Living in the UK I don't think we've seen a noticeable decrease in modern attendance at any of the stores that offer regular modern sanctioned tournaments.
In fact, recent modern events have broken attendance records in cities like Birmingham where larger stores operate.
I'm not disputing that some smaller stores may have seen a shift in format interest, but as is often the case, this can be swung just by a small group of friends trying something different, and suddenly it looks like a format has completely dropped off in your local shop. From my own experience, a group of modern aficionados in my small town decided on a whim to give legacy a try, selling their modern decks to buy into the format. As they quickly discovered, legacy events weren't popular and most people didn't follow them down the rabbit hole, so the experiment collapsed and a few of them ended up selling out of magic altogether. As a result, modern attendance dipped, but then we only had about 8-14 players max anyway for an average modern FNM so this one group jumping ship made a big difference. My point is that you could look at this example in a superficial way and come to all sorts of conclusions about how modern was dying and attendance was suffering, but in reality it was just a handful of guys deciding to try out legacy (with less than ideal results).
In aggregate, I don't think you can make those sorts of "modern is dying" claims based on anecdotal local evidence. It just doesn't work. It's a common facet of how people tend to think, but it's not factual or helpful.
Living in the UK I don't think we've seen a noticeable decrease in modern attendance at any of the stores that offer regular modern sanctioned tournaments.
In fact, recent modern events have broken attendance records in cities like Birmingham where larger stores operate.
I'm not disputing that some smaller stores may have seen a shift in format interest, but as is often the case, this can be swung just by a small group of friends trying something different, and suddenly it looks like a format has completely dropped off in your local shop. From my own experience, a group of modern aficionados in my small town decided on a whim to give legacy a try, selling their modern decks to buy into the format. As they quickly discovered, legacy events weren't popular and most people didn't follow them down the rabbit hole, so the experiment collapsed and a few of them ended up selling out of magic altogether. As a result, modern attendance dipped, but then we only had about 8-14 players max anyway for an average modern FNM so this one group jumping ship made a big difference. My point is that you could look at this example in a superficial way and come to all sorts of conclusions about how modern was dying and attendance was suffering, but in reality it was just a handful of guys deciding to try out legacy (with less than ideal results).
In aggregate, I don't think you can make those sorts of "modern is dying" claims based on anecdotal local evidence. It just doesn't work. It's a common facet of how people tend to think, but it's not factual or helpful.
Completely agree with you. We have three modern events a week at my LGS here in the US, and each one gets over a dozen people easily. That being said, the total number of people coming to play modern each week is only around 45-55, which isnt even close to a proper sample size to gauge the health of modern. We would need some kind of hard data from LGS owners across the globe to get a good idea of how often modern is being played at the local level, and I just can't see a scenario where that would happen.
Not one good deck uses it... because its an easy way to get 2 for 1'd.
Green is the only color that is heavily combo orientated. Let that sink in.
Bring back good draw spells/creatures and ug will get better.
The fight mechanic is bull because green didn't have any creature kill for ages, except for anti-flyer cards that were designed with blue being an enemy color.
So you're 4/4 beast is going to fight some 1/2 utility creature, only to get fatal push'd in response. This means that Fatal Push took out 2 cards and the utility creature still stands.
I'm not saying green should ever have good abilities to kill creatures, but giving it poor options to kill creatures is hardly game-breaking in your favor.
Well I don't think we've said Modern is dying. But a good part of the community seems to believe it's not very fun to play, in general.
And some attendance numbers might not be down because lower-skilled players playing janky brews are doing well because so much of Modern is so swingy in terms of matchup-dependence and variance-dependence. Get a good matchup with good draws and you will beat a better player nearly every time (regardless of what you're playing). Combine this exaggerated element with the fact that nearly every top deck is toxic and miserable to play against and you have certain types of players totally dissatisfied with the format and others happy for the chaos and randomness. I personally have zero motivation to play anything in Modern until something changes.
I don't mind if we have a best or two best decks, but the main thing that should be taken into account is the games to be enjoyable and that the matchups should not be lopsided. In other words, Wizards has sacrificed fun and skill in the altar of diversity.
And you imply it's a bad thing. I read way too many sentences that players claim to be truths, while it's just opinions and feelings.
By playing formats where just a few decks matter, we shape our minds to believe it's the one and good way Magic should be. Because we're used to it, and we feel comfortable in environments we know and can easily adapt to. Modern doesn't have to be an extension of Standard or Vintage, where a very few decks matter. It has the right to be different and be enjoyable in another way.
