It is really funny. The key is in my opinion more interaction cards like dismember and tec edge...but people dont use them. They play decks without interaction and cry about 2 ships passing in the night. Maybe only 1 time, they should try cards we have? But it seems it is more easy only crying for bannings
Tec edge is too slow and dismember cost is too high vs tron imo.
Totally forgot a banlist update was happening today. Final prediction is no changes. I think Wizards is likely to save all changes until the Pro Tour because that is what maximizes format coverage, exposure, and excitement. I suspect those eventual pre-PT changes will include at least one ban and probably an unban to keep things fresh.
I don't know what Wizards will ban but past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior. Wizards habitually bans Modern cards before the Modern PT, and with at least 2-3 decks skirting format rules, I can't envision a PT cycle without at least one ban.
It is really funny. The key is in my opinion more interaction cards like dismember and tec edge...but people dont use them. They play decks without interaction and cry about 2 ships passing in the night. Maybe only 1 time, they should try cards we have? But it seems it is more easy only crying for bannings
This is absolutely not true. People do play all these cards. Try playing Grixis Control in the current meta, overloaded with terminates and dismembers. Your ETron MU will still be abysmal because you can't keep up with the threats because often half of your deck will be invalidated (counters, getting 2-1 because of Smasher and/or Matter Reshaper). You will need a really good draw.
You can overload yourself with removals to try and combat ETron but then your Storm MU will be horrible because you cut too many counters/discard.
Play 2-3x Dismember will make your Affinity and other aggro MUs much worse since you will be cutting down on cheap interaction (Fatal Push/Bolt).
Play tec-edge and your mana base will be way worse because you can't have too many colorless sources. You will also be losing lands which are crucial for being able to snap/cryptic (which is one of the best ways to combat ETron).
There is a cost to everything, if Dismember and tec edge was the solutions to ETron people would have figured them out by now.
I completely agree. That's what Modern is about at the moment. It saddens me though to see one of the main UR Control and interactive players of this site saying "screw interaction".
Or just screw Modern entirely, I'm actually taking a break Nothing is really OP so I don't expect any changes. There's no point in playing a game you don't enjoy anymore though. It's been months, but hopefully the metagame eventually shifts. Maybe then I'll come back.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:WU WU Control | WBG Abzan Company Frontier:UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
I still think the best option is to ban chalice and past in flames.
But I think wizards maybe will instead unban BBE and/or SFM.
Jeskai's "good" results are weird. The deck is pretty bad, and the only reason I can think it's getting results is because so many people are playing the deck, cos there are many magic players that like to play SCM and blue control/value in general.
P.S forget a part of my answer. grixis control? Go watch the decklist. 4 push and 2-3 bolt. Chalice warpes you out of this universe even without the other 86 cards with 1 mana there
I mean the decks essentially doesn't care about Push or Bolt anyway. One of the biggest points of the decks that use Chalice of the Void is they don't care about a lot of the most common forms of interaction in the format which right now means having creatures that aren't weak to push/bolt.
Thanks for the heads up, i thought it was tomorrow too.
Regarding the very interesting and productive conversation about Banlist you were having, i have some thoughts too.
Modern is healthier than the people make it out to be. Yes, it's mostly dominated by uninteractive decks, but that's Modern 80% of its life, combo decks(aggro and spell based-classic) have always been the best archetypes and those do not want to interact.
Setting aside that point i think the Banlist could use some change for the better. I'm not sure they are necessary though.
-The scenario where Grapeshot/PIF,Temple/Chalice,DS/SW are getting hammered is basically imposible. I don't think that's never the direction they want to take and after the Standard fiasco that was last season i don't think they will recur to triple bans or double bans for some time.
-There is a scenario where they unban BBE to compensate the lack of Midrange in the top Tier of the format, and that change by now seems very logical, EVEN if i have a also logical fear of BBE+AV being a potential problem.
-SFM alone is still a no-go. The card itself inserts herself in the Tier 2 of the format to combat Eldrazi and Shadow(?) but in reality, i think Eldrazi Tron players will move to their old Bant Eldrazi and jam SFM themselves. I'm not saying it WILL happen but it's a concern when you think of the obejective of the unban.
