Make Tarmogoyf great again (LOL). The whole "green is poorly represented in Modern" argument seems to boil down to that. Apart from that one card green seems to be doing fine. Collected Company, Scapeshift, Chord of Calling and Primeval Titan are still relevant cards, mostly because they don't suck against Fatal Push. Love it or hate it it's how it is, at least until BGx midrange ascends back to tier 2 at least.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
A part of me suspects that WotC would rather conceal data than ban things, and that the reason they concealed data was to avoid more bans that alienate noteworthy groups of players, especially as they seem to have repeatedly clamped down on any data sources players work out. I would not be surprised if rather than a balanced format, they'd prefer a format that it takes a longer time to figure out it's imbalanced parts so they can avoid bans as long as possible, but that they've increased their opportunities to ban despite this because they've realized when it does get bad and the players notice, they need to be able to ban right away to avoid alienating more players.
I think that what Wizards wants, not just as a Standard format but as a game as a whole is a meta where every player thinks their deck is good, but no one has anything more than anecdotal evidence as to what is/isn't good. The reality is that sample sizes are far too low (even among pro teams) to determine matchup percents and meta favorability. Wizards wants to keep data sets low so that no one can figure it out.
This is effectively development abandoning their duties to make a balanced game, in favor of making a game that has the perception of balance.
I don't think that is the true reason. I think the reason has more to do with there not being available data to complain about a WotC ban decision. Therefore, it's just complaining since there's no data to disagree with them. So, if for example, Noble Hierarch gets banned, what do we have in statistics to prove that it shouldn't be? (who cares about common sense, honestly?)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
What's wrong with green? Green is doing fine. There have been 2-3 green decks in the T8 of every single October SCG Open and Classic, and every single October MTGO Challenge. Other large Modern events in October followed the same trend: 3 green decks in the 197 player Ovino XII side event, 4 green decks at the SCG Dallas Classic, and 2 at Danish Modern Masters with 106 players. In fact, the only large >100 player event that did not have 2+ green decks in the T8 was the recent Washington Classic which only had 1.
It takes about 5 minutes to look through standings to check claims like this. Green does not have the issues that players claim.
Bant spirits = Noble Heirarch and Collected Company.
5 Color humans = Mayor of Avabruck.
Elves! Now there's a... oh... hello Collected Company.
Scapeshift = Sakura-Tribe Elder and Primeval Titan, or better known as prime time.
B/G Midrange is the best looking of the bunch, but it placed 24th in the line up and doesn't really show up in the later events.
U/G Merfolk = Merfolk splashing for Kumena's Speaker and Merfolk Branchwalker (This was Cincinnati). Love his list but then again I play merfolk so I'm biased.
G/R devotion in 5th place Modern Cincinnati is another good one.
Let me put it this way: Green in it's classic form of out-valuing opponents in strict power and toughness at the mid-range level has gone nearly extinct: The primary reason being that green can't out-value eldrazi or beat a high powered Death's Shadow that makes even Tarmogoyf look like a piece of cardboard and also doesn't have a lot of ways to deal with Fatal Push outside of swarming the board or going over it. Other popular cards like Tireless Tracker have also ceased seeing serious play for the same reason. The major green strategy still surviving is to combo out with Collected Company or go big with devotion. Support pieces like Noble Heirarch will always stick around since it is the best green one drop ever created next to Deathrite Shaman. It's useful both late and early game because of the exalt trigger and the ability to mana-fix like a birds of paradise.
Also, it takes time for modern to adjust to new cards. Fatal Push is a subtle devil that will change the format slowly with time, and it's inclusion in modern has forced a lot of players to re-evaluate creature choices at 1-4 cmc and especially at the 1-2 cost. Suddenly, high power and toughness creatures at 2 cmc like Tarmogoyf just look a lot worse and ETB / creatures that do stuff at those cmcs look a ton better. Even if someone pushed a Bob off the side of what I presume is the bridge of the Heart of Kiran, he likely still got value out of it.
So, to put it this way, the death of green really isn't about the death of green. It's about the death of mid-range stompy good stuff that green was the master of and subsequently anything that doesn't at least have high power and toughness + hexproof at the 1-4 cmc. The only green decks that can survive are the ones that just swarm the board so much that a Fatal push or similar spot removal doesn't matter, or go so big that Fatal push can't hit them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Is the problem that green isn't getting played, or is it that the for-years-archetypal green creatures aren't getting played? Push did make Goyf, Scooze, and Flayer (and also Bob etc.) much worse, it's true. That's not the same thing as the color wholly disappearing from the meta, though.
Push didn't just make green creatures worse, it made EVERY <2cmc creature worse. Delver, Young Pyromancer, Bob, etc. As much as I love Fatal Push, I didn't imagine it would literally "push" nearly all 2cmc creatures out of existence unless they either win the game on the spot or have massively powerful ETB effects. That, and "push" the format towards creatures that dodge it like Tasigur/Angler, Eldrazi, and Primeval Titan.
Yep. That's the exact problem I am referring to right there. The card is so busted that it warps the format in a bad sense around it. In fact, there is a chance Fatal Push is better than Punishing Fire as an answer.
But, @cfusionpm and @everyone else, how can Modern deal with this from now on? It's getting too serious of a problem. Bans? Unbans?
I really don't see the issue. The metagame has plenty of decks that are light to Push. BGx was a legitimate casualty this year, but it's a combination of ETron, GDS, and Push, not Push alone. Here's the combined October SCG metagame, all decks with <2%.
Interestingly, Jund and Abzan together are 5.8%, so BGx isn't doing as badly as people think. Yes, we don't have good MTGO data, but at least at this limited paper level things look quite healthy. I know people are going to complain about the lack of blue-based interactive control decks, but that's not a Push problem.
Is it possible MTGO is a nightmare and Wizards is just hiding it? Sure. It's also possible this isn't the case; the Challenges look decent when aggregated (all decks with 2+ finishes).
MTGO is weird. D&T is a huge frontrunner, followed by the usual suspects of ETron and GDS with BG Tron making new waves and Titanshift holding things down at #2. Interestingly, some kind of interactive blue decks makes an appearance in every single Challenge T8: Tezzeret, Esper, Jeskai, UW, Mono U Tron, and UR Kiki all show up. BGx shows up in three of them.