Wizards is objectively right to work for diversity, in order to create a balance between environments where everyone has to SB for one single deck, and others where no deck clearly leads. All in all, Modern is objectively in a fine spot (maybe a bit too diverse, but nothing to be so mad at). However, you can still consider that everybody has SB slots specifically for Affinity, and some decks clearly have their chances against anything in the format (they're the top decks right now). Just play the best decks, and accept some MUs are still terrible. It's always been part of Modern Magic. No sacrifice has been done. Fun and skill are still there, you just can't experience it right now, and it's a shame.
Yes the format shapes up in a way it's not especially easier for Tier 2-3 decks to find a place in top8s, while we all hoped a more diversified format meant any deck could rise and shine. Well it's not quite the case. Deal with it. Some decks shine thanks to their oppressive angle of attack, and there are enough of these decks so it's impossible to adapt to all of them. Deal with it.
Or quit, and come back when you're less emotionally involved. It's real advice. Players stop playing Magic (or a format)... until they come back, relaxed from their obsessive training and preparation for competitive events. Honestly, when your mind is refreshed after retiring for a while, you can have these enjoyable games again, you can accept those lopsided MUs, you have fun facing decks you don't know very well. You don't get mad at unwinnable games, instead you maneuver in a landscape with no king. If Modern is a hard format to dominate with one deck, so be it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pioneer - A bunch of stuff Modern - Humans Legacy - Grixis Phoenix / Death & Taxes
Just play the best decks, and accept some MUs are still terrible. It's always been part of Modern Magic. No sacrifice has been done. Fun and skill are still there, you just can't experience it right now, and it's a shame.
No sacrifice has been done? The discussion over the last several pages by several members is exactly about the quality of these "best decks." Instead of having a collections of highly interactive decks or decks easy to interact with using multiple types of main deck answers or decks open to a glaring weakness (such as Jund/Twin/Affinity/Burn/Infect/Tron), we have instead enormously toxic and narrow decks that heighten and exaggerate the lopsided nature of variance and produce more non-games and feelsbad moments (Eldrazi/Storm/Titanshift/GDS). "Fun ans skill" are not anywhere near where they used to be, especially at the top of the format. And that's exactly what a lot of us have been complaining about.
I miss the 2015 meta. I did play in 2014 and pod wasn't bad but i guess i can live without it. But overall, games must have interaction. This goes for standard and draft too. I expect some changes by january at the latest.
I mean, Diva, last year was a garbage, dumpster fire of a mess format
Dredge and Infect ruined the format, and probe added to supplementary problems with the deck you enjoyed. A few months before that, Eldrazi Winter
I mean, I'm sorry you dislike modern where it is now, but you indicating last year as modern being remotely good really leaves me suspect that you view modern as healthy too selfishly. You did call yourself on that though, which I appreciate.
And I disagree heavily, modern is better now by miles than anytime at any single point of last year. Dredge was a toxic deck that wasn't quite on par with TC, DRS, but just a notch below those.
I miss the 2015 meta. I did play in 2014 and pod wasn't bad but i guess i can live without it. But overall, games must have interaction. This goes for standard and draft too. I expect some changes by january at the latest.
2015 was awesome, Amulet near the end kinda got unhealthy, but we all knew that decks time was short
h0ly I don't mean to insult here, but I think I've noticed a trend in your posting. Absolutely feel free to correct it.
It seems that you frequently post negative feelings about the state of Modern when the meta is solved. It doesn't seem to matter what the decks are, and whether or not they're the type of deck some people claim is "fair" vs "unfair" or "toxic" or whatever. Just that the meta is solved. From my observance of your posts you seem to like the decks you play but also like having to figure out and navigate a meta.
Modern is absolutely solved right now. Regardless of whether the decks in the top tier are "good" or "bad" for the format. It's solved. The only 3 things that could change a solved format are (a) drastic bans, (b) drastic unbans, or (c) powerful new printings/reprints.
Are there any decks or cards you'd ban or unban so the format is no longer solved?
Personally I'd ban Eldrazi Temple. Not for any numbers or objective reason but because (1) it would lead to a shakeup in top decks and (2) in my opinion there shouldn't be any Sol lands in the format.
I'd also unban BBE and either SFM or JTMS. I've long held that SFM is too powerful but I'm coming over to the white side.
The two largest dominos that fell to move us away from the 2015-style meta and produce the kinds of things we are seeing today are: the printing of broken, low-cost Eldrazi and the banning of Splinter Twin.
Eldrazi were so unbelievably pushed and broken it created the most unhealthy and warped metagame in the history of Modern. Even after a ban, they remain the best and strongest creature deck in the format. They have almost single-handedly pushed out all other midrange strategies and invalidated many other strategies. They get a combination of good colorless hate cards, pain-free, accelerated mana sources, and more efficient/powerful/value creatures than any other "midrange" deck. These creatures have been a cancer on the format for a long time, and serve as a large contributing factor to the current state by promoting decks like Titanshift and Storm.