-Lastly as much as i like Splinter Twin myself, i think Splinter Twin and Jace, the Mind Sculptor are NOT safe for unbans yet. They might be at some point in the future with new printings and meta shifts, but they are too risky to even take the chance.
This is my opinion and it's a little biased of course.
Standard is in a great place right now because you have at least 2 control decks in the top tiers (UB and UW), including one winning the nationals this weekend
Modern needs control decks in the tier 1 category for it to be great again, because control mirrors are fantastic
I don't know how to make this happen, but whatever it takes DO IT WIZARDS!
~Eldrazi Tron is the most played deck, it's just being hated out to not make results
~Jeskai is a bad deck, but so many people are playing it, that's why it's seeing results
Which one is it guys?
Eldrazi Tron barely saw top 32 this Open
We had an INTERACTIVE mirror in the last Open featuring two Jeskai Geist decks (with no ETron in the top 8)
We had Grixis Shadow and Storm in the finals before that one, again, No Etron in the top 8
The triple GP saw a ton of Eldrazi players, but again, no ETron in the top 8. We had a ton of Titanshift to hate the deck out
So, where's your factual basis on the Etron, guys? The deck isn't skinny on results, but it's nowhere near as dominant as you're all claiming. In fact, Storm and Grixis Shadow have been doing better. Grixis Shadow hasn't not seen any top 8 in nearly every paper tournament of 2017.
Ktkenshin seemed to allude storm could see a ban before the pro-tour, which I could see, WOTC despises the Storm mechanic. I'm not really sure what the two decks he alluded to skirting the rules.
I'm looking on mttgoldfish and it's modern meta
The diversity and numbers look fantastic; just a minority of disgruntled players in this thread, from my perspective.
WOTC will take their info from mtgo more than anything imo. That's why it is hidden so I don't put a lot of stock into big fnm's like scg events. Scg events IMO don't hold too much valuable info because they also skew a lot of their info. The players they like to show get shown and the ones that are just randomly at the event don't even get their names on the leader board. They go from 2 scg players in 1/2nd to x scg player in 5th. Sure a couple good players that grind pt/gp's play on scg but hell we have pt players at my lgs playing weekly too. Todd Stevens banned me from his twitch chat for having this opinion but I stand by it. If you really want to know what the meta is like you'll have to get WOTC to tell us.
I think if there will be a ban it will be this time and then an unban would happen next. WOTC already said they don't plan on a shake up ban so if something is on the block they'll probably do it now. Then as the format is about to adjust slightly they'll unban something(s).
My guess is modern is here for about 7ish more years because with arena coming out there will have to be a new format that starts here at ixalan and goes forward. They already stated they'll have to have something for when standard rotates out of arena so that seems like the only likely option IMO.
~Eldrazi Tron is the most played deck, it's just being hated out to not make results
~Jeskai is a bad deck, but so many people are playing it, that's why it's seeing results
Which one is it guys?
Eldrazi Tron barely saw top 32 this Open
We had an INTERACTIVE mirror in the last Open featuring two Jeskai Geist decks (with no ETron in the top 8)
We had Grixis Shadow and Storm in the finals before that one, again, No Etron in the top 8
The triple GP saw a ton of Eldrazi players, but again, no ETron in the top 8. We had a ton of Titanshift to hate the deck out
So, where's your factual basis on the Etron, guys? The deck isn't skinny on results, but it's nowhere near as dominant as you're all claiming. In fact, Storm and Grixis Shadow have been doing better. Grixis Shadow hasn't not seen any top 8 in nearly every paper tournament of 2017.
Ktkenshin seemed to allude storm could see a ban before the pro-tour, which I could see, WOTC despises the Storm mechanic. I'm not really sure what the two decks he alluded to skirting the rules.
I'm looking on mttgoldfish and it's modern meta
The diversity and numbers look fantastic; just a minority of disgruntled players in this thread, from my perspective.