Overall, I really think the issue here is that a segment of people are unhappy with Modern generally and can't quite articulate why. So some of those critics just go in the grab bag and pull out random problems, most of which aren't actually issues and most of which are unsupported by the (admittedly limited) data we have. ETron is down, GDS is down, Push isn't holding back the decks people think it is (Push is only played in 2 of the top 10 decks, plenty of decks soft to Push are being played), etc. Some interactive blue decks are viable, but it isn't as many as some pilots would prefer. That said, Storm could definitely be a legitimate issue. It's unquestionably top-tier at this point, and its T3 win consistency is fairly worrisome. But the other metagame issues aren't presenting in paper events. I honestly think most of the complaints boil down to "BGx isn't as good as it used to be" and "Ux interactive decks aren't as good as we want them."
I'm glad that we have Fatal Push. It is a solid answer to Baral, Chief of Compliance and Goblin Electromancer and while I haven't had a problem with Storm yet (probably around 50% with the decks that I play), it seemingly could be a larger problem without Fatal Push. Also happens to be great vs. Affinity.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
I would trade Fatal Push in a heartbeat for the equivalent CMC-based Revolt card as a counterspell (U: 2/4, or whatever "fixed" version of that looks like: U: 1/3, 1U: 2/4, etc), or something like a counterable Abrupt Decay for B with weaker 1/3 Revolt trigger. Those are much more "universal answers" than another creature removal card.
Also, with the nearly complete annihilation of small creatures from the format because of Push, I would be very interested to see Probe come back. Not that they will ever, ever, ever do that. But we all know my thoughts on Probe and what should have been banned instead.
At this point probe is one of the front runners for getting banned from legacy. Stop saying it was banned unfairly, it was a perfectly reasonable ban. It takes away one of the most important aspects of this game--bluffing. You can cast it for free, no danger, no worry, in any deck.
Blue player who doesn't play black would trade fatal push for a revolt counter seems obvious, no?
I have no interest in probe coming back, it just makes storm and probably shadow that much better, and it mainly fuels degenerate things. No thanks.
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
...with the nearly complete annihilation of small creatures from the format...
This just isn't true at all. There are loads of small creatures in the format.
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
...with the nearly complete annihilation of small creatures from the format...
This just isn't true at all. There are loads of small creatures in the format.
As was mentioned just a few posts above, Push has pushed out essentially all creatures 2cmc and under (several 4cmc and under) who do not either win/nearly win the game on the spot or provide massive advantage through things like ETB effects. The only other ones that remain are involved in go-wide strategies that may not care about removal of any one creature. Either way, there has been a sizable reduction in playable 2 drop creatures and a drastic shift of what is now considered "playable."
At this point probe is one of the front runners for getting banned from legacy. Stop saying it was banned unfairly, it was a perfectly reasonable ban. It takes away one of the most important aspects of this game--bluffing. You can cast it for free, no danger, no worry, in any deck.
Thoughtsize/IoK and now Freebooter all get to see your hand and even take something from it! And on top of all that, bluffing is almost irrelevant in a format defined by vomiting your hand as quickly as possible and making your opponent deal with it. But we've been down this road a dozen times. No need to repeat myself yet another time. We disagree on this. Also, a card's use in one format is almost always completely irrelevant to another.
Blue player who doesn't play black would trade fatal push for a revolt counter seems obvious, no?
My comment was a direct response to the seeming hypocrisy of clamoring for better answers and then complaining about getting one. I for one didn't have an issue with creature removal and think that our "better answers" should deal with spells on the stack or any permanent on the field. Hence my two examples. And in case it wasn't clear, Grixis is by far and away my favorite color combination.
At this point probe is one of the front runners for getting banned from legacy. Stop saying it was banned unfairly, it was a perfectly reasonable ban. It takes away one of the most important aspects of this game--bluffing. You can cast it for free, no danger, no worry, in any deck.
Is it? It seems to barely enter Legacy banning discussions. It's certainly nowhere near Deathrite Shaman when it comes to frequency of banning suggestions.
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
Your amusement is amusing. Have you considered that the people who clamored for the answer needed it, while those who protest afterwards were the ones exploiting the absence of the answer? "Magic players" is not a single entity, just like "American Voters". Those unhappy with the status quo will always be the loudest, so when that status quo changes you can be sure those who were quiet initially would be speaking up.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Your amusement is amusing. Have you considered that the people who clamored for the answer needed it, while those who protest afterwards were the ones exploiting the absence of the answer? "Magic players" is not a single entity, just like "American Voters". Those unhappy with the status quo will always be the loudest, so when that status quo changes you can be sure those who were quiet initially would be speaking up.
Some of the people I'm talking about who wanted better answers are people who posted in these threads, two or so years back, about how they wanted better general answers and removal in Modern, and who are no complaining about the effect Fatal Push has had on the format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
...with the nearly complete annihilation of small creatures from the format...
This just isn't true at all. There are loads of small creatures in the format.
As was mentioned just a few posts above, Push has pushed out essentially all creatures 2cmc and under (several 4cmc and under) who do not either win/nearly win the game on the spot or provide massive advantage through things like ETB effects. The only other ones that remain are involved in go-wide strategies that may not care about removal of any one creature. Either way, there has been a sizable reduction in playable 2 drop creatures and a drastic shift of what is now considered "playable."
cfusionpm, what you're saying just isn't true, or even close.
For users interested in some actual data regarding this claim: I did a comparison of the top 50 most-played creatures according to MTGGoldfish, looking at the May 2016 list (1 year before Push was spoiled) and the list as of last Thursday, for a piece dealing specifically with Tarmogoyf's playability published before the weekend. My Goyf-related conclusion was that the creature is obviously still playable, as it remains one of the top 50 creatures in Modern, but it's now harder for decks to splash it; those that do run Goyf must fulfill one or more of three speicfic requirements to accommodate it. Those intrigued can read the full piece here: http://modernnexus.com/pushing-back-how-goyf-2017/
Now on to the data. Here's a list of all the CMC 1-2 creatures from each year.
