Meh, I had a lengthier response typed up, but I figure I'll screw it. Wizards isn't dumb enough to throw two sets out of the format (particularly to "solve" problems that don't exist--the only thing that arguably is a problem from those sets is Summer Bloom, and you don't need to throw out entire sets to get rid of one problem card), so there's not much point even arguing about it. Also, this really does all belong in the main banlist thread, so I probably won't be continuing this discussion further after this.
But to respond to some of the especially outrageous claims:
3. can you explain to me why coco abzan decks arent doing well then?
In what world does "got two Top 8's at recent Grand Prix" translate to "aren't doing well"?
maybe tron and bloom decks just maybe?
A deck has unfavorable matchups! Oh no! That's... normal!
7. no it kills decks and then others rise that are good vs bg/x and ur/x decks aka coco decks,little kid, uwr control/midrange heck maybe even gifts decks...
No, others don't rise. The problem is that while decks like Collected Company may get a benefit from the loss of Tron and Amulet Bloom, so do Jund/Junk. There isn't a closing of the gap, the gap is just as big.
You also say “UR/x” decks as if those would be a thing in this hypothetical format. They lose Blood Moon and, in the case of Twin in particular, lose decks that were positive matchups for them, leaving them facing off against Jund/Junk, which now no longer has to fear Blood Moon and has positive matchups against them (BGx loves to play against Twin and is no slouch against Delver either, particularly now that neither have Blood Moon). And now that it no longer has to worry about Tron, it can drop the Tron hate and use it to be even better against other decks.
And UWR Control or Gifts suddenly getting good? Please. The removal of these sets doesn't actually help out those archetypes because it doesn't get rid of the actual weaknesses they had. Tron may have been a problematic matchup for them, but Tron is also only 5% of the meta. A deck you face once every 20 rounds isn't a deck that is keeping anything out of the format.
Maybe some decks will get better if they're good enough against BGx, because BGx is so good that having a favorable matchup could be enough for a deck to do well. But it isn't a healthy format if you just have a top deck and some decks that are good against that top deck. That's just Modern in late 2012 or the Treasure Cruise era... actually, worse than the Treasure Cruise era, because at least the Treasure Cruise era had two very different top decks.
Also, I can't help but notice you completely ignored my question of what decks are supposedly being kept out by Blood Moon. Probably because there aren't any such decks. Some decks might be hurt by it, but smart playing lets you play around it.
I don't want anything to be banned, I just want a modern legal Counterspell, or Force of Will. As Patrick Chapin has stated, the older/more powerful the format is, the better FoW becomes. It wouldn't be broken in modern, nor would counterspell. They would police dumb decks, and allow fair ones, or resilient combos to work well.
The problem with this idea is the same problem in Legacy. Have you seen a non-blue deck win lately? No. Because basically, if you're not playing blue, you're losing.
If you bring FOW in modern, the problem will be exactly the same (plus I really don't want the format to be legacy-light). It'll be a field riddled with blue and basically everything else will be Tier 2 and less. The fact that FOW does NOT exist in the format is the reason there are so many decks that are viable. And that's great.
I play Grisholbrand and I can assure you that there is no need to ban the deck. Yes, it CAN do busted turn two wins. But those are not as common as you think. The times where the deck is not comboing within the first 4 turns, it really does nothing. And you just lose because you have zero interaction with your opponent. The deck is fantastic against all the control decks out there (it greatly benefits from the draw-go style of play). But it has a really hard time with aggressive decks (zoo, burn, affinity, infect).
At this point in time, I don't really see anything worth banning. Not even amulet. Just play blood moon. GG.
Force of Will is terrible against any fair deck. I play Miracles in Legacy and I side out FoW quite a bit. The reason blue is so heavily played in Legacy is because of Brainstorm, Ponder, Preordain, Spell Pierce/Flusterstorm/Daze/Delver/etc., DtT/Jace/S&T. None of these things except spell pierce which isn't that good in modern, exist in the format.
In other words, Force would be an excellent police tool against the combo decks for control decks which would do a lot to balance the format. It would be terrible against the fair-decks, but that's not too much of a problem since most MB's for UWx control decks are pretty well suited against fair-decks (50/50 for the most part). I don't actually advocate for Force in Modern since the format would be better off with counterspell instead (Force would make twin too powerful imho).
Either put counterspell in the format, or give D&T the ability to police the combo decks in the format with MoR and Rishadan Port type cards. Modern is way too infested with linear/combo decks, since the tools to police them are bad/narrow.