Ignoring the "hiccup" of Eldrazi Winter, removing Twin paved the way for linear nightmares to take over the format. With the complete removal of any meaningful control/reactive deck from the format (combined with several new printings, Insolent Neonate, Prized Amalgam, Cathartic Reunion), fast aggro decks and Dredge became dominant forces. Dredge received a ban (probably didn't NEED to be GGT, as GGT itself wasn't a problem until Neonate/Amalgam/Reunion came along...), but it seemed to work out fine. Fast aggro decks were targeted with a ban of Gitaxian Probe, which was probably totally unecessary. Discussed this a million times before, but they could have selected something with less splash damage to other fair/interactive decks OR just waited to see how Fatal Push helped deal with it. Between Push and the ban, these decks were completely nuked from existence, and the removal of these decks allowed powerful goldfish/minimally-interactive decks to be extremely good again (Storm/Titanshift/ETron), and that's where we sit today.
Remove best reactive deck -> linear aggro nightmare.
Remove linear aggro -> powerful, minimal interaction decks reign supreme.
How do you fix it? Bring a good reactive/control deck back to Tier 1. If they aren't going to print better answers or good, reliable, and timely win conditions, then we all know what I would recommend come off the list. Slow, vanilla beaters and Manlands aren't going to get the job done when your opponents are casting Eldrazi, or killing you with Valakuts, or killing you with Storm triggers, or killing you with 1 mana 10/10s, etc.
As a side note, BBE and SFM also have no business being on the list and specifically both power up fair/interactive decks. They are also not even remotely as powerful as the kinds of degenerate garbage possible today, so it's kind of laughable that they remain banned.
I mean, Diva, last year was a garbage, dumpster fire of a mess format
Dredge and Infect ruined the format, and probe added to supplementary problems with the deck you enjoyed. A few months before that, Eldrazi Winter
And I disagree heavily, modern is better now by miles than anytime at any single point of last year. Dredge was a toxic deck that wasn't quite on par with TC, DRS, but just a notch below those.
I definitely agree with the first statement. On the whole, 2016 was pretty rough for Modern. I kind of can't believe it's been almost two years since Twin and Bloom were banned. Losing Twin was huge. I guess not so much for the metagame (at least, not when Eldrazi did its thing shortly thereafter), but it did a number on confidence. Super anecdotal, but when I saw Twin was banned, I was terrified. If they banned that, they could ban anything. I seriously considered the possibility that they would ban Delver. DELVER. Fortunately, I had people to tell me I was stupid. Then Eldrazi broke, then Dredge broke, and the metagame really suffered for it.
The second statement, I'm iffy on. I agree that Dredge being busted ruined the format. It was too good for most decks to not pack obscene amounts of hate, and that pushed out all other graveyard decks, while still hurting Midrange and Control with its inevitability. Infect, I think was less of a problem. Infect was great, but I think that was because Dredge was great. Infect was fast enough to fight Dredge (Dredge could make a lot of fliers, so I might be wrong about that matchup)so it preyed on Dredge, which suppressed Infect's more difficult matchups. I do think Infect was probably more powerful than it needed to be, so I guess it helped Dredge "ruin" the format.
It's kind of neat that back then, Dredge and Bant Eldrazi suppressed Midrange, which helped Infect in being busted, while right now, GDS (and other decks taking advantage of Fatal Push for efficient removal) suppresses Aggro-Combo decks, which is helping Eldrazi Tron and Valakut be good. It's really interesting to see how Rock-Paper-Scissors metagames develop and then skew to one corner based on the tools available.
On to the third point, I disagree. It is subjective, but I think parts (definitely not the whole) of 2016 were better. Or, at least one part. I can't be bothered to check every month of the meta to see what it looked like. I took a quick look through Modern Nexus's old meta updates (the good ones), and found this: the September meta had a Tier 1 of Bant Eldrazi, Burn, Infect, Affinity, Jund, Dredge, and Abzan, in order of meta share. I went looking because I remember there being a meta like this in which Dredge was somewhat in check (but still warped the meta), and the Tier 1 decks were fairly interesting. I'm not sure this is actually the right one though. Now, that isn't ideal, and there was a lot of hate required to keep Dredge that low (4.2%) but I think those decks are more fun to play against than what we see currently. I also think the gameplay of matches within Tier 1 (which is probably way more important than what I like playing against with my deck) is more interesting and interactive than what we see currently.
when I saw Twin was banned, I was terrified. If they banned that, they could ban anything. I seriously considered the possibility that they would ban Delver. DELVER.
They effectively did with the banning of Probe. And the choice to ban Probe was extremely strange, subjective, and showed a large bias against cantrips rather than an objective way to hit the targeted decks without killing them entirely or hitting multiple innocent splash damage decks.