1 = Only featured on the May '16 list
2 = Only featured on the Nov '17 list
4 = Featured on both lists
All but one of the eighteen CMC 1-2 creatures that did not transition to the current list (the "one" being a lone Lord of Atlantis, the 50th most-played creature at the time) can be traced back to Bushwhacker Zoo, Infect, and Abzan Company. These three decks have been supplanted by other decks or shattered by bannings, and not pushed out of the format by FP (Atarka has splintered into Zoo still/DS Zoo/Hollow One decks; Abzan Company has splintered into Counters Company/GW Company; Infect still exists and has been making a comeback lately but was obviously neutered by the Probe ban and, yes, Push's printing; in any case, only two of the creatures of the eighteen belonged to Infect). In place of the creatures lost, the ten newcomers represent fourteen different decks:
These creatures helm a healthy variety of different strategies, especially compared from the paltry three decks helmed by the creatures we lost. Additionally, they tend to have dramatically more overlap than the creatures from a year ago when it comes to the decks they inhabit, indicating a more open metagame.
One possible conclusion from this data: A few dominant aggro strategies (BGx, Infect, Zoo, Abzan CoCo) kept diversity low pre-Push. Push's printing and the subsequent metagame shifts have resulted in a net diversity gain for Modern, essentially pulling shares away from Tarmogoyf (long the most-played creature in Modern) and the decks fast enough to get under it, and redistributing them among a host of different strategic archetypes that now have room to breathe. Of course, there are plenty of ways to interpret this small data snapshot, but "Push has rendered most CMC 1-2 creatures unplayable" probably isn't one of them.
I don't usually respond to cfusionpm's posts this thoroughly if at all, as I find it exhausting to have to continually fact-check someone who refuses to do any research or back up their claims with evidence. But I had these numbers fresh in my mind from the Goyf article, and so balked at his blatant lie. I think part of the reason this thread is so polarizing is that certain users use it as a platform to push their private agendas by spouting falsehoods and ignoring evidence other users bring to their attention. We can combat this trend by continually calling them out, but since doing so seems to have little effect (they don't stop) and takes a huge amount of energy (this post took me an hour), it seems like a losing battle. Either way, I hope these numbers are helpful for anyone now unsure about Push's effect on cheap creatures in Modern.
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
its probably been said before but it apparently will bear saying again: the impact that Fatal push has had isn't on ALL creatures with cmc 2-4.
The simple reason being that many of the creatures would have also been killed by the other staple 1 drop removals - bolt, path, dismember. What push brought to the table was to allow decks lacking W to still have access to 1 cmc removal that can deal with tarmogoyf without paying 4 life. In other words, Push enables nonred/nonwhite archetypes that were otherwise lacking in cheap removal.
Lets face it; the biggest loser with the push printing was goyf. In nearly every other case, a bolt would have gotten the same job done, and bolt has the additional advantage of being able to dome. Thought-Knot Seer also suffers, but nobody cares about him because everybody hates being TKS'ed.
On to the point regarding how cmc 2-4 green creatures are underplayed. Can this be blamed on Push? Or is it an issue with the format? In this format, you don't play things at 3-4 cmc at sorcery speed unless you are going to win with said thing. Thats just a fact, and it doesn't apply to just creatures. In modern you don't throw down a 4 cmc planeswalker and tap out unless you've checked the opponent's hand or locked them out with a moon or something like that. Why would a creature be exempt? And then, between creature and planeswalker, which payoff would be more interesting?
Successful creature decks feature one or more of these key pillars: Aether Vial, Collected Company, Ramp. Because casting on curve with 1 mana per land is ridiculous. You might as well be playing standard. In a format where people win on turn 3 undisrupted and turn 4 through some disruption, you'd better be doing enough to be worth disrupting, or be really good at disrupting. The Eldrazi has inbuilt ramp in their lands. Elves' creatures ramp and they run the Coco. Merfolk rely on Aether vials to do the work while they save mana for disruption. Humans count on vials too for their explosiveness while also disrupting with ETB triggers. Your expectation of a deck that runs out green 3-4 cmc creatures makes the 3 pillars hard to use. With a fat curve, Aether vials are too slow. If I'm ramping, Eldrazi are just better and Elves are inbuilt rampers and more synergistic AND run coco. And Collected Company has just made 4 cmc in green creature decks a lot less attractive.
So don't pile the blame on push. There are so many more factors, such as the pressure on players to do a lot of things on their turns 3 and 4.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
I am amazed by the discussion on Push and green. I mean, we finally get a proper modern playable answer in years and now we are complaining that it "ruins" the format? What the actual F***? One of the best decks in the format runs 4 copies of a creature that gets demolished by push (DShadow).
Also, the comment regarding "push rendering 1-2 cmc creatures unplayable". Affinity and the new 5c Humans deck (which has been giving results online and offline after the win at the SCG) would beg to differ.
Just relax with the doomsaying already. Every time the format is sort of figuring out itself we have to start bashing at random things. Push is too strong (wait what?), probe was an unjustified ban (really?), green is in a bad spot (we have enough data to know that it isn't). We KNOW that there will be NO bannings until AFTER the pro tour. Instead of trying to figure out new targets for ban-talk just try to figure out what is going on and beat the dominant decks.
I am somewhat amused that we had a great clamour for better answers in Modern, and so WotC gave us one, at which point we're complaining that that answer is too good. I can't really make a statement about whether Fatal Push is too good, since the decks I play usually dodge it, but I am amused that this is the reaction that Magic players have.
...with the nearly complete annihilation of small creatures from the format...
This just isn't true at all. There are loads of small creatures in the format.
As was mentioned just a few posts above, Push has pushed out essentially all creatures 2cmc and under (several 4cmc and under) who do not either win/nearly win the game on the spot or provide massive advantage through things like ETB effects. The only other ones that remain are involved in go-wide strategies that may not care about removal of any one creature. Either way, there has been a sizable reduction in playable 2 drop creatures and a drastic shift of what is now considered "playable."
At this point probe is one of the front runners for getting banned from legacy. Stop saying it was banned unfairly, it was a perfectly reasonable ban. It takes away one of the most important aspects of this game--bluffing. You can cast it for free, no danger, no worry, in any deck.
