I do think there is a little bit too much Ban Mania, but I would like to argue, since most people understand that I want more of the fast mana enablers banned, and the fair cards unbanned, is for consistency of what is legal in the format, and what is not.
In summary I am arguing for a pretty dramatic set of changes;
My opinion changes from time to time on Jace, The Mind Sculptor. The artifact lands I am thoroughly convinced would not warp the format as some (especially Wizards) would fear.
Looking at all the decklists, and what those decks had to face, with a completely dramatic change of what was legal or not, the point remains, that Artifact Lands were present, but nowhere near dominant.
Anyway, food for thought, we aren't all about Ban Mania. There is a large majority of us arguing that there is a logical disconnection between what is legal, and not legal in the Modern format.
I do think there is a little bit too much Ban Mania, but I would like to argue, since most people understand that I want more of the fast mana enablers banned, and the fair cards unbanned, is for consistency of what is legal in the format, and what is not.
In summary I am arguing for a pretty dramatic set of changes;
My opinion changes from time to time on Jace, The Mind Sculptor. The artifact lands I am thoroughly convinced would not warp the format as some (especially Wizards) would fear.
Looking at all the decklists, and what those decks had to face, with a completely dramatic change of what was legal or not, the point remains, that Artifact Lands were present, but nowhere near dominant.
Anyway, food for thought, we aren't all about Ban Mania. There is a large majority of us arguing that there is a logical disconnection between what is legal, and not legal in the Modern format.
The biggest problem I have with unbanning the artifact lands is that it doesn't really help anything. What deck types are stuck that having the artifact lands would suddenly help? I can't think of any atm, and there is the possibility that it busts Robots wide open. Unbans should contribute to a better format, and I can't think of any reason the addition of the artifact lands would be beneficial.
Isn't that the player base's job though - to brew with the cards and come up with something? I agree that there's nothing obvious that the artifact lands would contribute to the format, but maybe there's something there. I think unless a card is affecting the format very negatively there's no reason to keep it banned. And I think the possibility for the artifact lands to be busted is extremely low. They certainly aren't better than anything in a current Affinity list, and wouldn't be even if you changed the deck considerably, I think.
But on the other hand there's no reason for Wizards to take the chance so they won't.
Isn't that the player base's job though - to brew with the cards and come up with something? I agree that there's nothing obvious that the artifact lands would contribute to the format, but maybe there's something there. I think unless a card is affecting the format very negatively there's no reason to keep it banned. And I think the possibility for the artifact lands to be busted is extremely low. They certainly aren't better than anything in a current Affinity list, and wouldn't be even if you changed the deck considerably, I think.
But on the other hand there's no reason for Wizards to take the chance so they won't.
Honestly, I don't see any doomsday scenarios right out of the gate if the artifact lands came off the list. However, they do open up a lot of smaller avenues in decks beyond just Robots. Any deck where artifacts in play matter could jam those lands in for zero opportunity cost. Whether or not those decks become busted, I don't know, but it's not a chance I see wizards taking anytime soon. Another thing to consider is that they would be legal targets for fetchlands; again whether that would lead towards anything degenerate, I dont know. Could they be perfectly safe? Certainly, but they're also risky, and until the safer options come off the ban list, they're not going anywhere.
Okay, I have the experience of having played affinity in mirrodin standard and extended back in the previous decade:
You do not want artifact lands in modern. Would they work in the current deck? Meh I dunno, but it would inspire the original version to make a comeback which is extremely dangerous. 4/4's on turn 2 that can't be hit by fatal push? How about adding that much more consistency to mox opal? The reality is, many affinity cards are kinda slow (champion and overseer, master of etherium specifically) and the deck adapted to run those. Is it guaranteed to be broken? No, but I saw enough of those blistering starts to say with confidence it is not a risk you want to take.
Okay, I have the experience of having played affinity in mirrodin standard and extended back in the previous decade:
You do not want artifact lands in modern. Would they work in the current deck? Meh I dunno, but it would inspire the original version to make a comeback which is extremely dangerous. 4/4's on turn 2 that can't be hit by fatal push? How about adding that much more consistency to mox opal? The reality is, many affinity cards are kinda slow (champion and overseer, master of etherium specifically) and the deck adapted to run those. Is it guaranteed to be broken? No, but I saw enough of those blistering starts to say with confidence it is not a risk you want to take.
