable interaction and answers. With almost all of those now gone, the current collection of "best decks" all attack on narrow, specific axes, that are mostly difficult to interact with. This means that, while the quantity of "diversity" is about the same, the quality is much more toxic in terms of how the decks play and matchup/sideboard lotteries are more and more exaggerated as a result. At least that's my view. Games have been less and less fun, win or lose, because of the nature of how most decks match up against each other nowadays.
unfortunately not many on this forum see this and plug Their ears when you say it. Nothing shows bias more than ignorance(Rose tinted glasses).
This format is ok but It certainly needs a few changes.
So it sounds like diversity is the same as it has always been or at least generally there. My own anecdotal evidence is otherwise, but that's why we don't use anecdotal evidence. What I don't understand is what this is supposed to mean good or bad for anyone. The format is just as diverse as it always has been which means that it should be just as difficult or easy to sideboard or metagame. Which means, at least in my opinion, the format used to be good and still is.
The issue is that most of the previous "best decks" all attacked on a traditional axis, and were all relatively easy to interact with using basic, maindeckable interaction and answers. With almost all of those now gone, the current collection of "best decks" all attack on narrow, specific axes, that are mostly difficult to interact with. This means that, while the quantity of "diversity" is about the same, the quality is much more toxic in terms of how the decks play and matchup/sideboard lotteries are more and more exaggerated as a result. At least that's my view. Games have been less and less fun, win or lose, because of the nature of how most decks match up against each other nowadays.
unfortunately not many on this forum see this and plug Their ears when you say it. Nothing shows bias more than ignorance(Rose tinted glasses).
This format is ok but It certainly needs a few changes.
It's interesting how different opinions can be on what should be banned/unbanned.
I see zero chance of GSZ or Jace ever coming off.
Preordain also seems highly unlikely. Serum Visions and Sleight of Hand are as good as WotC wants to allow in terms of scry/draw type cards. The fact that Preordain was banned in MTGO Commander is a pretty strong clue. Ponder is definitely never coming off as well (duh).
SFM and BBE both should come off for a trial phase if nothing else. I have playsets of both ready to go...
I see us getting an Opt reprint before Preordain ever comes off the banned list.
Ha! I knew it! Good to see Opt back in the mix now.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WoTC, thank you for finally announcing the Modern format, an eternal format where everyone can participate.
So here's the question. Does Opt replace Serum Visions in Control lists? Or do the lists run both?
It would depend on the list. Lists running Draw Go and particularly ones with Snapcaster Mage will want Opt. Serum Visions still lets you see more cards so it will probably stay the choice for tap out lists and those not running el snappy.
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
So, this is all about 3 people in here who don't like Modern at all. Couldn't care less though.
Modern is more diverse than ever. There is strategic diversity and there is also diversity within every archetype, a thing that never existed in Modern(as I describe earlier you can choose one of many ramp decks, one of many control decks, you can choose one of many midrange, aggro, combo, tempo, etc)
I remember ktkenshinx making an excellent comment about Modern firing on 6 out of 7 cylinders; leaving Control archetype outside. I think we can somewhat say Modern is firing on all cylinders now. And this is courtesy of Death's Shadow mainly.
You can't complain about people posting the same things over and over and then do that exact same thing. We get it, you think modern is diverse, move on man. The discussion is flowing.
The post was not the same Especially the last paragraph, was something nobody had said until now.
no your posts are all basically: "modern is amazing and diverse (rose tinted glasses). And dont listen to haters cuz there are few on this forum and they don't matter and are wrong"
Out of my last 10 posts, half of them are about metagame breakdowns, even leaving comments aside. So, yeah, no, you are totally wrong.
Moreover, during the Dredge era, I always said Modern was sooooo bad and I explained it several times, and in addition to that, when I see an uninteractive format, I always speak up(as I did some weeks ago), and suggest that the interactive decks should receive help.
But, that time is not now. Modern is more than fine at the moment and that's why most of us are super satisfied from this format. If this changes, be sure I will speak up.
not totally wrong you say it a ton. Also your mostly a spike so how could you ever have a complaint?