They can ban anything they want at any time for any reason. This has already been the case in Modern for a while, but the recent bannings/restrictions in other formats (with vague or subjective reasoning) does nothing to increase player confidence in Wizards' ability to manage formats.
After watching Eldrazi Tron play out today on camera, I think the Urzatron need to go. Turn 3 Karn is just so gross
It's also been a legal play for about 6 years now, so why is it suddenly a problem now? Especially because the primary Tron deck right now is significantly less consistent at pulling off that turn 3 Karn (fewer cantrips, fewer tutors, fewer Karns) than the primary Tron deck for most of those 6 years?
I seriously don't know where people come up with some of these ideas. Even if EldraziTron is a problem worth banning, which is a rather big if, the problem isn't the Urza lands powering out a 2-of card they have to naturally draw. Maybe the argument is that they should go because of regular ol' Gx Tron, but that deck has never met any previous criteria for banning (disregarding, perhaps, some of the bannings in the first few years of the game when you had weird bannings like Feldon's Cane).
Please don't ban urzatron lands, that would kill the normal tron decks. I like playing with/against the old tron, where you scramble to put together urzatron and stabilize before someone kills you. It's the eldrazi tron and bant eldrazi that i don't like. The colored tron is a real clunker against burn, infect, combo, ect
when I saw Twin was banned, I was terrified. If they banned that, they could ban anything. I seriously considered the possibility that they would ban Delver. DELVER.
They effectively did with the banning of Probe. And the choice to ban Probe was extremely strange, subjective, and showed a large bias against cantrips rather than an objective way to hit the targeted decks without killing them entirely or hitting multiple innocent splash damage decks.
I didn't like the Probe ban. I thought it would be better to ban something more specific to the problem decks, or wait to see the effect of Fatal Push or Dredge being weakened (as you mention). With Shadow becoming big, I think the ban ended up good for the format, but I don't think it was right at the time.
Delver decks got worse without Probe, but they are still playable. I was shook enough after the Twin ban that I thought they'd ban Delver itself, which is ridiculous given that the card hasn't ever done anything scary. Sure, they can ban anything, but I don't think they are that bad. I like most of the recent bans, and I'd rather they be conservative with unbans than too liberal.
On the topic of banning Tron, come on. Tron is fine. Tron has never been dominant before. Eldrazi Tron uses Tron's top-end, Midrangey Eldrazi, Ballista, and Chalice. That's extremely different than traditional Tron. It sucks to be on the receiving end of turn 3 Tron into a Karn that dominates the game, but we don't need it banned. It's been fine for years, and nothing has changed for traditional Tron to be busted. If Eldrazi Tron is the problem, deal with that independently of Gx Tron. We need Big Mana, just like we need Aggro, and need Interactive decks. We can't nuke Big Mana and expect the meta to emerge fine.
when I saw Twin was banned, I was terrified. If they banned that, they could ban anything. I seriously considered the possibility that they would ban Delver. DELVER.
They effectively did with the banning of Probe. And the choice to ban Probe was extremely strange, subjective, and showed a large bias against cantrips rather than an objective way to hit the targeted decks without killing them entirely or hitting multiple innocent splash damage decks.
I didn't like the Probe ban. I thought it would be better to ban something more specific to the problem decks, or wait to see the effect of Fatal Push or Dredge being weakened (as you mention). With Shadow becoming big, I think the ban ended up good for the format, but I don't think it was right at the time.
Delver decks got worse without Probe, but they are still playable. I was shook enough after the Twin ban that I thought they'd ban Delver itself, which is ridiculous given that the card hasn't ever done anything scary. Sure, they can ban anything, but I don't think they are that bad. I like most of the recent bans, and I'd rather they be conservative with unbans than too liberal.
On the topic of banning Tron, come on. Tron is fine. Tron has never been dominant before. Eldrazi Tron uses Tron's top-end, Midrangey Eldrazi, Ballista, and Chalice. That's extremely different than traditional Tron. It sucks to be on the receiving end of turn 3 Tron into a Karn that dominates the game, but we don't need it banned. It's been fine for years, and nothing has changed for traditional Tron to be busted. If Eldrazi Tron is the problem, deal with that independently of Gx Tron. We need Big Mana, just like we need Aggro, and need Interactive decks. We can't nuke Big Mana and expect the meta to emerge fine.
My only argument against what you're saying here is that, with the banning of Probe, Wizards showed they were OK with removing some part of the ecosystem of Modern. With Infect all but gone, big-mana decks were allowed to flourish, and I don't think the format "needing" a certain aspect of the meta will stop Wizards from doing anything. Sure, it'd fundamentally change what we see as the meta, but that's happened with pretty much every large ban, ever.