Its not about the decks in isolation. Its the environment those decks form. Eldrazi, more than any deck before it, deserved to be nuked from orbit. Forsythe was wrong about its 'interesting lines of play', comically so. There is nothing that it does that is interesting.
Its just a terrible deck, and makes for a meta that either prey's on it, or loses to it.
I'm not saying its too good. I'm saying its (in my very publicly open and biased opinion) a terrible deck to have around at any level of success.
If Twin is not 'safe' then this format is busted. How Twin could even potentially be oppressive in this format is beyond comprehension.
Twin looks safe to me. It doesn't seem likely to be busted in a format running so much efficient interaction. It could even for a nice Rock-Paper-Scissors with other interactive decks and Big Mana. Sort of taking the Aggro-Combo slot.
My biggest concern with Twin is that Wizards wasn't completely wrong about how Twin homogenizes UR decks. Now, if Jeskai doesn't actually end up being good, this is a much smaller concern. I would much prefer Jeskai be well positioned and less popular (Twin existing would likely cause both) than popular but not actually good. While Blue players will probably flock to Twin, other Blue decks will get better by having their good matchup back. Twin might even help to bring down some of the less interactive decks, or at least force them to run some more interaction. That may very well improve Modern's gameplay.
Another thing I am worried about with Twin, although this could be a nonproblem, is what Grixis Twin looks like. Grixis was one of the more popular Twin variants (if I'm remembering right) due to having a leg up in the mirror. It was like a Twin/Grixis Control hybrid. So, would we end up with Grixis Death Twin? Many decks have run the Twin package in the past. Can Death's Shadow fit it, and would it be too good? I'm imagining a Tarmo-Twin sort of deck, running extremely efficient (and hard to deal with) beaters, and an instant win combo.
I'm thinking a creature base of 3-4 Delve fatties, 4 Shadow, 3-4 Street Wraith, 4 Snapcaster Mage, and 4 Twin combo creatures. The deck would probably run 2-3 Twin, and have Death's Shadow's cantrip and disruption suite. Is that plausible, or am I worrying for nothing?
"If Twin is not safe then the format is busted" seems fallacious to me. Again, I have never heard of a deck having such a devout following that two years after it gets nuked there is still this vocal minority who seems to think Modern's health, enjoyment and future rest on an infinite combo entering the format.
"If Twin is not safe then the format is busted" seems fallacious to me. Again, I have never heard of a deck having such a devout following that two years after it gets nuked there is still this vocal minority who seems to think Modern's health, enjoyment and future rest on an infinite combo entering the format.
Thats fine, we are all entitled to our opinions.
I dont think getting Twin back, matters as much as getting rid of Eldrazi, however Twin's banning was always under false pretense. Wizards knows this.
I completely agree. That's what Modern is about at the moment. It saddens me though to see one of the main UR Control and interactive players of this site saying "screw interaction".
Or just screw Modern entirely, I'm actually taking a break Nothing is really OP so I don't expect any changes. There's no point in playing a game you don't enjoy anymore though. It's been months, but hopefully the metagame eventually shifts. Maybe then I'll come back.
This is it, what I've been saying, what has led me to even talk about mass bannings. It's not that anything is busted, it's that the format is not fun because of how the best decks are.
FOR YOU:
This is the friggin' point. Stop saying things aren't fun as if it were an objective fact when it just is not fun FOR YOU.
I am a bit confused with all the approaches in this thread. People say 1 event is not indicative and says nothing. Sure, it doesn't say much on its own, but 1) we always take things in context and 2) there is merit in analyzing each individual tournament as well.
The fact of the matter is that while ETron was the most popular deck in day 2 (15 copies) had the WORST conversion rate in both top 8 (0 copies) and top 32 (1 copy). If ETron was tier 0.5 there would be no chance for such a low conversion rate. We don't know how many ETron decks were day 1 but they definitely did well on the first day of the tournament but not the second.
To me that says several things. Firstly, that in a very wide format as is day 1 of an SCG open, with players of literally every level, ETron can do well. It is a deck that prays on several brews as well as on players of lower skill tiers.