Thoughtsize/IoK and now Freebooter all get to see your hand and even take something from it! And on top of all that, bluffing is almost irrelevant in a format defined by vomiting your hand as quickly as possible and making your opponent deal with it. But we've been down this road a dozen times. No need to repeat myself yet another time. We disagree on this. Also, a card's use in one format is almost always completely irrelevant to another.
Blue player who doesn't play black would trade fatal push for a revolt counter seems obvious, no?
My comment was a direct response to the seeming hypocrisy of clamoring for better answers and then complaining about getting one. I for one didn't have an issue with creature removal and think that our "better answers" should deal with spells on the stack or any permanent on the field. Hence my two examples. And in case it wasn't clear, Grixis is by far and away my favorite color combination.
You can't compare IOK/Thoughtseize to Probe. The black discard is an atrocious top deck that gets worse as the game goes on, i can't tell you how many times I lost a game because it I top-decked a discard in a really grindy game. Probe replaced itself, it's free, and can fit in any deck. You know better than this, stop leaving things out to make an argument convenient for you. Freebooter is a 2 mana spell, again, very different...and it goes into one deck, for the time being.
Why do you keep saying decks vomit their hand out? Some do, some don't, that discard prevents those decks from doing so minus a few like Affinity.
You just constantly refuse to say true things except to bend it to make your agreements sound better.
Gkourou, I have to admit, Sheridan may have proven you right looking at that list you quoted, the rest of his examples had big green creatures.
But---this may not just be from fatal push. I mean, it's totally true it hurt Goyf probably more than any other creature in the format...but could you imagine if all we had now for Goyfs, Eldrazi and Shadow were bolts? Goyf was already a pain since decks in the past had to bolt snap bolt. Push...is not so fantastic against Eldrazi, I know, but this could mean that it's actually Shadow and Eldrazi proving to be the bigger issue. I think there's a reason go wide aggro is occurring--it hurts both of these decks.
I don't know if we can really put this on push. I mean, think of it, value creatures like Voice and Finks don't care about that card, this is from something much bigger.
I'm not sure creature decks can beat storm, it's just so much faster
Zoo like Creature decks just fold to Shadow in general, and the more they attack the bigger shadow gets.
It looks like Shadow, E-Tron, Storm and Titanshift really have a tight choke hold of things, it's really not a wonder why go wide is now emerging.
I also wonder if Grixis Shadow/5 Color could exist without fatal push.
In your eagerness to find problems with Modern's metagame, you have a) forgotten some of the metagames you considered the best and b) proven my point. Let's look at a metagame I know you and CFP both loved: December 2015. I'll ignore one element of that metagame (anyone who wants to talk Twin, PM me and I'll add you to the PM list), and just focus on little green creatures in this metagame picture: http://modernnexus.com/modern-metagame-breakdown-121-1231/
Looking exclusively at green creatures in Tier 1 and Tier 2 paper, here's their shares:
Jund: 5.8%
Abzan: 4.9%
Infect: 3.7%
Abzan Company: 3%
Naya Company: 2.1%
TOTAL: 19.5%
Now let's compare to all the current October 2017 green decks with >2% share.
Abzan Company: 4.4%
Infect: 3.7%
Jund: 2.9%
Elves: 2.9%
Abzan: 2.9%
TOTAL: 16.9%
So we have a 2.4% difference between the two metagames when it comes to small green creatures in creature-based, tiered green decks. And that difference is entirely explained in the drop of BGx, which fell from 10.7% in December 2015 to 5.8% by today. In fact, non-BGx decks picked up 3.4% of that share and increased by the same amount. So either your complaint of "Push hurts green creatures" really boils down to "BGx share is too low," or your complaint about Pushable green decks isn't valid at all for paper events. You've creatively reinterpreted the statistics to try and prove your personal point, but you haven't considered the context of your numbers.
Our current MTGO sample is pretty dismal with only 6 events, and this is a real area where Wizards' data embargo has hurt us. Even so, how does this comparison hold up online?
This time, we see a 5.4% drop which is largely explained in BGx's fall. BGx dropped from 12% in 2015 to 8.3% in 2017, which accounts for most of the decline. There's still a 1.7% difference which is accounted for by other factors, but the major difference is clearly BGx. Also, you know what else dropped 5% in the MTGO picture? Infect! A T4 rule violator I know people disliked. Its 5% was spread out between different green decks, and even if we account for the 1.7% share lost in BGx, that still leaves 3.3% picked up among the rest. Again, we see green creature decks OVERALL doing fine.
This returns to the exact comment I made in the post you disagreed with: players are unhappy that BGx's share has fallen and they distribute that blame to lots of factors when it's really just BGx taking the drop. The argument also keeps changing. First it was that "Push makes low-cost creatures unplayable." That is obviously untrue, so then it becomes "Push makes low-cost green creatures unplayable." That is also untrue as we see here, so I suspect the REAL argument is "Push makes BGx worse." That is definitely possible and somewhat supported by the numbers. In reality, I expect BGx's decline has many contributors, only one of which is Push.
TLDR: BGx has legitimately dropped from 2015 to 2017. But the claims about green decks, little creatures (see Ashton's post on the previous page), or little creature green decks do not withstand scrutiny. If people want to complain about the BGx drop, do so. But don't shift that to other claims that are not true.
I'm only saying this because I hardly ever see dredge perform well anymore.
No it wasn't an overkill. Also, dredge has a 2,75% metagame share on mtggoldfish so, hardly ever is a bit of a hyperbole. Dredge is doing fine at the moment.
I don't think that is the true reason. I think the reason has more to do with there not being available data to complain about a WotC ban decision. Therefore, it's just complaining since there's no data to disagree with them. So, if for example, Noble Hierarch gets banned, what do we have in statistics to prove that it shouldn't be? (who cares about common sense, honestly?)
Wizards has a lot of statistics. They have all of the Magic online results, as well as whatever data they're logging in each game. They have a lot of information to figure out what is and isn't good or perhaps too good. The player base right now has virtually no information.
I think they've deliberately set things up this way. Balance usually gets a lot of complaints, the perception of balance rarely does.
@GK
I never called you a hypocrite, nor do I believe that. I think you believe Modern has some issues and are just mis-attributing of misidentifying those issues. For example, you talk about Push suppressing green creature decks but that is not true. The SCG Regionals results confirm this even further: https://www.reddit.com/r/ModernMagic/comments/7b7hrw/regionals_results/
Blue-based control is even doing well there. In fact, Jeskai Control was tied for most-played deck with Affinity. The format is much healthier than many of these recent criticisms would have us believe. Moreover, these recent SCG results, and those I posted above, support Wizards' claim that Modern is healthy.
You have two concerns that are both legitimate and supported. First, that BGx has fallen. That's not debateable at this point and I have never disagreed with it. Second, that Storm may be a T4 rule violator, which I am also worried about having seen the #s. But most of the 2017 concerns I've seen in this thread have gone unproven.
EDIT: Also, there was nothing "wrong" with the tables I posted. They were posted in response to the allegation that "green decks are bad." When that allegation shifted and narrowed to "green creature decks with Push vulnerability are bad," I added more data to show this is also not the case. BGx is down, that's clear. But green decks, Pushable creatures, and decks running those creatures as a whole are doing fine.
I want to clarify that I don't think push ruined small green creatures
Push did ruin GBx, particularly Jund. I couldn't understand when GBx players were giddy with the reveal, it literally hits everything, from bolt proof Goyfs to Raging Ravine.
Something feels off about the meta, but I can't put my finger on it. It doesn't feel like one deck or card in particular. I'm kinda thinking there's just multiple issues with a triangulation on Shadow, E-Tron and Storm, they're suppressing the format in unique ways, but only storm is worthy of a possible ban and a culprit of a possible violator
E-Tron, Shadow and Storm really ruined what we considered the best card in modern. The meta seems incredibly difficult to approach, and I can absolutely see why people are frustrated being paired up against a 30/70 matchup that can really feel like it's out of your control.
You could attribute small green creatures as bad because the meta is leaning towards linear decks though.
I think it's great that we have people giving actual evidence, I certainly don't have the skills or time to do what you two do.
I do find it frustrating that WOTC may be succeeding in concealing information, attacking the meta is difficult without paper results, I don't like being paired up against random one sided matchups because people play what they know instead of what could be good or next leveling a meta.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
I think that what Wizards wants, not just as a Standard format but as a game as a whole is a meta where every player thinks their deck is good, but no one has anything more than anecdotal evidence as to what is/isn't good. The reality is that sample sizes are far too low (even among pro teams) to determine matchup percents and meta favorability. Wizards wants to keep data sets low so that no one can figure it out.
This is effectively development abandoning their duties to make a balanced game, in favor of making a game that has the perception of balance.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Bant spirits = Noble Heirarch and Collected Company.
5 Color humans = Mayor of Avabruck.
Elves! Now there's a... oh... hello Collected Company.
Scapeshift = Sakura-Tribe Elder and Primeval Titan, or better known as prime time.
B/G Midrange is the best looking of the bunch, but it placed 24th in the line up and doesn't really show up in the later events.
U/G Merfolk = Merfolk splashing for Kumena's Speaker and Merfolk Branchwalker (This was Cincinnati). Love his list but then again I play merfolk so I'm biased.
G/R devotion in 5th place Modern Cincinnati is another good one.
Let me put it this way: Green in it's classic form of out-valuing opponents in strict power and toughness at the mid-range level has gone nearly extinct: The primary reason being that green can't out-value eldrazi or beat a high powered Death's Shadow that makes even Tarmogoyf look like a piece of cardboard and also doesn't have a lot of ways to deal with Fatal Push outside of swarming the board or going over it. Other popular cards like Tireless Tracker have also ceased seeing serious play for the same reason. The major green strategy still surviving is to combo out with Collected Company or go big with devotion. Support pieces like Noble Heirarch will always stick around since it is the best green one drop ever created next to Deathrite Shaman. It's useful both late and early game because of the exalt trigger and the ability to mana-fix like a birds of paradise.
Also, it takes time for modern to adjust to new cards. Fatal Push is a subtle devil that will change the format slowly with time, and it's inclusion in modern has forced a lot of players to re-evaluate creature choices at 1-4 cmc and especially at the 1-2 cost. Suddenly, high power and toughness creatures at 2 cmc like Tarmogoyf just look a lot worse and ETB / creatures that do stuff at those cmcs look a ton better. Even if someone pushed a Bob off the side of what I presume is the bridge of the Heart of Kiran, he likely still got value out of it.
So, to put it this way, the death of green really isn't about the death of green. It's about the death of mid-range stompy good stuff that green was the master of and subsequently anything that doesn't at least have high power and toughness + hexproof at the 1-4 cmc. The only green decks that can survive are the ones that just swarm the board so much that a Fatal push or similar spot removal doesn't matter, or go so big that Fatal push can't hit them.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I really don't see the issue. The metagame has plenty of decks that are light to Push. BGx was a legitimate casualty this year, but it's a combination of ETron, GDS, and Push, not Push alone. Here's the combined October SCG metagame, all decks with <2%.
1. Affinity: 8.1%
2. TitanShift: 7.4%
3. U/R Gifts Storm: 6.6%
4. Eldrazi Tron: 5.9%
5. Burn: 4.4%
6. Abzan Company: 4.4%
7. Jeskai Tempo: 3.7%
8. Grixis Death's Shadow: 3.7%
9. B/W Eldrazi: 3.7%
10. Infect: 3.7%
11. Jund: 2.9%
12. Elves: 2.9%
13. Abzan: 2.9%
14. Mardu: 2.2%
15. Jeskai Control: 2.2%
16. Humans: 2.2%
Interestingly, Jund and Abzan together are 5.8%, so BGx isn't doing as badly as people think. Yes, we don't have good MTGO data, but at least at this limited paper level things look quite healthy. I know people are going to complain about the lack of blue-based interactive control decks, but that's not a Push problem.
Is it possible MTGO is a nightmare and Wizards is just hiding it? Sure. It's also possible this isn't the case; the Challenges look decent when aggregated (all decks with 2+ finishes).