Meh, I had a lengthier response typed up, but I figure I'll screw it. Wizards isn't dumb enough to throw two sets out of the format (particularly to "solve" problems that don't exist--the only thing that arguably is a problem from those sets is Summer Bloom, and you don't need to throw out entire sets to get rid of one problem card), so there's not much point even arguing about it. Also, this really does all belong in the main banlist thread, so I probably won't be continuing this discussion further after this.
But to respond to some of the especially outrageous claims:
3. can you explain to me why coco abzan decks arent doing well then?
In what world does "got two Top 8's at recent Grand Prix" translate to "aren't doing well"?
maybe tron and bloom decks just maybe?
A deck has unfavorable matchups! Oh no! That's... normal!
7. no it kills decks and then others rise that are good vs bg/x and ur/x decks aka coco decks,little kid, uwr control/midrange heck maybe even gifts decks...
No, others don't rise. The problem is that while decks like Collected Company may get a benefit from the loss of Tron and Amulet Bloom, so do Jund/Junk. There isn't a closing of the gap, the gap is just as big.
You also say “UR/x” decks as if those would be a thing in this hypothetical format. They lose Blood Moon and, in the case of Twin in particular, lose decks that were positive matchups for them, leaving them facing off against Jund/Junk, which now no longer has to fear Blood Moon and has positive matchups against them (BGx loves to play against Twin and is no slouch against Delver either, particularly now that neither have Blood Moon). And now that it no longer has to worry about Tron, it can drop the Tron hate and use it to be even better against other decks.
And UWR Control or Gifts suddenly getting good? Please. The removal of these sets doesn't actually help out those archetypes because it doesn't get rid of the actual weaknesses they had. Tron may have been a problematic matchup for them, but Tron is also only 5% of the meta. A deck you face once every 20 rounds isn't a deck that is keeping anything out of the format.
Maybe some decks will get better if they're good enough against BGx, because BGx is so good that having a favorable matchup could be enough for a deck to do well. But it isn't a healthy format if you just have a top deck and some decks that are good against that top deck. That's just Modern in late 2012 or the Treasure Cruise era... actually, worse than the Treasure Cruise era, because at least the Treasure Cruise era had two very different top decks.
Also, I can't help but notice you completely ignored my question of what decks are supposedly being kept out by Blood Moon. Probably because there aren't any such decks. Some decks might be hurt by it, but smart playing lets you play around it.
I agree this is not where to argue about this so ill be done after this last comment.
1. I stand by bbds argument that tron and bloom push out some fair decks that would be great in this format as this player
has more games under his belt and I trust his experience. he plays more than coco decks
2. bad matchups are one thing, unwinnable matchups is another
3. junk and jund rise from a tron bloom ban yes But so does burn and coco decks and uwr decks which can fight bgx and keep it in check just fine...
4. modern is the most aggressive/linear ive ever seen it. would it hurt to kill bloom and tron and allow decks like uwr and coco to rise? think about this a more interactive format. and to answer your blood moon question: you shouldn't get punished for playing a 3 colour deck and blood moon does just this. its one thing to get your manland hit with fulminator or getting tec edged out of a mana colour. but to just lose to a 3 mana enchantment is just stupid and isnt good for innovation. "games shouldnt be won this way".
edit: the play around it strategy doesn't work all the time if you dont have fetches in your opening hand and are on the draw.
pre ktk pod era was the most interactive ive seen modern. as pod kept infect and burn down. shaun mclaren dong well at a pro tour is a good sign that the format is interactive and creature based the way wizards wants it.
If summer bloom gets hit I think It would be a good step
I agree this is not where to argue about this so ill be done after this last comment.
1. I stand by bbds argument that tron and bloom push out some fair decks that would be great in this format as this player
has more games under his belt and I trust his experience. he plays more than coco decks
2. bad matchups are one thing, unwinnable matchups is another
3. junk and jund rise from a tron bloom ban yes But so does burn and coco decks and uwr decks which can fight bgx and keep it in check just fine...
4. modern is the most aggressive/linear ive ever seen it. would it hurt to kill bloom and tron and allow decks like uwr and coco to rise? think about this a more interactive format. and to answer your blood moon question: you shouldn't get punished for playing a 3 colour deck and blood moon does just this. its one thing to get your manland hit with fulminator or getting tec edged out of a mana colour. but to just lose to a 3 mana enchantment is just stupid and isnt good for innovation. "games shouldnt be won this way".
edit: the play around it strategy doesn't work all the time if you dont have fetches in your opening hand and are on the draw.
pre ktk pod era was the most interactive ive seen modern. as pod kept infect and burn down. shaun mclaren dong well at a pro tour is a good sign that the format is interactive and creature based the way wizards wants it.