At the same time, it is a deck with low risk high reward. Often you just play big dumb dudes and you win. The combination of the low skill floor of the deck and the fact that it prays on unprepared opponents gives it a huge boost on day 1.
Second, the deck can clearly be hated out. Obviously this is the case for every deck, but not when a deck is oppressive. Eldrazi decks during Eldrazi winters couldn't be hated out. There would be 0 chance of no eldrazi decks making into top 8 during eldrazi winter. Eldrazi Tron however now almost missed top 32 altogether. Therefore it can be hated out.
Thirdly, it's not like one or two decks prayed on it and converted on top 32 with 5-6 copies each. On the contrary, top 32 was quite diverse, with control decks, junds, combo, normal tron, ponza, affinity etc. This shows that a meta with ETron in it has room with a variety of decks.
Concluding, this event (specifically) showed that it is possible to hate out ETron even if it comes in large numbers. Is that the case in general? I say probably, we see it happening in GPs and in competitive leagues. Is ETron an annoying deck to play against? Well, I guess that's a personal thing. I hate playing against it but I am a control player.
Does temple deserve a ban? Maybe, depending on the justification. However, in terms of meta percentages and results, a temple ban can't be supported right now.
Love this post. What I love even more is that gkourou liked it and probably knows this is true yet continues with his narrative.
Thank you for speaking unbiasedly and sound, I hope to see you post more on this thread in the future.
Why is the banning announcement on Tuesday instead of Monday? I hate the way they keep shortening the time between the announcement and when it takes effect (there once was a time when you had advance notice of a month!). Give people more time to react to any changes, darn it.
ETron promotes the kind of gameplay best exhibited by stuff like Storm, Titanshift, and Affinity. It rewards people for playing miserable decks. If someone thinks ETron/Storm/Titanshift/Affinity/GDS + 25 lower tier decks is better, healthier, and more fun meta than Jund/Twin/Gx Tron/Affinity/Infect + 25 lower tier decks, then we just have objectively different opinions on what "healthy" and "fun" means.
If Temple, Chalice, or something out of Eldrazi isn't banned, then something needs to be unbanned to help fight it and quell the swash of miserable decks it is enabling in the format.
In my ideal world, that would be Probe, SFM, BBE, and Twin. There's no way they'll reverse Probe this quick (or probably ever, given their stance on cantrips), but the other 3 would all be totally fine in today's format. Healthy inclusions that either play or promote interaction on normal and traditional axes.
As a side note, I don't know if anyone caught this, but Wizards is not only aware of splash damage, but actively seems to target high-splash-damage cards if they really want to hit a deck hard. This is what they said about Thorn of Amethyst in the last Vintage restriction:
"Thorn of Amethyst is the more powerful disruptive tool in the Shops deck, as it allows the deck to continue applying creature-based threats unimpeded. The case for restricting Sphere of Resistance instead is to avoid splash damage on other archetypes—other non-Shops creature decks also use Thorn of Amethyst. However, given the strength of Shops in the current metagame and a restriction weakening the other top deck, we decided to make the more impactful change."
Lines up perfectly with their "Splash Damage" Probe ban. Maybe predicts a Chalice ban? Who knows. They are ALL OVER THE PLACE with their reasonings.....
As a side note, I don't know if anyone caught this, but Wizards is not only aware of splash damage, but actively seems to target high-splash-damage cards if they really want to hit a deck hard. This is what they said about Thorn of Amethyst in the last Vintage restriction:
"Thorn of Amethyst is the more powerful disruptive tool in the Shops deck, as it allows the deck to continue applying creature-based threats unimpeded. The case for restricting Sphere of Resistance instead is to avoid splash damage on other archetypes—other non-Shops creature decks also use Thorn of Amethyst. However, given the strength of Shops in the current metagame and a restriction weakening the other top deck, we decided to make the more impactful change."
Lines up perfectly with their "Splash Damage" Probe ban. Maybe predicts a Chalice ban? Who knows. They are ALL OVER THE PLACE with their reasonings.....