Not to mention that Tron isn't the only Big Mana out there; we'd still have Scapeshift. Full disclosure, I've never loved Tron, and I think T3 Karn is about as feelsbad as Chalice on 1 in this meta, but I don't have a huge desire to see it banned. Eldrazi is surely the culprit of a lot of the current issues with the meta, and I feel either a Tron or Temple ban would absolutely gut the deck. Whether that'd be best for the format, I'm not sure. A more conservative approach is to ban Chalice, allow the early aggro decks to prey on the ETron side of Big Mana like they're meant to, and ETron loses its number 1 spot. Other gimmicky decks that rely on T1 Chalices and T1/2 Moons will suffer, but again, full disclosure, I wouldn't lose much sleep over that.
If Wizards feel the need to handle ETron right now, either we see a conservative Chalice ban, or gut ETron with Temple, or say "go play TitanShift" with a Tron ban. I feel Tron is the least likely to be hit, as it does have splash damage to what's been a long standing but never really oppressive archetype.
Chalice ban would be the more conservative approach. I do think the move would make Eldrazi Tron a tier 3 deck though.
If Temple is banned, E-Tron would be gutted into unplayable territory
Tron land ban, Bant Eldrazi Would be the only option, along with Eldrazi & Taxes
Eldrazi Temple ban kills three decks entirely from existence from modern, and makes every eldrazi creature unplayable in the format
I believe Grixis Shadow would possibly eat a ban after an eldrazi ban
Kinda disappointed in a lot of people in this thread, you guys preached about diversity, wanting less bans, and now you're upset things are stale and solved.
Play standard if you want things switched up and enjoy solving metas
Eldrazi Temple ban kills three decks entirely from existence from modern, and makes every eldrazi creature unplayable in the format
Boo hoo? I'm sorry, but having been on the receiving end of this multiple times now, it's hard to have sympathy anymore. Nothing is safe in this format; and even less so now that the PT is back. WOTC does not care about splash damage and will ban whatever they want for whatever reason they want.
Eldrazi Temple ban kills three decks entirely from existence from modern, and makes every eldrazi creature unplayable in the format
I'm sorry? Is it required for every single supported creature type to be playable in the format?
How about Pirates? Should we be upset that there isn't a sol land for them? What about Elementals? Cats?
Eldrazi have been the single most pushed creature type in recent years, I'd argue EVER. They were part of the largest modern era screw-up by development, which gave us a terrible Standard format and Eldrazi winter. Temple was in no way considered when they printed BFZ/OGW. Eldrazi are how they are due to the negligence of Wizards. They were pushed, and those pushed cards got a sol land outside of Standard. The fact that there are multiple "archetypes" around two sets worth of creatures speaks to how ridiculous they were.
Eldrazi in no way get a free pass. Story-wise, I love 'em. For the integrity of the game? Wizards messed up, and if it takes never seeing Eldrazi be competitive again to set things right, I say that's fine.
If they dont ban Temple, or unban Twin, nothing changes. The format is stuck with a broken ass deck that pushes out any other midrange strat, and the decks that rotate around it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
UW Spirits
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In fact, recent modern events have broken attendance records in cities like Birmingham where larger stores operate.
I'm not disputing that some smaller stores may have seen a shift in format interest, but as is often the case, this can be swung just by a small group of friends trying something different, and suddenly it looks like a format has completely dropped off in your local shop. From my own experience, a group of modern aficionados in my small town decided on a whim to give legacy a try, selling their modern decks to buy into the format. As they quickly discovered, legacy events weren't popular and most people didn't follow them down the rabbit hole, so the experiment collapsed and a few of them ended up selling out of magic altogether. As a result, modern attendance dipped, but then we only had about 8-14 players max anyway for an average modern FNM so this one group jumping ship made a big difference. My point is that you could look at this example in a superficial way and come to all sorts of conclusions about how modern was dying and attendance was suffering, but in reality it was just a handful of guys deciding to try out legacy (with less than ideal results).
In aggregate, I don't think you can make those sorts of "modern is dying" claims based on anecdotal local evidence. It just doesn't work. It's a common facet of how people tend to think, but it's not factual or helpful.
Completely agree with you. We have three modern events a week at my LGS here in the US, and each one gets over a dozen people easily. That being said, the total number of people coming to play modern each week is only around 45-55, which isnt even close to a proper sample size to gauge the health of modern. We would need some kind of hard data from LGS owners across the globe to get a good idea of how often modern is being played at the local level, and I just can't see a scenario where that would happen.
The fight mechanic is bull because green didn't have any creature kill for ages, except for anti-flyer cards that were designed with blue being an enemy color.
I'm not saying green should ever have good abilities to kill creatures, but giving it poor options to kill creatures is hardly game-breaking in your favor.