I second that. And we aren't even talking about T2. An affinity with artifact lands can very reliably hit a 4/4 on T1 and go up to 3 on T2 if they draw them.
It also gives higher color consistency for specific iterations of affinity which care about that.
Affinity is one of the best 3 decks of the format, and has kept this place since the inception of the format. There is NO reason to give it extra powerful toys to play with, especially when they will only make it even more consistent.
Okay, I have the experience of having played affinity in mirrodin standard and extended back in the previous decade:
You do not want artifact lands in modern. Would they work in the current deck? Meh I dunno, but it would inspire the original version to make a comeback which is extremely dangerous. 4/4's on turn 2 that can't be hit by fatal push? How about adding that much more consistency to mox opal? The reality is, many affinity cards are kinda slow (champion and overseer, master of etherium specifically) and the deck adapted to run those. Is it guaranteed to be broken? No, but I saw enough of those blistering starts to say with confidence it is not a risk you want to take.
I was playing during the same era, the same PTQ System, and the same Standard Season so let me tell you my experience; the artifact lands were never the problem - Damage on the Stack was. Disciple of the Vault only became a Fireball, which was a problem in of itself, but the fact that no single block you made against the deck ever mattered was the core issue.
Look, and I mean actually take a look at the links I provided. Decks were able to handle Artifact Lands and Affinity and your legendary Myr Enforcers with NO STONY SILENCE. There are more Kird Apes in over 300 PTQ's than Arcbound Ravagers.
We currently have ******* Thought-Knot Seer making headway faster than most Myr Enforcer ever saw Daylight in the creation of Modern.If Artifact lands were as busted as you claim, people would be doing it, we have the card pool.
I always wanted to let Dig Through Time have a longer life than it did to see how crazy the decks could be. I think Treasure Cruise was definitely a broken card, but I think that they at least should have lets DTT stay a while longer to see if it was really that bad. Especially at the time when Splinter Twin was legal to police a little bit. This was also before Baral was here and storm wasnt that good
I always wanted to let Dig Through Time have a longer life than it did to see how crazy the decks could be. I think Treasure Cruise was definitely a broken card, but I think that they at least should have lets DTT stay a while longer to see if it was really that bad. Especially at the time when Splinter Twin was legal to police a little bit. This was also before Baral was here and storm wasnt that good
God no, that card was rightfully pre-banned. Legacy couldn't even handle that card, and I don't truly don't want to hear, "but this isn't legacy". You're right, it's not, it's a format with a much lower power level and ability to regulate itself than legacy.
Dig through time would break this format. I don't know how or with what deck, but I'm 100% certain it would.
Honestly, the delve mechanic itself was very powerful, we had two different black Goyfs enter the format.
Okay, I have the experience of having played affinity in mirrodin standard and extended back in the previous decade:
You do not want artifact lands in modern. Would they work in the current deck? Meh I dunno, but it would inspire the original version to make a comeback which is extremely dangerous. 4/4's on turn 2 that can't be hit by fatal push? How about adding that much more consistency to mox opal? The reality is, many affinity cards are kinda slow (champion and overseer, master of etherium specifically) and the deck adapted to run those. Is it guaranteed to be broken? No, but I saw enough of those blistering starts to say with confidence it is not a risk you want to take.
I was playing during the same era, the same PTQ System, and the same Standard Season so let me tell you my experience; the artifact lands were never the problem - Damage on the Stack was. Disciple of the Vault only became a Fireball, which was a problem in of itself, but the fact that no single block you made against the deck ever mattered was the core issue.
Look, and I mean actually take a look at the links I provided. Decks were able to handle Artifact Lands and Affinity and your legendary Myr Enforcers with NO STONY SILENCE. There are more Kird Apes in over 300 PTQ's than Arcbound Ravagers.
We currently have ******* Thought-Knot Seer making headway faster than most Myr Enforcer ever saw Daylight in the creation of Modern.If Artifact lands were as busted as you claim, people would be doing it, we have the card pool.
People would be doing it, we have the card pool? I don't understand this claim. We have one artifact land available in modern. The difference between four in a deck and twelve in a deck is obviously huge.
The point I was trying to make wasn't that affinity was the best deck ten years ago in extended or standard. My point is that arguments that modern affinity in its current form is better than a version with artifact lands is wrong.