If summer bloom gets hit I think It would be a good step
peace
I replied to this in the banlist discussion thread.
I voted "I don't want any cards banned right now", but if I had to pick a card in Modern that I really don't enjoy, it's Eidolon of the Great Revel.
In a format where most of the decent cards are 1-3 CMC, it seems like it might provide just a bit too much value, and Burn has gotten a lot of goodies recently. However, I'm not a Burn player, and I don't really enjoy playing against Burn, so there is some definite bias there.
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 voted "I don't want any cards banned right now", but if I had to pick a card in Modern that I really don't enjoy, it's Eidolon of the Great Revel.
In a format where most of the decent cards are 1-3 CMC, it seems like it might provide just a bit too much value, and Burn has gotten a lot of goodies recently. However, I'm not a Burn player, and I don't really enjoy playing against Burn, so there is some definite bias there.
You're going to enjoy burn even more once they splash blue for Day's Undoing.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
Just let the thread be what it is. Don't turn this into banlist thread #2. One is enough.
Seriously guys, it's in the OP. I keep coming back looking to read people's rationales, but most of the posts are criticism. This thread is for people to explain their answer, and criticism is likely causing self-censorship and stopping some voters from posting their thoughts.
As the mod said, please refrain from discussing the choices in this thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I'd say two not on this list: Rending Volley and Galvanic Blast. I think that Bolt should be the premier 1-mana red damage spell. I'd have also said Goblin Guide, but he's won me games (he was on the other side of the board; I don't play Burn).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Generation 15: The first time you see this, add it to your sig, but add 1 to the number. Call it a social experiment.
I'd say two not on this list: Rending Volley and Galvanic Blast. I think that Bolt should be the premier 1-mana red damage spell. I'd have also said Goblin Guide, but he's won me games (he was on the other side of the board; I don't play Burn).
Uh... Lightning Bolt still is the premier 1-mana red damage spell. Rending Volley is only capable of killing creatures (and only a particular subset of creatures, at that, forcing it to be a sideboard card) and Galvanic Blast is limited to Affinity.
This is like saying that Dispatch needs banning because Path to Exile should be the premier 1-mana White removal spell. It just doesn't make any sense.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
Except that they come into play tapped, in addition to bouncing lands. Without Amulet triggers to make use of them as soon as they come in, all you're doing is casting explosive vegetation on Turn 2, which is hardly gamebreaking.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I feel the format is coping with the danger posed by Bloom.dec, Twin.dec and Grishoalbrand right now and advocate no bannings (plus some unbannings). And I'm a person that's often quite happy with bannings, not someone that always opposes them on principle.
Twin is the one closest to warranting a brush with the banhammer but it hasn't crossed that line. If it does, Exarch should be the card to go - Twin will still be playable but weaker without it (unlike banning Twin which outright kills the deck).
If people start sideboarding Pithing Needle and Phyrexian Revoker and Grishoalbrand finds ways to overcome them and still put up results, then we can look at Nourishing Shoal, but that would be totally premature now. Likewise Amulet Bloom - hate cards exist and are not being widely played.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
Except that they come into play tapped, in addition to bouncing lands. Without Amulet triggers to make use of them as soon as they come in, all you're doing is casting explosive vegetation on Turn 2, which is hardly gamebreaking.
I don't see anything wrong with Amulet of Vigor. It's a cool card that has way more applications than just the Bloom decks and I think it has potential to inspire neat decks in the future. The issue with Amulet Bloom isn't amulet, it's Summer Bloom. Bloom is acting like Seething Song once did, accelerating things too quickly. Banning Bloom would let Amulet of Vigor remain for future neato deck building but also allow Amulet/Titan decks to stay alive. Banning Amulet would wreck that deck entirely but they can substitute Bloom for other things. I would hate to see modern become less diverse.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
Except that they come into play tapped, in addition to bouncing lands. Without Amulet triggers to make use of them as soon as they come in, all you're doing is casting explosive vegetation on Turn 2, which is hardly gamebreaking.
Except explosive vegetation comes down on turn 4 versus summer bloom coming down on turn 2? seems like a vast difference to me....
Like I said. there are many situations where having 2 mana on one card is very potent, and this is one of them. No one said it would be game breaking but a turn 3 titan is still a viable threat in modern. So I will say it again. if you want to slow down Amulet Bloom, you ban amulet of vigor. If you want to kill Amulet Bloom you ban Summer Bloom. Any bloom player will tell you the same.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
Except that they come into play tapped, in addition to bouncing lands. Without Amulet triggers to make use of them as soon as they come in, all you're doing is casting explosive vegetation on Turn 2, which is hardly gamebreaking.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
Except that they come into play tapped, in addition to bouncing lands. Without Amulet triggers to make use of them as soon as they come in, all you're doing is casting explosive vegetation on Turn 2, which is hardly gamebreaking.
Except explosive vegetation comes down on turn 4 versus summer bloom coming down on turn 2? seems like a vast difference to me....
Like I said. there are many situations where having 2 mana on one card is very potent, and this is one of them. No one said it would be game breaking but a turn 3 titan is still a viable threat in modern. So I will say it again. if you want to slow down Amulet Bloom, you ban amulet of vigor. If you want to kill Amulet Bloom you ban Summer Bloom. Any bloom player will tell you the same.
I've played the deck since its inception. Amulet of Vigor is the reason the deck works. Do you know what a turn 3 Prime Time does in that scenario? Fetches two tapped lands, eats removal, and you die the following turn to Twin or Jund/Junk beats. Prime Time is entirely useless without Amulet of Vigor, because Amulet allows you to find the lands that give it haste to actually generate card advantage in the small openings when your opponent isn't pushing on your throat.
Summer Bloom is nothing more than a Harrow or Explosive Vegetation without Amulet. Amulet fuels the early turn mana, fuels the ability of Primeval Titan to chain together activations which is how the deck gets ahead.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Step 2- Watch Goyf shoot up to $500+ each
Step 3- Die to BGx constantly
Step 4-Unban Tron and apologize to it
You have fun in your Goyf-fest, I will just switch to EDH, see what the fuss is about
But to respond to some of the especially outrageous claims:
In what world does "got two Top 8's at recent Grand Prix" translate to "aren't doing well"?
A deck has unfavorable matchups! Oh no! That's... normal!
No, others don't rise. The problem is that while decks like Collected Company may get a benefit from the loss of Tron and Amulet Bloom, so do Jund/Junk. There isn't a closing of the gap, the gap is just as big.
You also say “UR/x” decks as if those would be a thing in this hypothetical format. They lose Blood Moon and, in the case of Twin in particular, lose decks that were positive matchups for them, leaving them facing off against Jund/Junk, which now no longer has to fear Blood Moon and has positive matchups against them (BGx loves to play against Twin and is no slouch against Delver either, particularly now that neither have Blood Moon). And now that it no longer has to worry about Tron, it can drop the Tron hate and use it to be even better against other decks.
And UWR Control or Gifts suddenly getting good? Please. The removal of these sets doesn't actually help out those archetypes because it doesn't get rid of the actual weaknesses they had. Tron may have been a problematic matchup for them, but Tron is also only 5% of the meta. A deck you face once every 20 rounds isn't a deck that is keeping anything out of the format.
Maybe some decks will get better if they're good enough against BGx, because BGx is so good that having a favorable matchup could be enough for a deck to do well. But it isn't a healthy format if you just have a top deck and some decks that are good against that top deck. That's just Modern in late 2012 or the Treasure Cruise era... actually, worse than the Treasure Cruise era, because at least the Treasure Cruise era had two very different top decks.
Also, I can't help but notice you completely ignored my question of what decks are supposedly being kept out by Blood Moon. Probably because there aren't any such decks. Some decks might be hurt by it, but smart playing lets you play around it.
Force of Will is terrible against any fair deck. I play Miracles in Legacy and I side out FoW quite a bit. The reason blue is so heavily played in Legacy is because of Brainstorm, Ponder, Preordain, Spell Pierce/Flusterstorm/Daze/Delver/etc., DtT/Jace/S&T. None of these things except spell pierce which isn't that good in modern, exist in the format.
In other words, Force would be an excellent police tool against the combo decks for control decks which would do a lot to balance the format. It would be terrible against the fair-decks, but that's not too much of a problem since most MB's for UWx control decks are pretty well suited against fair-decks (50/50 for the most part). I don't actually advocate for Force in Modern since the format would be better off with counterspell instead (Force would make twin too powerful imho).
Either put counterspell in the format, or give D&T the ability to police the combo decks in the format with MoR and Rishadan Port type cards. Modern is way too infested with linear/combo decks, since the tools to police them are bad/narrow.
Just let the thread be what it is. Don't turn this into banlist thread #2. One is enough.
Also.... C-c-c-c-c-c-combo breaker!
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I agree this is not where to argue about this so ill be done after this last comment.
1. I stand by bbds argument that tron and bloom push out some fair decks that would be great in this format as this player
has more games under his belt and I trust his experience. he plays more than coco decks
2. bad matchups are one thing, unwinnable matchups is another
3. junk and jund rise from a tron bloom ban yes But so does burn and coco decks and uwr decks which can fight bgx and keep it in check just fine...
4. modern is the most aggressive/linear ive ever seen it. would it hurt to kill bloom and tron and allow decks like uwr and coco to rise? think about this a more interactive format. and to answer your blood moon question: you shouldn't get punished for playing a 3 colour deck and blood moon does just this. its one thing to get your manland hit with fulminator or getting tec edged out of a mana colour. but to just lose to a 3 mana enchantment is just stupid and isnt good for innovation. "games shouldnt be won this way".
edit: the play around it strategy doesn't work all the time if you dont have fetches in your opening hand and are on the draw.
pre ktk pod era was the most interactive ive seen modern. as pod kept infect and burn down. shaun mclaren dong well at a pro tour is a good sign that the format is interactive and creature based the way wizards wants it.
If summer bloom gets hit I think It would be a good step
peace
decks playing:
none
That's nothing new. It's the same at every single poll. People are mad that buying a playset means that they are down $600.
In a format where most of the decent cards are 1-3 CMC, it seems like it might provide just a bit too much value, and Burn has gotten a lot of goodies recently. However, I'm not a Burn player, and I don't really enjoy playing against Burn, so there is some definite bias there.
You're going to enjoy burn even more once they splash blue for Day's Undoing.
"It's oppressive to green creatures! I want to run Kalonian Tusker in a top tier deck!"
Just let the thread be what it is. Don't turn this into banlist thread #2. One is enough.
Seriously guys, it's in the OP. I keep coming back looking to read people's rationales, but most of the posts are criticism. This thread is for people to explain their answer, and criticism is likely causing self-censorship and stopping some voters from posting their thoughts.
As the mod said, please refrain from discussing the choices in this thread.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
This is like saying that Dispatch needs banning because Path to Exile should be the premier 1-mana White removal spell. It just doesn't make any sense.
You have it backwards. Amulet of Vigor being banned would slow the deck down but not kill it. Summer bloom being banned would make the deck laughably bad.
I think YOU have it reversed. Without Amulet, there is no point to the Ravnica bounces, and therefore no extra mana generation. Summer would just give the deck a mediocre ramp spell without Amulet.
Besides, neither needs to go. Hive Mind is the only justifiable ban. If you ban the deck because of a Turn 2 Prime Time, then you need to ban Infect as well.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
I dont think either needs to be ban, but no I do not have it reversed. Bloom players are just as likely to value bloom as they are to combo bloom. The reason to keep the bounce lands is having one card that produces two mana.
Except that they come into play tapped, in addition to bouncing lands. Without Amulet triggers to make use of them as soon as they come in, all you're doing is casting explosive vegetation on Turn 2, which is hardly gamebreaking.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Twin is the one closest to warranting a brush with the banhammer but it hasn't crossed that line. If it does, Exarch should be the card to go - Twin will still be playable but weaker without it (unlike banning Twin which outright kills the deck).
If people start sideboarding Pithing Needle and Phyrexian Revoker and Grishoalbrand finds ways to overcome them and still put up results, then we can look at Nourishing Shoal, but that would be totally premature now. Likewise Amulet Bloom - hate cards exist and are not being widely played.
Except explosive vegetation comes down on turn 4 versus summer bloom coming down on turn 2? seems like a vast difference to me....
Turn one: Gemstone Mine
Turn two: Forest(or any untapped land), Summer Bloom, Simic Growth Chamber(bounce mine), Gruul Turf(bounce other land), Forest or Gemstone Mine.
Turn three: Primeval Titan
Like I said. there are many situations where having 2 mana on one card is very potent, and this is one of them. No one said it would be game breaking but a turn 3 titan is still a viable threat in modern. So I will say it again. if you want to slow down Amulet Bloom, you ban amulet of vigor. If you want to kill Amulet Bloom you ban Summer Bloom. Any bloom player will tell you the same.
I've played the deck since its inception. Amulet of Vigor is the reason the deck works. Do you know what a turn 3 Prime Time does in that scenario? Fetches two tapped lands, eats removal, and you die the following turn to Twin or Jund/Junk beats. Prime Time is entirely useless without Amulet of Vigor, because Amulet allows you to find the lands that give it haste to actually generate card advantage in the small openings when your opponent isn't pushing on your throat.
Summer Bloom is nothing more than a Harrow or Explosive Vegetation without Amulet. Amulet fuels the early turn mana, fuels the ability of Primeval Titan to chain together activations which is how the deck gets ahead.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."