I don't think that is fair. I got a very different message from reading the passage you quoted. From your post, specifically the "actively seems to target high-splash-damage cards if they really want to hit a deck hard" it sounds like you think that "given the strength of Shops in the current metagame and a restriction weakening the other top deck, we decided to make the more impactful change" means "banning Thorn of Amethyst will affect more decks in the format, so we are banning that."
I read it as "Because banning Thorn of Amethyst will have a greater impact on Shops, we are banning it, despite the collateral damage that we are acknowledging."
I think Wizards was willing to target a high splash damage card to hit the deck hard. I don't think that wanting to hit the deck hard drove them to cause splash damage.
On the splash damage of Probe being banned, I'd argue that they caused that splash damage in order to not hit decks hard. Banning Probe left DS Zoo, Infect, and Kiln Fiend combo far more playable than more targeted bans would have. They could have banned Shadow, Kiln Fiend, and Blighted Agent/Glistener Elf. Those decks would have been murdered, and other Probe decks would be intact.
However, enough correlations could lead to causation. Does anyone know how many heavy-hitting bans caused collateral damage?
I think Wizards was willing to target a high splash damage card to hit the deck hard. I don't think that wanting to hit the deck hard drove them to cause splash damage.
On the splash damage of Probe being banned, I'd argue that they caused that splash damage in order to not hit decks hard. Banning Probe left DS Zoo, Infect, and Kiln Fiend combo far more playable than more targeted bans would have. They could have banned Shadow, Kiln Fiend, and Blighted Agent/Glistener Elf. Those decks would have been murdered, and other Probe decks would be intact.
However, enough correlations could lead to causation. Does anyone know how many heavy-hitting bans caused collateral damage?
I don't know if it's a pattern, but all patterns have basically been thrown out the window the past two years in favor of vague and subjective justifications. Specifically for Probe, this assumes that Wizards' infinite wisdom legitimately did not think Fatal Push would be effective in curbing the decks, and all those decks STILL NEEDED their throats ripped out (in addition to lots of splash damage).
It just seems strange for them to even bother mentioning "Hey... we COULD have minimized splash damage by banning X, but we hate this deck, so we banned Y, which has big splash damage anyway." It says a lot about their thinking...
Tec edge is too slow and dismember cost is too high vs tron imo.
I don't know what Wizards will ban but past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior. Wizards habitually bans Modern cards before the Modern PT, and with at least 2-3 decks skirting format rules, I can't envision a PT cycle without at least one ban.
You can overload yourself with removals to try and combat ETron but then your Storm MU will be horrible because you cut too many counters/discard.
Play 2-3x Dismember will make your Affinity and other aggro MUs much worse since you will be cutting down on cheap interaction (Fatal Push/Bolt).
Play tec-edge and your mana base will be way worse because you can't have too many colorless sources. You will also be losing lands which are crucial for being able to snap/cryptic (which is one of the best ways to combat ETron).
There is a cost to everything, if Dismember and tec edge was the solutions to ETron people would have figured them out by now.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
Frontier: UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
But I think wizards maybe will instead unban BBE and/or SFM.
Jeskai's "good" results are weird. The deck is pretty bad, and the only reason I can think it's getting results is because so many people are playing the deck, cos there are many magic players that like to play SCM and blue control/value in general.
Legacy: UW RiP/Helm, UR Sneak and Show
The last B&R announcement said the 17th, so unless there's a more recent article stating otherwise, the announcement is tomorrow
Modern:
UWUW Control
UBRGrixis Shadow
URIzzet Phoenix
tomorrow, 17th
I mean the decks essentially doesn't care about Push or Bolt anyway. One of the biggest points of the decks that use Chalice of the Void is they don't care about a lot of the most common forms of interaction in the format which right now means having creatures that aren't weak to push/bolt.
Regarding the very interesting and productive conversation about Banlist you were having, i have some thoughts too.
Modern is healthier than the people make it out to be. Yes, it's mostly dominated by uninteractive decks, but that's Modern 80% of its life, combo decks(aggro and spell based-classic) have always been the best archetypes and those do not want to interact.
Setting aside that point i think the Banlist could use some change for the better. I'm not sure they are necessary though.