1. Death and Taxes: 14.6%
2. Titanshift: 10.4%
3. BG Tron: 8.3%
4. Grixis Death's Shadow: 8.3%
5. Eldrazi Tron: 8.3%
6. Storm: 6.3%
7. Jeskai Control: 6.3%
8. UW Control: 4.2%
9. Humans: 4.2%
10. Jund: 4.2%
MTGO is weird. D&T is a huge frontrunner, followed by the usual suspects of ETron and GDS with BG Tron making new waves and Titanshift holding things down at #2. Interestingly, some kind of interactive blue decks makes an appearance in every single Challenge T8: Tezzeret, Esper, Jeskai, UW, Mono U Tron, and UR Kiki all show up. BGx shows up in three of them.
Overall, I really think the issue here is that a segment of people are unhappy with Modern generally and can't quite articulate why. So some of those critics just go in the grab bag and pull out random problems, most of which aren't actually issues and most of which are unsupported by the (admittedly limited) data we have. ETron is down, GDS is down, Push isn't holding back the decks people think it is (Push is only played in 2 of the top 10 decks, plenty of decks soft to Push are being played), etc. Some interactive blue decks are viable, but it isn't as many as some pilots would prefer. That said, Storm could definitely be a legitimate issue. It's unquestionably top-tier at this point, and its T3 win consistency is fairly worrisome. But the other metagame issues aren't presenting in paper events. I honestly think most of the complaints boil down to "BGx isn't as good as it used to be" and "Ux interactive decks aren't as good as we want them."
EDIT: MTGO data issues fixed!
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)I would trade Fatal Push in a heartbeat for the equivalent CMC-based Revolt card as a counterspell (U: 2/4, or whatever "fixed" version of that looks like: U: 1/3, 1U: 2/4, etc), or something like a counterable Abrupt Decay for B with weaker 1/3 Revolt trigger. Those are much more "universal answers" than another creature removal card.
Also, with the nearly complete annihilation of small creatures from the format because of Push, I would be very interested to see Probe come back. Not that they will ever, ever, ever do that. But we all know my thoughts on Probe and what should have been banned instead.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Blue player who doesn't play black would trade fatal push for a revolt counter seems obvious, no?
I have no interest in probe coming back, it just makes storm and probably shadow that much better, and it mainly fuels degenerate things. No thanks.
As was mentioned just a few posts above, Push has pushed out essentially all creatures 2cmc and under (several 4cmc and under) who do not either win/nearly win the game on the spot or provide massive advantage through things like ETB effects. The only other ones that remain are involved in go-wide strategies that may not care about removal of any one creature. Either way, there has been a sizable reduction in playable 2 drop creatures and a drastic shift of what is now considered "playable."
Thoughtsize/IoK and now Freebooter all get to see your hand and even take something from it! And on top of all that, bluffing is almost irrelevant in a format defined by vomiting your hand as quickly as possible and making your opponent deal with it. But we've been down this road a dozen times. No need to repeat myself yet another time. We disagree on this. Also, a card's use in one format is almost always completely irrelevant to another.
My comment was a direct response to the seeming hypocrisy of clamoring for better answers and then complaining about getting one. I for one didn't have an issue with creature removal and think that our "better answers" should deal with spells on the stack or any permanent on the field. Hence my two examples. And in case it wasn't clear, Grixis is by far and away my favorite color combination.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Your amusement is amusing. Have you considered that the people who clamored for the answer needed it, while those who protest afterwards were the ones exploiting the absence of the answer? "Magic players" is not a single entity, just like "American Voters". Those unhappy with the status quo will always be the loudest, so when that status quo changes you can be sure those who were quiet initially would be speaking up.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Some of the people I'm talking about who wanted better answers are people who posted in these threads, two or so years back, about how they wanted better general answers and removal in Modern, and who are no complaining about the effect Fatal Push has had on the format.
For users interested in some actual data regarding this claim: I did a comparison of the top 50 most-played creatures according to MTGGoldfish, looking at the May 2016 list (1 year before Push was spoiled) and the list as of last Thursday, for a piece dealing specifically with Tarmogoyf's playability published before the weekend. My Goyf-related conclusion was that the creature is obviously still playable, as it remains one of the top 50 creatures in Modern, but it's now harder for decks to splash it; those that do run Goyf must fulfill one or more of three speicfic requirements to accommodate it. Those intrigued can read the full piece here: http://modernnexus.com/pushing-back-how-goyf-2017/
Now on to the data. Here's a list of all the CMC 1-2 creatures from each year.
1 = Only featured on the May '16 list
2 = Only featured on the Nov '17 list
4 = Featured on both lists
4 Signal Pest
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Birds of Paradise
4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
1 Wild Nacatl
1 Kird Ape
1 Experiment One
1 Glistener Elf
1 Viscera Seer
1 Grim Lavamancer
1 Burrenton Forge-Tender
4 Arcbound Ravager
4 Vault Skirge
4 Steel Overseer
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Scavenging Ooze
4 Dark Confidant
4 Snapcaster Mage
4 Sakura-Tribe Elder
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Leonin Arbiter
4 Tidehollow Sculler
4 Voice of Resurgence
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
1 Spellskite
1 Wall of Roots
1 Wall of Omens
1 Burning-Tree Emissary
1 Melira, Sylvok Outcast
1 Anafenza, Kin-Tree Spirit
1 Qasali Pridemage
1 Reckless Bushwhacker
1 Kor Firewalker
1 Lord of Atlantis
1 Blighted Agent
4 Signal Pest
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Birds of Paradise
4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
2 Champion of the Parish
2 Death's Shadow
CMC 2 (21)
4 Arcbound Ravager
4 Vault Skirge
4 Steel Overseer
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Scavenging Ooze
4 Dark Confidant
4 Snapcaster Mage
4 Sakura-Tribe Elder
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Leonin Arbiter
4 Tidehollow Sculler
4 Voice of Resurgence
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
2 Vizier of Remedies
2 Devoted Druid
2 Young Pyromancer
2 Goblin Electromancer
2 Baral, Chief of Compliance
2 Bloodghast
2 Thalia's Lieutenant
2 Walking Ballista
All but one of the eighteen CMC 1-2 creatures that did not transition to the current list (the "one" being a lone Lord of Atlantis, the 50th most-played creature at the time) can be traced back to Bushwhacker Zoo, Infect, and Abzan Company. These three decks have been supplanted by other decks or shattered by bannings, and not pushed out of the format by FP (Atarka has splintered into Zoo still/DS Zoo/Hollow One decks; Abzan Company has splintered into Counters Company/GW Company; Infect still exists and has been making a comeback lately but was obviously neutered by the Probe ban and, yes, Push's printing; in any case, only two of the creatures of the eighteen belonged to Infect). In place of the creatures lost, the ten newcomers represent fourteen different decks:
- Shadow: Jund/5c/Zoo/Grixis Shadow
- Vizier, Druid: Counters Company/Elves
- YP: Grixis Delver, Mardu Pyromancer
- Electromancer, Baral: Storm
- Bloodghast: Dredge, Hollow One
- Champion, Lieutenant: 5c Humans, Bant Humans
- Walking Ballista: Eldrazi Tron, Counters Company
These creatures helm a healthy variety of different strategies, especially compared from the paltry three decks helmed by the creatures we lost. Additionally, they tend to have dramatically more overlap than the creatures from a year ago when it comes to the decks they inhabit, indicating a more open metagame.
One possible conclusion from this data: A few dominant aggro strategies (BGx, Infect, Zoo, Abzan CoCo) kept diversity low pre-Push. Push's printing and the subsequent metagame shifts have resulted in a net diversity gain for Modern, essentially pulling shares away from Tarmogoyf (long the most-played creature in Modern) and the decks fast enough to get under it, and redistributing them among a host of different strategic archetypes that now have room to breathe. Of course, there are plenty of ways to interpret this small data snapshot, but "Push has rendered most CMC 1-2 creatures unplayable" probably isn't one of them.
I don't usually respond to cfusionpm's posts this thoroughly if at all, as I find it exhausting to have to continually fact-check someone who refuses to do any research or back up their claims with evidence. But I had these numbers fresh in my mind from the Goyf article, and so balked at his blatant lie. I think part of the reason this thread is so polarizing is that certain users use it as a platform to push their private agendas by spouting falsehoods and ignoring evidence other users bring to their attention. We can combat this trend by continually calling them out, but since doing so seems to have little effect (they don't stop) and takes a huge amount of energy (this post took me an hour), it seems like a losing battle. Either way, I hope these numbers are helpful for anyone now unsure about Push's effect on cheap creatures in Modern.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
The simple reason being that many of the creatures would have also been killed by the other staple 1 drop removals - bolt, path, dismember. What push brought to the table was to allow decks lacking W to still have access to 1 cmc removal that can deal with tarmogoyf without paying 4 life. In other words, Push enables nonred/nonwhite archetypes that were otherwise lacking in cheap removal.
Lets face it; the biggest loser with the push printing was goyf. In nearly every other case, a bolt would have gotten the same job done, and bolt has the additional advantage of being able to dome. Thought-Knot Seer also suffers, but nobody cares about him because everybody hates being TKS'ed.
On to the point regarding how cmc 2-4 green creatures are underplayed. Can this be blamed on Push? Or is it an issue with the format? In this format, you don't play things at 3-4 cmc at sorcery speed unless you are going to win with said thing. Thats just a fact, and it doesn't apply to just creatures. In modern you don't throw down a 4 cmc planeswalker and tap out unless you've checked the opponent's hand or locked them out with a moon or something like that. Why would a creature be exempt? And then, between creature and planeswalker, which payoff would be more interesting?
Successful creature decks feature one or more of these key pillars: Aether Vial, Collected Company, Ramp. Because casting on curve with 1 mana per land is ridiculous. You might as well be playing standard. In a format where people win on turn 3 undisrupted and turn 4 through some disruption, you'd better be doing enough to be worth disrupting, or be really good at disrupting. The Eldrazi has inbuilt ramp in their lands. Elves' creatures ramp and they run the Coco. Merfolk rely on Aether vials to do the work while they save mana for disruption. Humans count on vials too for their explosiveness while also disrupting with ETB triggers. Your expectation of a deck that runs out green 3-4 cmc creatures makes the 3 pillars hard to use. With a fat curve, Aether vials are too slow. If I'm ramping, Eldrazi are just better and Elves are inbuilt rampers and more synergistic AND run coco. And Collected Company has just made 4 cmc in green creature decks a lot less attractive.
So don't pile the blame on push. There are so many more factors, such as the pressure on players to do a lot of things on their turns 3 and 4.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Also, the comment regarding "push rendering 1-2 cmc creatures unplayable". Affinity and the new 5c Humans deck (which has been giving results online and offline after the win at the SCG) would beg to differ.
Just relax with the doomsaying already. Every time the format is sort of figuring out itself we have to start bashing at random things. Push is too strong (wait what?), probe was an unjustified ban (really?), green is in a bad spot (we have enough data to know that it isn't). We KNOW that there will be NO bannings until AFTER the pro tour. Instead of trying to figure out new targets for ban-talk just try to figure out what is going on and beat the dominant decks.
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
You can't compare IOK/Thoughtseize to Probe. The black discard is an atrocious top deck that gets worse as the game goes on, i can't tell you how many times I lost a game because it I top-decked a discard in a really grindy game. Probe replaced itself, it's free, and can fit in any deck. You know better than this, stop leaving things out to make an argument convenient for you. Freebooter is a 2 mana spell, again, very different...and it goes into one deck, for the time being.
Why do you keep saying decks vomit their hand out? Some do, some don't, that discard prevents those decks from doing so minus a few like Affinity.
You just constantly refuse to say true things except to bend it to make your agreements sound better.
But---this may not just be from fatal push. I mean, it's totally true it hurt Goyf probably more than any other creature in the format...but could you imagine if all we had now for Goyfs, Eldrazi and Shadow were bolts? Goyf was already a pain since decks in the past had to bolt snap bolt. Push...is not so fantastic against Eldrazi, I know, but this could mean that it's actually Shadow and Eldrazi proving to be the bigger issue. I think there's a reason go wide aggro is occurring--it hurts both of these decks.
I don't know if we can really put this on push. I mean, think of it, value creatures like Voice and Finks don't care about that card, this is from something much bigger.
I'm not sure creature decks can beat storm, it's just so much faster
Zoo like Creature decks just fold to Shadow in general, and the more they attack the bigger shadow gets.
It looks like Shadow, E-Tron, Storm and Titanshift really have a tight choke hold of things, it's really not a wonder why go wide is now emerging.
I also wonder if Grixis Shadow/5 Color could exist without fatal push.
In your eagerness to find problems with Modern's metagame, you have a) forgotten some of the metagames you considered the best and b) proven my point. Let's look at a metagame I know you and CFP both loved: December 2015. I'll ignore one element of that metagame (anyone who wants to talk Twin, PM me and I'll add you to the PM list), and just focus on little green creatures in this metagame picture:
http://modernnexus.com/modern-metagame-breakdown-121-1231/
Looking exclusively at green creatures in Tier 1 and Tier 2 paper, here's their shares:
Jund: 5.8%
Abzan: 4.9%
Infect: 3.7%
Abzan Company: 3%
Naya Company: 2.1%
TOTAL: 19.5%
Now let's compare to all the current October 2017 green decks with >2% share.
Abzan Company: 4.4%
Infect: 3.7%
Jund: 2.9%
Elves: 2.9%
Abzan: 2.9%
TOTAL: 16.9%
So we have a 2.4% difference between the two metagames when it comes to small green creatures in creature-based, tiered green decks. And that difference is entirely explained in the drop of BGx, which fell from 10.7% in December 2015 to 5.8% by today. In fact, non-BGx decks picked up 3.4% of that share and increased by the same amount. So either your complaint of "Push hurts green creatures" really boils down to "BGx share is too low," or your complaint about Pushable green decks isn't valid at all for paper events. You've creatively reinterpreted the statistics to try and prove your personal point, but you haven't considered the context of your numbers.
Our current MTGO sample is pretty dismal with only 6 events, and this is a real area where Wizards' data embargo has hurt us. Even so, how does this comparison hold up online?
2015 picture:
Jund: 6%
Abzan: 5.8%
Infect: 5%
Abzan Company: 1.9%
Naya Company: 1.2%
TOTAL: 19.9%
2017 picture:
Jund: 4.2%
GW Company: 2.1%
Abzan Shadow: 2.1%
Bant Company: 2.1%
Mono Green Devotion: 2.1%
BG Rock: 2.1%
TOTAL: 14.5%
This time, we see a 5.4% drop which is largely explained in BGx's fall. BGx dropped from 12% in 2015 to 8.3% in 2017, which accounts for most of the decline. There's still a 1.7% difference which is accounted for by other factors, but the major difference is clearly BGx. Also, you know what else dropped 5% in the MTGO picture? Infect! A T4 rule violator I know people disliked. Its 5% was spread out between different green decks, and even if we account for the 1.7% share lost in BGx, that still leaves 3.3% picked up among the rest. Again, we see green creature decks OVERALL doing fine.
This returns to the exact comment I made in the post you disagreed with: players are unhappy that BGx's share has fallen and they distribute that blame to lots of factors when it's really just BGx taking the drop. The argument also keeps changing. First it was that "Push makes low-cost creatures unplayable." That is obviously untrue, so then it becomes "Push makes low-cost green creatures unplayable." That is also untrue as we see here, so I suspect the REAL argument is "Push makes BGx worse." That is definitely possible and somewhat supported by the numbers. In reality, I expect BGx's decline has many contributors, only one of which is Push.
TLDR: BGx has legitimately dropped from 2015 to 2017. But the claims about green decks, little creatures (see Ashton's post on the previous page), or little creature green decks do not withstand scrutiny. If people want to complain about the BGx drop, do so. But don't shift that to other claims that are not true.
I'm only saying this because I hardly ever see dredge perform well anymore.
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
Wizards has a lot of statistics. They have all of the Magic online results, as well as whatever data they're logging in each game. They have a lot of information to figure out what is and isn't good or perhaps too good. The player base right now has virtually no information.
I think they've deliberately set things up this way. Balance usually gets a lot of complaints, the perception of balance rarely does.
I never called you a hypocrite, nor do I believe that. I think you believe Modern has some issues and are just mis-attributing of misidentifying those issues. For example, you talk about Push suppressing green creature decks but that is not true. The SCG Regionals results confirm this even further:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ModernMagic/comments/7b7hrw/regionals_results/
Blue-based control is even doing well there. In fact, Jeskai Control was tied for most-played deck with Affinity. The format is much healthier than many of these recent criticisms would have us believe. Moreover, these recent SCG results, and those I posted above, support Wizards' claim that Modern is healthy.
You have two concerns that are both legitimate and supported. First, that BGx has fallen. That's not debateable at this point and I have never disagreed with it. Second, that Storm may be a T4 rule violator, which I am also worried about having seen the #s. But most of the 2017 concerns I've seen in this thread have gone unproven.
EDIT: Also, there was nothing "wrong" with the tables I posted. They were posted in response to the allegation that "green decks are bad." When that allegation shifted and narrowed to "green creature decks with Push vulnerability are bad," I added more data to show this is also not the case. BGx is down, that's clear. But green decks, Pushable creatures, and decks running those creatures as a whole are doing fine.
Push did ruin GBx, particularly Jund. I couldn't understand when GBx players were giddy with the reveal, it literally hits everything, from bolt proof Goyfs to Raging Ravine.
Something feels off about the meta, but I can't put my finger on it. It doesn't feel like one deck or card in particular. I'm kinda thinking there's just multiple issues with a triangulation on Shadow, E-Tron and Storm, they're suppressing the format in unique ways, but only storm is worthy of a possible ban and a culprit of a possible violator
E-Tron, Shadow and Storm really ruined what we considered the best card in modern. The meta seems incredibly difficult to approach, and I can absolutely see why people are frustrated being paired up against a 30/70 matchup that can really feel like it's out of your control.
You could attribute small green creatures as bad because the meta is leaning towards linear decks though.
I think it's great that we have people giving actual evidence, I certainly don't have the skills or time to do what you two do.
I do find it frustrating that WOTC may be succeeding in concealing information, attacking the meta is difficult without paper results, I don't like being paired up against random one sided matchups because people play what they know instead of what could be good or next leveling a meta.