No offense but I hardly ever hear infect bloom twin and Grixis Shadow players ever complaining about format health and unfun/balanced matchups before they were nerfed and/or banned.
Opt is a spectacular reprint. Combo lists will likely prefer the greater dig of Visions and Sleight, which means control and tempo decks will benefit from the selectivity and instant-speed nature of Opt. The T3 Snapcaster sure got a whole lot better! Great bone thrown by Wizards.
Also, I'd wager that Opt's reprinting means Preordain and Ponder are probably off the unban menu indefinitely, if they were ever on that menu at all.
It's not a card I'd play, but it's cool to see useful cards getting reprinted for Modern. FWIW, I don't think Storm would use Opt over the Sorcery spells.
So what do folks think opt to replace sleight of hand in the control decks? Or is it still too little value at scry 1?
Really interested in that U/W walker control now.
I've been playing the Caleb Scherer storm list with 3 Peek and no fetches for a bit. I'm going to try replacing Peek with Opt. Looking at the opponents hand is nice, but I think digging to the reducer on turn one is better. And it kinda lets you bluff interaction on turn one. I dig it
So it sounds like diversity is the same as it has always been or at least generally there. My own anecdotal evidence is otherwise, but that's why we don't use anecdotal evidence. What I don't understand is what this is supposed to mean good or bad for anyone. The format is just as diverse as it always has been which means that it should be just as difficult or easy to sideboard or metagame. Which means, at least in my opinion, the format used to be good and still is.
The issue is that most of the previous "best decks" all attacked on a traditional axis, and were all relatively easy to interact with using basic, maindeckable interaction and answers. With almost all of those now gone, the current collection of "best decks" all attack on narrow, specific axes, that are mostly difficult to interact with. This means that, while the quantity of "diversity" is about the same, the quality is much more toxic in terms of how the decks play and matchup/sideboard lotteries are more and more exaggerated as a result. At least that's my view. Games have been less and less fun, win or lose, because of the nature of how most decks match up against each other nowadays.
unfortunately not many on this forum see this and plug Their ears when you say it. Nothing shows bias more than ignorance(Rose tinted glasses).
This format is ok but It certainly needs a few changes.
Being able to either opt or spell snare on t1 on the draw is pretty strong. Keep up rejection or opt post board as well.
I also like the old upkeep/draw step opt to find land now instead of next turn.
I think it'll see play primarily in esper and think twice lists. Very excited about it. Don't think it'll be a huge difference but it's a very nice option.
Opt is a spectacular reprint. Combo lists will likely prefer the greater dig of Visions and Sleight, which means control and tempo decks will benefit from the selectivity and instant-speed nature of Opt. The T3 Snapcaster sure got a whole lot better! Great bone thrown by Wizards.
Also, I'd wager that Opt's reprinting means Preordain and Ponder are probably off the unban menu indefinitely, if they were ever on that menu at all.
which is fine cuz opt is decent. Now if they could print a better counterspell and maybe do some unbans.
So it sounds like diversity is the same as it has always been or at least generally there. My own anecdotal evidence is otherwise, but that's why we don't use anecdotal evidence. What I don't understand is what this is supposed to mean good or bad for anyone. The format is just as diverse as it always has been which means that it should be just as difficult or easy to sideboard or metagame. Which means, at least in my opinion, the format used to be good and still is.
The issue is that most of the previous "best decks" all attacked on a traditional axis, and were all relatively easy to interact with using basic, maindeckable interaction and answers. With almost all of those now gone, the current collection of "best decks" all attack on narrow, specific axes, that are mostly difficult to interact with. This means that, while the quantity of "diversity" is about the same, the quality is much more toxic in terms of how the decks play and matchup/sideboard lotteries are more and more exaggerated as a result. At least that's my view. Games have been less and less fun, win or lose, because of the nature of how most decks match up against each other nowadays.
unfortunately not many on this forum see this and plug Their ears when you say it. Nothing shows bias more than ignorance(Rose tinted glasses).
This format is ok but It certainly needs a few changes.
Great avatar/post combo.
nice example of what I meant by my previous post
I'm just saying the guy with the avatar about the card so decisive we had to ban any mention of it might not have an objective opinion on rose-tinted(twinted) glasses.
So it sounds like diversity is the same as it has always been or at least generally there. My own anecdotal evidence is otherwise, but that's why we don't use anecdotal evidence. What I don't understand is what this is supposed to mean good or bad for anyone. The format is just as diverse as it always has been which means that it should be just as difficult or easy to sideboard or metagame. Which means, at least in my opinion, the format used to be good and still is.
The issue is that most of the previous "best decks" all attacked on a traditional axis, and were all relatively easy to interact with using basic, maindeckable interaction and answers. With almost all of those now gone, the current collection of "best decks" all attack on narrow, specific axes, that are mostly difficult to interact with. This means that, while the quantity of "diversity" is about the same, the quality is much more toxic in terms of how the decks play and matchup/sideboard lotteries are more and more exaggerated as a result. At least that's my view. Games have been less and less fun, win or lose, because of the nature of how most decks match up against each other nowadays.
unfortunately not many on this forum see this and plug Their ears when you say it. Nothing shows bias more than ignorance(Rose tinted glasses).
This format is ok but It certainly needs a few changes.
Great avatar/post combo.
nice example of what I meant by my previous post
So is it all opinions opposite of yours that are the result of "rose tinted glasses?" Because if you want to talk about your feelings of modern as if they were facts then more evidence is required than simply questioning the judgment of its proponents.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Your not going to convince the haters. They are still too bitter over the [Redacted] ban to listen to logic. To them, "No changes" will always mean WotC isn't looking at Modern. Forget that even if WotC was doing an incredibly deep analysis of Modern the announcement would still read the same.
decks playing:
none
This format is ok but It certainly needs a few changes.
decks playing:
none
Great avatar/post combo.
Ha! I knew it! Good to see Opt back in the mix now.
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'd imagine Serum Visions in control like UW, while Opt goes into more aggressive lists like Delver and Shadow. Not to mention combo...yay combo!
It would depend on the list. Lists running Draw Go and particularly ones with Snapcaster Mage will want Opt. Serum Visions still lets you see more cards so it will probably stay the choice for tap out lists and those not running el snappy.
No offense but I hardly ever hear infect bloom twin and Grixis Shadow players ever complaining about format health and unfun/balanced matchups before they were nerfed and/or banned.
decks playing:
none
Also, I'd wager that Opt's reprinting means Preordain and Ponder are probably off the unban menu indefinitely, if they were ever on that menu at all.
Scry 2 is much more powerful than scry 1 which is why Preordain is likely still too good
Oh! Or a deck like UW or Jeskai flash midrange!
Really interested in that U/W walker control now.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
Agree here. More opportunity to play in my desired game phase (opponents end of turn) is always a good thing.
Spirits
Spirits
Marath, Will of the Wild Tokens!! / Karrthus, Tyrant of Jund Dragons! / Muzzio, Visionary Architect / Brago, King Eternal / Daretti, Scrap Savant / Narset, Enlightened Master / Alesha, Who Smiles at Death / Bruna, Light of Alabaster / Marchesa, the Black Rose / Iroas, God of Victory / Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury / Omnath, Locus of rage / Titania, Protector of Argoth / Kozilek, the Great Distortion
Modern
Elves / Titanshift / Merfolk
nice example of what I meant by my previous post
decks playing:
none
I also like the old upkeep/draw step opt to find land now instead of next turn.
I think it'll see play primarily in esper and think twice lists. Very excited about it. Don't think it'll be a huge difference but it's a very nice option.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
decks playing:
none
I'm just saying the guy with the avatar about the card so decisive we had to ban any mention of it might not have an objective opinion on rose-tinted(twinted) glasses.
So is it all opinions opposite of yours that are the result of "rose tinted glasses?" Because if you want to talk about your feelings of modern as if they were facts then more evidence is required than simply questioning the judgment of its proponents.