I always wanted to let Dig Through Time have a longer life than it did to see how crazy the decks could be. I think Treasure Cruise was definitely a broken card, but I think that they at least should have lets DTT stay a while longer to see if it was really that bad. Especially at the time when Splinter Twin was legal to police a little bit. This was also before Baral was here and storm wasnt that good
God no, that card was rightfully pre-banned. Legacy couldn't even handle that card, and I don't truly don't want to hear, "but this isn't legacy". You're right, it's not, it's a format with a much lower power level and ability to regulate itself than legacy.
Dig through time would break this format. I don't know how or with what deck, but I'm 100% certain it would.
Honestly, the delve mechanic itself was very powerful, we had two different black Goyfs enter the format.
Yeah but I wanted to see which decks would break it. Jeskai Ascendancy combo was good with Treasure Cruise, but who knows how powerful it would be with DTT only in todays meta. Possibly tier 1, but nothing game breaking. I wanna see it lol!
I always wanted to let Dig Through Time have a longer life than it did to see how crazy the decks could be. I think Treasure Cruise was definitely a broken card, but I think that they at least should have lets DTT stay a while longer to see if it was really that bad. Especially at the time when Splinter Twin was legal to police a little bit. This was also before Baral was here and storm wasnt that good
God no, that card was rightfully pre-banned. Legacy couldn't even handle that card, and I don't truly don't want to hear, "but this isn't legacy". You're right, it's not, it's a format with a much lower power level and ability to regulate itself than legacy.
Dig through time would break this format. I don't know how or with what deck, but I'm 100% certain it would.
Honestly, the delve mechanic itself was very powerful, we had two different black Goyfs enter the format.
Yeah but I wanted to see which decks would break it. Jeskai Ascendancy combo was good with Treasure Cruise, but who knows how powerful it would be with DTT only in todays meta. Possibly tier 1, but nothing game breaking. I wanna see it lol!
Yeah but, and no offense meant here, "I want to see it" is not really an argument for unbanning one of the most powerful card-draws cards printed (at least recently).
Jeskai Ascedancy was prettey degenerate when it existed and it is ok that is is gone. You can still play it but it is way slower and less consistent. We already have enough issues with one storm deck that plays with itself. I can't imagine having ANOTHER similar tier one deck.
Yeah I get that Jeskai Ascedancy was a degenerate deck for sure. Dig Through Time got an unfair banning since there was no proof that it actually caused anything degenerate without Treasure Cruise. Just because its a powerful draw card doesnt mean it automatically should be banned. At least let the stats come in and statistically prove that DTT deserves to be banned. There was no proof that even the Ascedancy Combo deck would even be that good without Cruise even with DTT, it was all theory. They could have jus experimented with it for 1 more ban phase after Cruise was banned. If after the Cruise ban, DTT was in fact causing degenerative strategies then, yeah ban it.
On the one hand, I too don't like preemptive bans without data to support them. DTT's metagame shares, although definitely top-tier, were not nearly as offensive as the obviously broken TC. From a methodological perspective, I would have preferred DTT to get at least 3-4 months before a ban, similar to how Wizards allowed Eye and Temple to rampage all over the format before banning in the appropriate update.
On the other hand, the card proved so broken that it got banned in Legacy and restricted in Vintage. I'm sure it would have been outrageous in Modern for those 3-4 months and the format lost nothing except some ban integrity by its early demise. Temur Scapeshift, Ascendancy, and/or Twin would have abused this card too heavily. So although I'm not thrilled by Wizards' method of banning the card before it had a chance, the end result was fine. To their credit, Wizards has also not done this again despite numerous alarmist calls to the contrary.
This isnt Legacy or Vintage. Anyways, the card is banned already, but I was wondering if it became unbanned in todays meta, if it would be oppressive if a storm card got banned like Grapeshot. This was kind of the whole point of me bringing it up in the first place
Having played original Affinity in Standard back during Mirrodin, I'm resisting the urge to laugh out loud at the idea of unbanning artifact lands. That is one conversation I never thought would pick up any steam here. Robots is (and has been) a staple in this format without artifact lands. Enabling actual Affinity in addition to the tools already available to Robots is absolutely a nonstarter in Modern, to put it gently.
This isnt Legacy or Vintage. Anyways, the card is banned already, but I was wondering if it became unbanned in todays meta, if it would be oppressive if a storm card got banned like Grapeshot. This was kind of the whole point of me bringing it up in the first place
Well, it is always possible to jam it and playtest it against some of the Tier 1 decks.
It indeed isn't LEgacy or Vintage, but I stand by the argument that if these formats can't handle the card, then Modern wouldn't be able either. GYs fill up equally fast in modern and modern is a format with no free counterspells. Any combo deck would have just broken everything with the availability of DTT.
In addition, GDS's biggest problem is that sometimes it just can't find a DS to win the game. A card that would let it dig 7 cards deep would give it an insane consistency.
Finally, yeah maybe a couple of control decks would have played the card, but in reality, it would simply just break combo decks so much, control decks would have even less hope than they have now.
We didn't have the data back then in relation to DTT, because the meta-share it would (eventually) take over was already taken by TC. TC leaves, DTT takes over. It really was that simple. Hell, that card was even broken in standard even though we didn't have the same ways of filling up the GYs so fast.
It is not only related to storm. It has to do with the consistency of combo in general.
This isnt Legacy or Vintage. Anyways, the card is banned already, but I was wondering if it became unbanned in todays meta, if it would be oppressive if a storm card got banned like Grapeshot. This was kind of the whole point of me bringing it up in the first place
There is no card banned in Legacy from a Modern legal set that is also not completely broken in Modern. It's a very reliable litmus test. Vintage is different, but if a card is BOTH banned in Legacy AND restricted in Vintage, it's a whole new level of broken.
This isnt Legacy or Vintage. Anyways, the card is banned already, but I was wondering if it became unbanned in todays meta, if it would be oppressive if a storm card got banned like Grapeshot. This was kind of the whole point of me bringing it up in the first place
Well, it is always possible to jam it and playtest it against some of the Tier 1 decks.
It indeed isn't LEgacy or Vintage, but I stand by the argument that if these formats can't handle the card, then Modern wouldn't be able either. GYs fill up equally fast in modern and modern is a format with no free counterspells. Any combo deck would have just broken everything with the availability of DTT.
In addition, GDS's biggest problem is that sometimes it just can't find a DS to win the game. A card that would let it dig 7 cards deep would give it an insane consistency.
Finally, yeah maybe a couple of control decks would have played the card, but in reality, it would simply just break combo decks so much, control decks would have even less hope than they have now.
We didn't have the data back then in relation to DTT, because the meta-share it would (eventually) take over was already taken by TC. TC leaves, DTT takes over. It really was that simple. Hell, that card was even broken in standard even though we didn't have the same ways of filling up the GYs so fast.
It is not only related to storm. It has to do with the consistency of combo in general.
That was my opinion at the time of the banning and now that you have pointed out things like GDS, then I agree now that DTT would probably be bad for the format in todays meta. Thanks for the post.
The only problem I have is that we can conjecture all we want on this board, but I'd rather wotc not and provide actual statistics
In addition, GDS's biggest problem is that sometimes it just can't find a DS to win the game. A card that would let it dig 7 cards deep would give it an insane consistency.
DS variants can't feasibly support DTT and Delve threats. That puts a lot of strain on Death's Shadow to close out the game, which is weak to push. The delve threats add a much-needed threat diversity to the deck. I highly doubt DS would play DTT, at least not in any of its current iterations.
DTT is still probably way too busted for Modern though.
In addition, GDS's biggest problem is that sometimes it just can't find a DS to win the game. A card that would let it dig 7 cards deep would give it an insane consistency.
DS variants can't feasibly support DTT and Delve threats. That puts a lot of strain on Death's Shadow to close out the game, which is weak to push. The delve threats add a much-needed threat diversity to the deck. I highly doubt DS would play DTT, at least not in any of its current iterations.
DTT is still probably way too busted for Modern though.
If you can reliably dig for your threats you don't really need that many. Look at DS decks that play Traverse. I suggest that DTT would have been just WAY better than Traverse because it allows you to dig for threats and answers at the same time.
If you can dig for a DS and Stubborn Denial in one go you don't need another 3-4x delve threats.
You can easily go for EoT T2 DTT into a DS with Stubborn Denial up and from that point onward things become quite trivial.
Maybe Grixis wouldn't have been the best version and we would had sultai, but I am certain that DS would easily exploit DTT.
On the comparison of Legacy and Modern card pools:
People show once again that they are not capable of realizing how much differently Legacy plays out (when compared to Modern). For example, if there was not Omniscience in Legacy, Dig Through Time might be just a fine, powerful card(though strong).
Thankfully Wizards has provided us with a beautiful text that pushes away all of those anecdotal, unbased opinions that are trying to compare Legacy's banned card pool with Modern's one.
Of note is that Legacy is currently the only tournament format where we have not taken action against Gitaxian Probe. Currently, the data does not support doing so in that format, and we examine each format individually.
And yet, there is no card banned in Legacy from a Modern legal set that is not banned/broken in Modern. There is also no card from a Modern legal set that is BOTH banned in Legacy AND restricted in Vintage that isn't majorly busted (and also justifiably banned) in Modern.
I very clearly never said Wizards uses the formats to inform ban decisions across formats, although we know they do to some unknown extent (see JTMS's and SFM's Modern ban explanations for an example). I said this Vintage/Legacy B&R test is an effective litmus test/indicator as to how broken a card would be in Modern.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In summary I am arguing for a pretty dramatic set of changes;
Unban
Bloodbraid Elf
Stoneforge Mystic
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Great Furnace
Ancient Den
Tree of Tales
Seat of the Synod
Vault of Whispers
Ban
Simian Spirit Guide
Mox Opal
Eldrazi Temple
My opinion changes from time to time on Jace, The Mind Sculptor. The artifact lands I am thoroughly convinced would not warp the format as some (especially Wizards) would fear.
To show examples of this, I refer back to Pro Tour Austin (09)
https://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptaus09
More importantly, the PTQ Seasons of past extended formats.
https://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/pro-tour–hollywood-qualifying-season-top-8-decklists
https://magic.wizards.com/en/eventcoverage/ptqhon09
https://magic.wizards.com/en/eventcoverage/ptqsj10
Looking at all the decklists, and what those decks had to face, with a completely dramatic change of what was legal or not, the point remains, that Artifact Lands were present, but nowhere near dominant.
Anyway, food for thought, we aren't all about Ban Mania. There is a large majority of us arguing that there is a logical disconnection between what is legal, and not legal in the Modern format.
The biggest problem I have with unbanning the artifact lands is that it doesn't really help anything. What deck types are stuck that having the artifact lands would suddenly help? I can't think of any atm, and there is the possibility that it busts Robots wide open. Unbans should contribute to a better format, and I can't think of any reason the addition of the artifact lands would be beneficial.
But on the other hand there's no reason for Wizards to take the chance so they won't.
Honestly, I don't see any doomsday scenarios right out of the gate if the artifact lands came off the list. However, they do open up a lot of smaller avenues in decks beyond just Robots. Any deck where artifacts in play matter could jam those lands in for zero opportunity cost. Whether or not those decks become busted, I don't know, but it's not a chance I see wizards taking anytime soon. Another thing to consider is that they would be legal targets for fetchlands; again whether that would lead towards anything degenerate, I dont know. Could they be perfectly safe? Certainly, but they're also risky, and until the safer options come off the ban list, they're not going anywhere.
You do not want artifact lands in modern. Would they work in the current deck? Meh I dunno, but it would inspire the original version to make a comeback which is extremely dangerous. 4/4's on turn 2 that can't be hit by fatal push? How about adding that much more consistency to mox opal? The reality is, many affinity cards are kinda slow (champion and overseer, master of etherium specifically) and the deck adapted to run those. Is it guaranteed to be broken? No, but I saw enough of those blistering starts to say with confidence it is not a risk you want to take.
It also gives higher color consistency for specific iterations of affinity which care about that.
Affinity is one of the best 3 decks of the format, and has kept this place since the inception of the format. There is NO reason to give it extra powerful toys to play with, especially when they will only make it even more consistent.
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
I was playing during the same era, the same PTQ System, and the same Standard Season so let me tell you my experience; the artifact lands were never the problem - Damage on the Stack was. Disciple of the Vault only became a Fireball, which was a problem in of itself, but the fact that no single block you made against the deck ever mattered was the core issue.
Look, and I mean actually take a look at the links I provided. Decks were able to handle Artifact Lands and Affinity and your legendary Myr Enforcers with NO STONY SILENCE. There are more Kird Apes in over 300 PTQ's than Arcbound Ravagers.
We currently have ******* Thought-Knot Seer making headway faster than most Myr Enforcer ever saw Daylight in the creation of Modern.If Artifact lands were as busted as you claim, people would be doing it, we have the card pool.