And some attendance numbers might not be down because lower-skilled players playing janky brews are doing well because so much of Modern is so swingy in terms of matchup-dependence and variance-dependence. Get a good matchup with good draws and you will beat a better player nearly every time (regardless of what you're playing). Combine this exaggerated element with the fact that nearly every top deck is toxic and miserable to play against and you have certain types of players totally dissatisfied with the format and others happy for the chaos and randomness. I personally have zero motivation to play anything in Modern until something changes.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
And you imply it's a bad thing. I read way too many sentences that players claim to be truths, while it's just opinions and feelings.
By playing formats where just a few decks matter, we shape our minds to believe it's the one and good way Magic should be. Because we're used to it, and we feel comfortable in environments we know and can easily adapt to. Modern doesn't have to be an extension of Standard or Vintage, where a very few decks matter. It has the right to be different and be enjoyable in another way.
Wizards is objectively right to work for diversity, in order to create a balance between environments where everyone has to SB for one single deck, and others where no deck clearly leads. All in all, Modern is objectively in a fine spot (maybe a bit too diverse, but nothing to be so mad at). However, you can still consider that everybody has SB slots specifically for Affinity, and some decks clearly have their chances against anything in the format (they're the top decks right now). Just play the best decks, and accept some MUs are still terrible. It's always been part of Modern Magic. No sacrifice has been done. Fun and skill are still there, you just can't experience it right now, and it's a shame.
Yes the format shapes up in a way it's not especially easier for Tier 2-3 decks to find a place in top8s, while we all hoped a more diversified format meant any deck could rise and shine. Well it's not quite the case. Deal with it. Some decks shine thanks to their oppressive angle of attack, and there are enough of these decks so it's impossible to adapt to all of them. Deal with it.
Or quit, and come back when you're less emotionally involved. It's real advice. Players stop playing Magic (or a format)... until they come back, relaxed from their obsessive training and preparation for competitive events. Honestly, when your mind is refreshed after retiring for a while, you can have these enjoyable games again, you can accept those lopsided MUs, you have fun facing decks you don't know very well. You don't get mad at unwinnable games, instead you maneuver in a landscape with no king. If Modern is a hard format to dominate with one deck, so be it.
No sacrifice has been done? The discussion over the last several pages by several members is exactly about the quality of these "best decks." Instead of having a collections of highly interactive decks or decks easy to interact with using multiple types of main deck answers or decks open to a glaring weakness (such as Jund/Twin/Affinity/Burn/Infect/Tron), we have instead enormously toxic and narrow decks that heighten and exaggerate the lopsided nature of variance and produce more non-games and feelsbad moments (Eldrazi/Storm/Titanshift/GDS). "Fun ans skill" are not anywhere near where they used to be, especially at the top of the format. And that's exactly what a lot of us have been complaining about.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Dredge and Infect ruined the format, and probe added to supplementary problems with the deck you enjoyed. A few months before that, Eldrazi Winter
I mean, I'm sorry you dislike modern where it is now, but you indicating last year as modern being remotely good really leaves me suspect that you view modern as healthy too selfishly. You did call yourself on that though, which I appreciate.
And I disagree heavily, modern is better now by miles than anytime at any single point of last year. Dredge was a toxic deck that wasn't quite on par with TC, DRS, but just a notch below those.
2015 was awesome, Amulet near the end kinda got unhealthy, but we all knew that decks time was short
It seems that you frequently post negative feelings about the state of Modern when the meta is solved. It doesn't seem to matter what the decks are, and whether or not they're the type of deck some people claim is "fair" vs "unfair" or "toxic" or whatever. Just that the meta is solved. From my observance of your posts you seem to like the decks you play but also like having to figure out and navigate a meta.
Modern is absolutely solved right now. Regardless of whether the decks in the top tier are "good" or "bad" for the format. It's solved. The only 3 things that could change a solved format are (a) drastic bans, (b) drastic unbans, or (c) powerful new printings/reprints.
Are there any decks or cards you'd ban or unban so the format is no longer solved?
Personally I'd ban Eldrazi Temple. Not for any numbers or objective reason but because (1) it would lead to a shakeup in top decks and (2) in my opinion there shouldn't be any Sol lands in the format.
I'd also unban BBE and either SFM or JTMS. I've long held that SFM is too powerful but I'm coming over to the white side.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
The two largest dominos that fell to move us away from the 2015-style meta and produce the kinds of things we are seeing today are: the printing of broken, low-cost Eldrazi and the banning of Splinter Twin.
Eldrazi were so unbelievably pushed and broken it created the most unhealthy and warped metagame in the history of Modern. Even after a ban, they remain the best and strongest creature deck in the format. They have almost single-handedly pushed out all other midrange strategies and invalidated many other strategies. They get a combination of good colorless hate cards, pain-free, accelerated mana sources, and more efficient/powerful/value creatures than any other "midrange" deck. These creatures have been a cancer on the format for a long time, and serve as a large contributing factor to the current state by promoting decks like Titanshift and Storm.
Ignoring the "hiccup" of Eldrazi Winter, removing Twin paved the way for linear nightmares to take over the format. With the complete removal of any meaningful control/reactive deck from the format (combined with several new printings, Insolent Neonate, Prized Amalgam, Cathartic Reunion), fast aggro decks and Dredge became dominant forces. Dredge received a ban (probably didn't NEED to be GGT, as GGT itself wasn't a problem until Neonate/Amalgam/Reunion came along...), but it seemed to work out fine. Fast aggro decks were targeted with a ban of Gitaxian Probe, which was probably totally unecessary. Discussed this a million times before, but they could have selected something with less splash damage to other fair/interactive decks OR just waited to see how Fatal Push helped deal with it. Between Push and the ban, these decks were completely nuked from existence, and the removal of these decks allowed powerful goldfish/minimally-interactive decks to be extremely good again (Storm/Titanshift/ETron), and that's where we sit today.
Remove best reactive deck -> linear aggro nightmare.
Remove linear aggro -> powerful, minimal interaction decks reign supreme.
How do you fix it? Bring a good reactive/control deck back to Tier 1. If they aren't going to print better answers or good, reliable, and timely win conditions, then we all know what I would recommend come off the list. Slow, vanilla beaters and Manlands aren't going to get the job done when your opponents are casting Eldrazi, or killing you with Valakuts, or killing you with Storm triggers, or killing you with 1 mana 10/10s, etc.
As a side note, BBE and SFM also have no business being on the list and specifically both power up fair/interactive decks. They are also not even remotely as powerful as the kinds of degenerate garbage possible today, so it's kind of laughable that they remain banned.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Let's leave 7+ mana cards in EDH where they belong
I definitely agree with the first statement. On the whole, 2016 was pretty rough for Modern. I kind of can't believe it's been almost two years since Twin and Bloom were banned. Losing Twin was huge. I guess not so much for the metagame (at least, not when Eldrazi did its thing shortly thereafter), but it did a number on confidence. Super anecdotal, but when I saw Twin was banned, I was terrified. If they banned that, they could ban anything. I seriously considered the possibility that they would ban Delver. DELVER. Fortunately, I had people to tell me I was stupid. Then Eldrazi broke, then Dredge broke, and the metagame really suffered for it.
The second statement, I'm iffy on. I agree that Dredge being busted ruined the format. It was too good for most decks to not pack obscene amounts of hate, and that pushed out all other graveyard decks, while still hurting Midrange and Control with its inevitability. Infect, I think was less of a problem. Infect was great, but I think that was because Dredge was great. Infect was fast enough to fight Dredge (Dredge could make a lot of fliers, so I might be wrong about that matchup)so it preyed on Dredge, which suppressed Infect's more difficult matchups. I do think Infect was probably more powerful than it needed to be, so I guess it helped Dredge "ruin" the format.
It's kind of neat that back then, Dredge and Bant Eldrazi suppressed Midrange, which helped Infect in being busted, while right now, GDS (and other decks taking advantage of Fatal Push for efficient removal) suppresses Aggro-Combo decks, which is helping Eldrazi Tron and Valakut be good. It's really interesting to see how Rock-Paper-Scissors metagames develop and then skew to one corner based on the tools available.
On to the third point, I disagree. It is subjective, but I think parts (definitely not the whole) of 2016 were better. Or, at least one part. I can't be bothered to check every month of the meta to see what it looked like. I took a quick look through Modern Nexus's old meta updates (the good ones), and found this: the September meta had a Tier 1 of Bant Eldrazi, Burn, Infect, Affinity, Jund, Dredge, and Abzan, in order of meta share. I went looking because I remember there being a meta like this in which Dredge was somewhat in check (but still warped the meta), and the Tier 1 decks were fairly interesting. I'm not sure this is actually the right one though. Now, that isn't ideal, and there was a lot of hate required to keep Dredge that low (4.2%) but I think those decks are more fun to play against than what we see currently. I also think the gameplay of matches within Tier 1 (which is probably way more important than what I like playing against with my deck) is more interesting and interactive than what we see currently.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
They effectively did with the banning of Probe. And the choice to ban Probe was extremely strange, subjective, and showed a large bias against cantrips rather than an objective way to hit the targeted decks without killing them entirely or hitting multiple innocent splash damage decks.