-The scenario where Grapeshot/PIF,Temple/Chalice,DS/SW are getting hammered is basically imposible. I don't think that's never the direction they want to take and after the Standard fiasco that was last season i don't think they will recur to triple bans or double bans for some time.
-There is a scenario where they unban BBE to compensate the lack of Midrange in the top Tier of the format, and that change by now seems very logical, EVEN if i have a also logical fear of BBE+AV being a potential problem.
-SFM alone is still a no-go. The card itself inserts herself in the Tier 2 of the format to combat Eldrazi and Shadow(?) but in reality, i think Eldrazi Tron players will move to their old Bant Eldrazi and jam SFM themselves. I'm not saying it WILL happen but it's a concern when you think of the obejective of the unban.
-Lastly as much as i like Splinter Twin myself, i think Splinter Twin and Jace, the Mind Sculptor are NOT safe for unbans yet. They might be at some point in the future with new printings and meta shifts, but they are too risky to even take the chance.
This is my opinion and it's a little biased of course.
Spirits
Modern needs control decks in the tier 1 category for it to be great again, because control mirrors are fantastic
I don't know how to make this happen, but whatever it takes DO IT WIZARDS!
~Eldrazi Tron is the most played deck, it's just being hated out to not make results
~Jeskai is a bad deck, but so many people are playing it, that's why it's seeing results
Which one is it guys?
Eldrazi Tron barely saw top 32 this Open
We had an INTERACTIVE mirror in the last Open featuring two Jeskai Geist decks (with no ETron in the top 8)
We had Grixis Shadow and Storm in the finals before that one, again, No Etron in the top 8
The triple GP saw a ton of Eldrazi players, but again, no ETron in the top 8. We had a ton of Titanshift to hate the deck out
So, where's your factual basis on the Etron, guys? The deck isn't skinny on results, but it's nowhere near as dominant as you're all claiming. In fact, Storm and Grixis Shadow have been doing better. Grixis Shadow hasn't not seen any top 8 in nearly every paper tournament of 2017.
Ktkenshin seemed to allude storm could see a ban before the pro-tour, which I could see, WOTC despises the Storm mechanic. I'm not really sure what the two decks he alluded to skirting the rules.
I'm looking on mttgoldfish and it's modern meta
The diversity and numbers look fantastic; just a minority of disgruntled players in this thread, from my perspective.
I think if there will be a ban it will be this time and then an unban would happen next. WOTC already said they don't plan on a shake up ban so if something is on the block they'll probably do it now. Then as the format is about to adjust slightly they'll unban something(s).
My guess is modern is here for about 7ish more years because with arena coming out there will have to be a new format that starts here at ixalan and goes forward. They already stated they'll have to have something for when standard rotates out of arena so that seems like the only likely option IMO.
Its not about the decks in isolation. Its the environment those decks form. Eldrazi, more than any deck before it, deserved to be nuked from orbit. Forsythe was wrong about its 'interesting lines of play', comically so. There is nothing that it does that is interesting.
Its just a terrible deck, and makes for a meta that either prey's on it, or loses to it.
I'm not saying its too good. I'm saying its (in my very publicly open and biased opinion) a terrible deck to have around at any level of success.
Spirits
Twin looks safe to me. It doesn't seem likely to be busted in a format running so much efficient interaction. It could even for a nice Rock-Paper-Scissors with other interactive decks and Big Mana. Sort of taking the Aggro-Combo slot.
My biggest concern with Twin is that Wizards wasn't completely wrong about how Twin homogenizes UR decks. Now, if Jeskai doesn't actually end up being good, this is a much smaller concern. I would much prefer Jeskai be well positioned and less popular (Twin existing would likely cause both) than popular but not actually good. While Blue players will probably flock to Twin, other Blue decks will get better by having their good matchup back. Twin might even help to bring down some of the less interactive decks, or at least force them to run some more interaction. That may very well improve Modern's gameplay.