I feel it is just as important to look at the banned list and say, "ok, so how does this also improve modern?"
Artifact lands could possibly be harmless, but I don't think it'll add any good and don't like the risk it holds.
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
God no, that card was rightfully pre-banned. Legacy couldn't even handle that card, and I don't truly don't want to hear, "but this isn't legacy". You're right, it's not, it's a format with a much lower power level and ability to regulate itself than legacy.
Dig through time would break this format. I don't know how or with what deck, but I'm 100% certain it would.
Honestly, the delve mechanic itself was very powerful, we had two different black Goyfs enter the format.
People would be doing it, we have the card pool? I don't understand this claim. We have one artifact land available in modern. The difference between four in a deck and twelve in a deck is obviously huge.
The point I was trying to make wasn't that affinity was the best deck ten years ago in extended or standard. My point is that arguments that modern affinity in its current form is better than a version with artifact lands is wrong.
Yeah but I wanted to see which decks would break it. Jeskai Ascendancy combo was good with Treasure Cruise, but who knows how powerful it would be with DTT only in todays meta. Possibly tier 1, but nothing game breaking. I wanna see it lol!
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
Jeskai Ascedancy was prettey degenerate when it existed and it is ok that is is gone. You can still play it but it is way slower and less consistent. We already have enough issues with one storm deck that plays with itself. I can't imagine having ANOTHER similar tier one deck.
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
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
On the other hand, the card proved so broken that it got banned in Legacy and restricted in Vintage. I'm sure it would have been outrageous in Modern for those 3-4 months and the format lost nothing except some ban integrity by its early demise. Temur Scapeshift, Ascendancy, and/or Twin would have abused this card too heavily. So although I'm not thrilled by Wizards' method of banning the card before it had a chance, the end result was fine. To their credit, Wizards has also not done this again despite numerous alarmist calls to the contrary.
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
CG
It indeed isn't LEgacy or Vintage, but I stand by the argument that if these formats can't handle the card, then Modern wouldn't be able either. GYs fill up equally fast in modern and modern is a format with no free counterspells. Any combo deck would have just broken everything with the availability of DTT.
In addition, GDS's biggest problem is that sometimes it just can't find a DS to win the game. A card that would let it dig 7 cards deep would give it an insane consistency.
Finally, yeah maybe a couple of control decks would have played the card, but in reality, it would simply just break combo decks so much, control decks would have even less hope than they have now.
We didn't have the data back then in relation to DTT, because the meta-share it would (eventually) take over was already taken by TC. TC leaves, DTT takes over. It really was that simple. Hell, that card was even broken in standard even though we didn't have the same ways of filling up the GYs so fast.
It is not only related to storm. It has to do with the consistency of combo in general.
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
There is no card banned in Legacy from a Modern legal set that is also not completely broken in Modern. It's a very reliable litmus test. Vintage is different, but if a card is BOTH banned in Legacy AND restricted in Vintage, it's a whole new level of broken.
That was my opinion at the time of the banning and now that you have pointed out things like GDS, then I agree now that DTT would probably be bad for the format in todays meta. Thanks for the post.
The only problem I have is that we can conjecture all we want on this board, but I'd rather wotc not and provide actual statistics
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
DS variants can't feasibly support DTT and Delve threats. That puts a lot of strain on Death's Shadow to close out the game, which is weak to push. The delve threats add a much-needed threat diversity to the deck. I highly doubt DS would play DTT, at least not in any of its current iterations.
DTT is still probably way too busted for Modern though.
If you can dig for a DS and Stubborn Denial in one go you don't need another 3-4x delve threats.
You can easily go for EoT T2 DTT into a DS with Stubborn Denial up and from that point onward things become quite trivial.
Maybe Grixis wouldn't have been the best version and we would had sultai, but I am certain that DS would easily exploit DTT.
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
And yet, there is no card banned in Legacy from a Modern legal set that is not banned/broken in Modern. There is also no card from a Modern legal set that is BOTH banned in Legacy AND restricted in Vintage that isn't majorly busted (and also justifiably banned) in Modern.
I very clearly never said Wizards uses the formats to inform ban decisions across formats, although we know they do to some unknown extent (see JTMS's and SFM's Modern ban explanations for an example). I said this Vintage/Legacy B&R test is an effective litmus test/indicator as to how broken a card would be in Modern.