They can ban anything they want at any time for any reason. This has already been the case in Modern for a while, but the recent bannings/restrictions in other formats (with vague or subjective reasoning) does nothing to increase player confidence in Wizards' ability to manage formats.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I seriously don't know where people come up with some of these ideas. Even if EldraziTron is a problem worth banning, which is a rather big if, the problem isn't the Urza lands powering out a 2-of card they have to naturally draw. Maybe the argument is that they should go because of regular ol' Gx Tron, but that deck has never met any previous criteria for banning (disregarding, perhaps, some of the bannings in the first few years of the game when you had weird bannings like Feldon's Cane).
I didn't like the Probe ban. I thought it would be better to ban something more specific to the problem decks, or wait to see the effect of Fatal Push or Dredge being weakened (as you mention). With Shadow becoming big, I think the ban ended up good for the format, but I don't think it was right at the time.
Delver decks got worse without Probe, but they are still playable. I was shook enough after the Twin ban that I thought they'd ban Delver itself, which is ridiculous given that the card hasn't ever done anything scary. Sure, they can ban anything, but I don't think they are that bad. I like most of the recent bans, and I'd rather they be conservative with unbans than too liberal.
On the topic of banning Tron, come on. Tron is fine. Tron has never been dominant before. Eldrazi Tron uses Tron's top-end, Midrangey Eldrazi, Ballista, and Chalice. That's extremely different than traditional Tron. It sucks to be on the receiving end of turn 3 Tron into a Karn that dominates the game, but we don't need it banned. It's been fine for years, and nothing has changed for traditional Tron to be busted. If Eldrazi Tron is the problem, deal with that independently of Gx Tron. We need Big Mana, just like we need Aggro, and need Interactive decks. We can't nuke Big Mana and expect the meta to emerge fine.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
My only argument against what you're saying here is that, with the banning of Probe, Wizards showed they were OK with removing some part of the ecosystem of Modern. With Infect all but gone, big-mana decks were allowed to flourish, and I don't think the format "needing" a certain aspect of the meta will stop Wizards from doing anything. Sure, it'd fundamentally change what we see as the meta, but that's happened with pretty much every large ban, ever.
Not to mention that Tron isn't the only Big Mana out there; we'd still have Scapeshift. Full disclosure, I've never loved Tron, and I think T3 Karn is about as feelsbad as Chalice on 1 in this meta, but I don't have a huge desire to see it banned. Eldrazi is surely the culprit of a lot of the current issues with the meta, and I feel either a Tron or Temple ban would absolutely gut the deck. Whether that'd be best for the format, I'm not sure. A more conservative approach is to ban Chalice, allow the early aggro decks to prey on the ETron side of Big Mana like they're meant to, and ETron loses its number 1 spot. Other gimmicky decks that rely on T1 Chalices and T1/2 Moons will suffer, but again, full disclosure, I wouldn't lose much sleep over that.
If Wizards feel the need to handle ETron right now, either we see a conservative Chalice ban, or gut ETron with Temple, or say "go play TitanShift" with a Tron ban. I feel Tron is the least likely to be hit, as it does have splash damage to what's been a long standing but never really oppressive archetype.
If Temple is banned, E-Tron would be gutted into unplayable territory
Tron land ban, Bant Eldrazi Would be the only option, along with Eldrazi & Taxes
Eldrazi Temple ban kills three decks entirely from existence from modern, and makes every eldrazi creature unplayable in the format
I believe Grixis Shadow would possibly eat a ban after an eldrazi ban
Kinda disappointed in a lot of people in this thread, you guys preached about diversity, wanting less bans, and now you're upset things are stale and solved.
Play standard if you want things switched up and enjoy solving metas
Boo hoo? I'm sorry, but having been on the receiving end of this multiple times now, it's hard to have sympathy anymore. Nothing is safe in this format; and even less so now that the PT is back. WOTC does not care about splash damage and will ban whatever they want for whatever reason they want.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I'm sorry? Is it required for every single supported creature type to be playable in the format?
How about Pirates? Should we be upset that there isn't a sol land for them? What about Elementals? Cats?
Eldrazi have been the single most pushed creature type in recent years, I'd argue EVER. They were part of the largest modern era screw-up by development, which gave us a terrible Standard format and Eldrazi winter. Temple was in no way considered when they printed BFZ/OGW. Eldrazi are how they are due to the negligence of Wizards. They were pushed, and those pushed cards got a sol land outside of Standard. The fact that there are multiple "archetypes" around two sets worth of creatures speaks to how ridiculous they were.
Eldrazi in no way get a free pass. Story-wise, I love 'em. For the integrity of the game? Wizards messed up, and if it takes never seeing Eldrazi be competitive again to set things right, I say that's fine.
I am worried that Eldrazis demise leads to Grixis Death Shadow receiving a ban of some sort.
Maybe Eldrazi Temples and Tron lands is just an issue in modern.
How do you all imagine modern changing if Temple were banned next week? (not that it will)
Spirits