Another thing I am worried about with Twin, although this could be a nonproblem, is what Grixis Twin looks like. Grixis was one of the more popular Twin variants (if I'm remembering right) due to having a leg up in the mirror. It was like a Twin/Grixis Control hybrid. So, would we end up with Grixis Death Twin? Many decks have run the Twin package in the past. Can Death's Shadow fit it, and would it be too good? I'm imagining a Tarmo-Twin sort of deck, running extremely efficient (and hard to deal with) beaters, and an instant win combo.
I'm thinking a creature base of 3-4 Delve fatties, 4 Shadow, 3-4 Street Wraith, 4 Snapcaster Mage, and 4 Twin combo creatures. The deck would probably run 2-3 Twin, and have Death's Shadow's cantrip and disruption suite. Is that plausible, or am I worrying for nothing?
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Thats fine, we are all entitled to our opinions.
I dont think getting Twin back, matters as much as getting rid of Eldrazi, however Twin's banning was always under false pretense. Wizards knows this.
Spirits
FOR YOU:
This is the friggin' point. Stop saying things aren't fun as if it were an objective fact when it just is not fun FOR YOU.
Love this post. What I love even more is that gkourou liked it and probably knows this is true yet continues with his narrative.
Thank you for speaking unbiasedly and sound, I hope to see you post more on this thread in the future.
RG BBE Ponza
UX Eldrazi Tron
UR Jace Breach
If Temple, Chalice, or something out of Eldrazi isn't banned, then something needs to be unbanned to help fight it and quell the swash of miserable decks it is enabling in the format.
In my ideal world, that would be Probe, SFM, BBE, and Twin. There's no way they'll reverse Probe this quick (or probably ever, given their stance on cantrips), but the other 3 would all be totally fine in today's format. Healthy inclusions that either play or promote interaction on normal and traditional axes.
As a side note, I don't know if anyone caught this, but Wizards is not only aware of splash damage, but actively seems to target high-splash-damage cards if they really want to hit a deck hard. This is what they said about Thorn of Amethyst in the last Vintage restriction:
"Thorn of Amethyst is the more powerful disruptive tool in the Shops deck, as it allows the deck to continue applying creature-based threats unimpeded. The case for restricting Sphere of Resistance instead is to avoid splash damage on other archetypes—other non-Shops creature decks also use Thorn of Amethyst. However, given the strength of Shops in the current metagame and a restriction weakening the other top deck, we decided to make the more impactful change."
Lines up perfectly with their "Splash Damage" Probe ban. Maybe predicts a Chalice ban? Who knows. They are ALL OVER THE PLACE with their reasonings.....
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I don't think that is fair. I got a very different message from reading the passage you quoted. From your post, specifically the "actively seems to target high-splash-damage cards if they really want to hit a deck hard" it sounds like you think that "given the strength of Shops in the current metagame and a restriction weakening the other top deck, we decided to make the more impactful change" means "banning Thorn of Amethyst will affect more decks in the format, so we are banning that."
I read it as "Because banning Thorn of Amethyst will have a greater impact on Shops, we are banning it, despite the collateral damage that we are acknowledging."
I think Wizards was willing to target a high splash damage card to hit the deck hard. I don't think that wanting to hit the deck hard drove them to cause splash damage.
On the splash damage of Probe being banned, I'd argue that they caused that splash damage in order to not hit decks hard. Banning Probe left DS Zoo, Infect, and Kiln Fiend combo far more playable than more targeted bans would have. They could have banned Shadow, Kiln Fiend, and Blighted Agent/Glistener Elf. Those decks would have been murdered, and other Probe decks would be intact.
However, enough correlations could lead to causation. Does anyone know how many heavy-hitting bans caused collateral damage?
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
I don't know if it's a pattern, but all patterns have basically been thrown out the window the past two years in favor of vague and subjective justifications. Specifically for Probe, this assumes that Wizards' infinite wisdom legitimately did not think Fatal Push would be effective in curbing the decks, and all those decks STILL NEEDED their throats ripped out (in addition to lots of splash damage).
It just seems strange for them to even bother mentioning "Hey... we COULD have minimized splash damage by banning X, but we hate this deck, so we banned Y, which has big splash damage anyway." It says a lot about their thinking...
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate