If Wizards believes that a card needs to be banned from Amulet Bloom, it will be Amulet itself. It won't be Summer Bloom, it won't be Hive Mind, and it won't be Prime Time.
Wizards ALWAYS bans the enabler whenever a card or deck becomes a problem. That's why GSZ is banned and not Dryad Arbor. That's why Cloudpost is banned and not Vesuva or Glimmerpost. That's why Birthing Pod is banned and not a bunch of creatures that piggyback off of Pod. They would follow the same pattern by banning Amulet of Vigor instead of other cards. It would kill the deck, but that's sort of the point. The last thing you want is to ban a card and to still have the deck causing problems because you banned the wrong card.
Here is a weird question: Would ABloom be a fair deck without Primeval Titan? Not a ban proposal, more of a thinking exercise.
This is my thinking. Ban Primeval Titan and make it play like Tron or other ramp decks. I think this way the deck can still be played, just have to change a bit. Might have to hit Hivemind also but I dont see Wotc killing the deck all together right away.
If Amulet was on Wotc's radar before yesterday, I expect a ban from the deck in 2 weeks. Its possible they give it another 3 months if its been under the radar even with all the talk from pros and such.
I can not see Wotc banning or nerfing one combo deck and allowing another one into the format with an unban in SotM. I understand they do different things but its still a combo deck.
Someone mentioned a Vesuva ban and unbanning Cloudpost. Wotc would have to ban Thespian's Stage also. So all we could play is 8 post.
Here is a weird question: Would ABloom be a fair deck without Primeval Titan? Not a ban proposal, more of a thinking exercise.
This is my thinking. Ban Primeval Titan and make it play like Tron or other ramp decks. I think this way the deck can still be played, just have to change a bit. Might have to hit Hivemind also but I dont see Wotc killing the deck all together right away.
If Amulet was on Wotc's radar before yesterday, I expect a ban from the deck in 2 weeks. Its possible they give it another 3 months if its been under the radar even with all the talk from pros and such.
I can not see Wotc banning or nerfing one combo deck and allowing another one into the format with an unban in SotM. I understand they do different things but its still a combo deck.
Someone mentioned a Vesuva ban and unbanning Cloudpost. Wotc would have to ban Thespian's Stage also. So all we could play is 8 post.
I suspect <something> will be banned from bloom. It's just too fast and non-interactive.
The only unban I'm expecting is Stoneforge Mystic.
The Amulet combo is a 4 card combo. You need Amulet, a karoo, Summer Bloom, and a Titan in order to get the turn 2 Titan play. If any of these cards get countered or Thoughtseized, the combo fails to execute.
Doesn't the deck have fewer Top 8s than Affinity, Twin, or burn? Am I wrong here? What am I missing? I can't help but get the impression that psychologically, it's more frustrating to lose to Primeval Titan than Arcbound Ravager even though they're winning at about the same speed. When you lose to Affinity, you just wish you drew your Ancient Grudge, but when you lose to Amulet, it feels unfair, and you want a ban.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
These days, some wizards are finding they have a little too much deck left at the end of their $$$.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
I never said amulet was an unbeatable deck, I said a turn 2 titan on the play is nearly unbeatable for any deck in the modern format
Hivemind isn't the issue. I'm a little bored hearing about summer bloom, you guys can play 4 Asuzas, that way the average interactive deck can stop you from ramping up storm style, the ability to interact is why a two card combo like splinter twin isn't an issue (that, and being turn 4)
I don't think a turn 4 titan with mana is unreasonable, a turn 2 titan is
I was kinda split on amulet before yesterday, seeing a turn 2 titan go through a Remand with 16 mana is utterly broken
I get it, that's not a normal hand, but it does it just enough to be a problem, and if storm is any indication, something is going to go.
It's one thing when we have people on reddit and forums here crying about it, but the pros are strongly vocing their opinions too
While Bobby was a little classless with his speech, he hurt that deck as a representative winner of that deck and talking about its inherent power and how unfair it is
The Amulet combo is a 4 card combo. You need Amulet, a karoo, Summer Bloom, and a Titan in order to get the turn 2 Titan play. If any of these cards get countered or Thoughtseized, the combo fails to execute.
Doesn't the deck have fewer Top 8s than Affinity, Twin, or burn? Am I wrong here? What am I missing? I can't help but get the impression that psychologically, it's more frustrating to lose to Primeval Titan than Arcbound Ravager even though they're winning at about the same speed. When you lose to Affinity, you just wish you drew your Ancient Grudge, but when you lose to Amulet, it feels unfair, and you want a ban.
Thought seize may not actually be enough. I've had games where I had thought-seize and still lost due to the land transmute.
I feel like amulet is in a relatively fair place, and the only card in it that should even be considered for a ban is hive mind. Any deck or enough decks should be, in theory, able to kill a primeval Titan with a terminate, path, double bolt, vapor snag, or interrupt it with hand hate.
The problem card is hive mind. It's one of the hardest types of permanent in modern to deal with in the early game (enchantment) because the only main deck enchantment hate I can think of is abrupt decay, which it dodges. It comes down too quickly for a counterspell in the ideal scenario, and when your opponent plays it they win the game in a way most decks can't interact with at all.
Banning hive mind is one of the few cards you could ban out of amulet bloom without completely killing the deck.
I also agree with the poster above me on his point of is the deck really unfair? Or does it just feel unfair?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Come watch me stream over at my twitch channel. I play Loam Pox, Ad Nauseam, and jank in modern on MTGO.
I feel like amulet is in a relatively fair place, and the only card in it that should even be considered for a ban is hive mind. Any deck or enough decks should be, in theory, able to kill a primeval Titan with a terminate, path, double bolt, vapor snag, or interrupt it with hand hate.
The problem card is hive mind. It's one of the hardest types of permanent in modern to deal with in the early game (enchantment) because the only main deck enchantment hate I can think of is abrupt decay, which it dodges. It comes down too quickly for a counterspell in the ideal scenario, and when your opponent plays it they win the game in a way most decks can't interact with at all.
Banning hive mind is one of the few cards you could ban out of amulet bloom without completely killing the deck.
At first I was inclined to agree. But after continuing coverage of the deck... terminate isn't even good enough if they go off turn 2 and they are on the play.
If Wizards believes that a card needs to be banned from Amulet Bloom, it will be Amulet itself. It won't be Summer Bloom, it won't be Hive Mind, and it won't be Prime Time.
Wizards ALWAYS bans the enabler whenever a card or deck becomes a problem. That's why GSZ is banned and not Dryad Arbor. That's why Cloudpost is banned and not Vesuva or Glimmerpost. That's why Birthing Pod is banned and not a bunch of creatures that piggyback off of Pod. They would follow the same pattern by banning Amulet of Vigor instead of other cards. It would kill the deck, but that's sort of the point. The last thing you want is to ban a card and to still have the deck causing problems because you banned the wrong card.
You omit some of the most obvious counterexamples from this. Wizards didn't ban Grapeshot from Storm back during PT Philly. They banned Rite. They didn't ban it again in 2013. They banned Seething Song. Indeed, they even explicitly state this disposition to not kill a fast combo deck in the announcement: "The DCI looked for a card that was very important to the turn-three wins but not one of the cards that make this deck unique."
I think you get into trouble when you apply ban rationale for decks that weren't turn four violators to decks that are. Summer Bloom seems like the obvious ban because it follows the "ban ritual" model Wizards has taken in the past, and because it kills the deck less than Amulet of Vigor. It also has existing, worse replacements in Explore and Journey of Discovery, which I'm sure Wizards will mention or refer to in their announcement.
The Amulet combo is a 4 card combo. You need Amulet, a karoo, Summer Bloom, and a Titan in order to get the turn 2 Titan play. If any of these cards get countered or Thoughtseized, the combo fails to execute.
Doesn't the deck have fewer Top 8s than Affinity, Twin, or burn? Am I wrong here? What am I missing? I can't help but get the impression that psychologically, it's more frustrating to lose to Primeval Titan than Arcbound Ravager even though they're winning at about the same speed. When you lose to Affinity, you just wish you drew your Ancient Grudge, but when you lose to Amulet, it feels unfair, and you want a ban.
None of those decks would be banned under the turn four rule. Bloom doesn't need to be a Tier 1 format pillar to fall under that rule. It just needs to be "top-tier", and it is definitely top-tier based on its metagame shares throughout 2015 and its T8/T16 history (three T8s in GPs/PTs, three T16s, and three SCG T8s).
People need to remember all the aspects of the turn four rule if we are to have this conversation about Bloom. I'm just going to paste my article on it here so we can see where the rule comes from and how it's applied. http://modernnexus.com/understanding-the-turn-four-rule/
Being able to kill PrimeTime is not the point here. Firstly it generates insane value through ramping even if its removed on the spot. Secondly, if you remove it hey just go on and grab anoter pact and start the process again.Titan serves as finisher,a tutor and a ramp spell, it's not just a dumb beater cast on t3 that needs removal.
Also: A titan can get another pact via Tolaria West
Hive Mind is the only truly unfair part of Amulet Bloom because tons of decks don't have answers in their colors to deal with Hive Mind, and even when they do, Bloom can spam Pact of Negation on them. Once it resolves the game is almost always immediately over with no chance for a comeback (outside of Angel's Grace which exactly 1 deck can realistically play). Turn 2/3 Titan is brutal but can still be dealt with in most colors by maindeckable removal and thus allows the game to have a chance to progress.
Bro, you smiling as you wrote that?
What deck can handle a turn 2 Titan? Let's say I path to Exile your Titan on your turn 2. Turn 3 you tutor another Titan, drop Titan, get more lands, tutor Titan number 3, two Titans swing turn 3 with haste, let's say in some world, Path to Exile number 2 and 3 are in my hand. Kill them. Turn 4 you tutor the last Titan up, you swing for 24 damage? Am I going to win?
**** no
Playing Titan on turn 2 is a soft-lock win, no deck is coming back from that except an Infect player who's going to Glisten elf into the absolute nut hand
Stop it
Titan is not easy to interact with because the next turn you're most likely swinging with two new titans the next turn. No deck is coming back from a turn 2 Titan drop
The only way I'm winning is if my Bloom opponent forgot to pay that pact cost during his upkeep
I'm trying to figure out how your hypothetical even works. So first we have the turn 2 amulet, karoo, summer bloom, titan (not pact for titan since we're playing more titans turn 3 mind you). Obviously this is a standard bloom hand, happens every game. We've triple karoo'ed and bounced the turn 1 land, then played titan and presumably gotten growth chamber + t-west to transmute for a summoner's pact. Then you path, giving us another basic. So we end the turn with two karoos and a basic, 5 mana. Got it.
Now we're going into turn three. We have five mana and a least one land bounced back to hand. We're going to pact to get a titan, then use that titan to tutor for another titan. Let's try. We'll play the land we bounced turn 2 and pact for a titan, play titan and get growth chamber t-west to transmute for another titan. Wait, we're out of mana. And our titan doesn't have haste. We need another amulet! Ok, standard operating procedure, bloom clearly always has 2 amulets by turn three. But we need to cast it! So we need another karoo to play turn three to get up to 7 mana to cast our other amulet. Now let's try. Damn, still three mana short. Ok, so no we need another summer bloom in addition to the second amulet, or we need three amulets.
But you've killed both titans regardless, what luck, so we have to go to turn 4. We paid 8 mana for two pacts and obviously drew the fourth titan, since our turn three hasty titan play required us to get boros-stronghold rather than another t-west for the last titan (if we had three amulets why didn't we go for the third titan turn three? Oh well, bloom titan can handle sloppy plays, it's so easy to play that it wins anyway). We need to spend 14 mana total to get this titan into play after paying for all our pacts, but with three amulets that's not too hard. So we play our fourth naturally drawn titan with three amulets out, get vesuva to copy the slayer's stronghold and a gruul turf for the triple red. We already have the boros garrison in play and don't run two vesuvas, but hopefully we can find two more white mana from somewhere. Now we swing with our 12/6 hasty titan and get our sunhome and a gemstone mine to kill you. In our scenario naturally drew or started with three amulets, two titans, 1-2 summer blooms, 1-2 karoos, and our opponent wisely went after our titans instead of our amulets, lands, or hand. This clearly happens every game. I am, of course, lying.
This is ridiculous hyperbole and it needs to stop. Yes, amulet got the nut draw on camera. Actually, it got the ultra nut draw - the v-clique which was supposed to take away his dig to get an amulet straight up found him an amulet for free. Even then he was dead to BBD drawing twin, but he drew blanks. Second game, yes he got a titan in past remand. It was have been trivial for him to die to blood moon if BBD had or drew it, but he drew blanks. It happens. It's unfortunate that it happened on camera, so that the masses get out there pitchforks and assume that this is how every game of twin vs bloom plays out.
Also, I love Cedric Phillips but he needs to calm the **** down. When infect kills on turn 2 on camera it's "hey, bad beats, this is modern sometimes this happens." When amulet gets down a titan turn two and doesn't even win until several turns later, it's all aboard the ban-wagon. Let's have some consistency man.
So you don't feel bad about someone casting 3 titans turn 3 against you but you go crazy over hivemind? Hivemind isn't the issue with Amulet, it's the speed of the deck. That's why Summer bloom has to go.
If we keep assuming that bloom always has 3 amulets, I'm going to start assuming infect always has three mutagenic growths, tron always has three tron peices, griselbrand always has everything, burn always has 3 goblin guides, and jund always has TS into bob into lilly into double goyf. With that in mind, my opinion on the format is that we should ban everything.
EDIT:
To keep productive conversation going, as a bloom player I personally support a hive mind ban. Titans can be dealt with. It's not easy, but that's kinda what makes the deck good. Turn three Karn isn't easy to deal with either. Hive mind requires you to interact with their hand or interact on the stack, something which a number of decks (basically anything not running black or blue) are incapable of doing. It's won me games I didn't deserve. It feels cheesy, and I think is the main source of a lot of ill will towards the deck. Further, banning hive mind allows the deck to continue to function. It's possible that losing hive minds allows maindeck Hornet Queen and maybe something else, pushing bloom more towards a midrange ramp deck than pure combo deck. And I think that would be ok.
Also, stoneforge can come off. People grossly overestimate how good she is, especially in a format with far more removal than legacy and without access to Jitte. She's great, I'd love to play her, but people in this thread are saying stoneforge decks would be 40% of the PT and that's absurd. Delver didn't get that, and it was playing ANCESTRAL RECALL. AV can come off. Control needs all the help it can get, and honestly I don't think even AV is enough to push it over the top. AV is an ok control card which helps control in the long game but does NOTHING to address control's biggest problem in this format, which is that you can't go long against Tron. If you want to talk about decks warping the meta, can we talk about the fact that one deck basically makes an entire archetype tier 2? Yes, grixis control is a thing as long as you fade tron all day. And given that a trained monkey can pilot tron and it's relatively inexpensive, fading tron has become impossible where I'm from.
Hive Mind is the only truly unfair part of Amulet Bloom because tons of decks don't have answers in their colors to deal with Hive Mind, and even when they do, Bloom can spam Pact of Negation on them. Once it resolves the game is almost always immediately over with no chance for a comeback (outside of Angel's Grace which exactly 1 deck can realistically play). Turn 2/3 Titan is brutal but can still be dealt with in most colors by maindeckable removal and thus allows the game to have a chance to progress.
Bro, you smiling as you wrote that?
What deck can handle a turn 2 Titan? Let's say I path to Exile your Titan on your turn 2. Turn 3 you tutor another Titan, drop Titan, get more lands, tutor Titan number 3, two Titans swing turn 3 with haste, let's say in some world, Path to Exile number 2 and 3 are in my hand. Kill them. Turn 4 you tutor the last Titan up, you swing for 24 damage? Am I going to win?
**** no
Playing Titan on turn 2 is a soft-lock win, no deck is coming back from that except an Infect player who's going to Glisten elf into the absolute nut hand
Stop it
Titan is not easy to interact with because the next turn you're most likely swinging with two new titans the next turn. No deck is coming back from a turn 2 Titan drop
The only way I'm winning is if my Bloom opponent forgot to pay that pact cost during his upkeep
I'm trying to figure out how your hypothetical even works. So first we have the turn 2 amulet, karoo, summer bloom, titan (not pact for titan since we're playing more titans turn 3 mind you). Obviously this is a standard bloom hand, happens every game. We've triple karoo'ed and bounced the turn 1 land, then played titan and presumably gotten growth chamber + t-west to transmute for a summoner's pact. Then you path, giving us another basic. So we end the turn with two karoos and a basic, 5 mana. Got it.
Now we're going into turn three. We have five mana and a least one land bounced back to hand. We're going to pact to get a titan, then use that titan to tutor for another titan. Let's try. We'll play the land we bounced turn 2 and pact for a titan, play titan and get growth chamber t-west to transmute for another titan. Wait, we're out of mana. And our titan doesn't have haste. We need another amulet! Ok, standard operating procedure, bloom clearly always has 2 amulets by turn three. But we need to cast it! So we need another karoo to play turn three to get up to 7 mana to cast our other amulet. Now let's try. Damn, still three mana short. Ok, so no we need another summer bloom in addition to the second amulet, or we need three amulets.
But you've killed both titans regardless, what luck, so we have to go to turn 4. We paid 8 mana for two pacts and obviously drew the fourth titan, since our turn three hasty titan play required us to get boros-stronghold rather than another t-west for the last titan (if we had three amulets why didn't we go for the third titan turn three? Oh well, bloom titan can handle sloppy plays, it's so easy to play that it wins anyway). We need to spend 14 mana total to get this titan into play after paying for all our pacts, but with three amulets that's not too hard. So we play our fourth naturally drawn titan with three amulets out, get vesuva to copy the slayer's stronghold and a gruul turf for the triple red. We already have the boros garrison in play and don't run two vesuvas, but hopefully we can find two more white mana from somewhere. Now we swing with our 12/6 hasty titan and get our sunhome and a gemstone mine to kill you. In our scenario naturally drew or started with three amulets, two titans, 1-2 summer blooms, 1-2 karoos, and our opponent wisely went after our titans instead of our amulets, lands, or hand. This clearly happens every game. I am, of course, lying.
This is ridiculous hyperbole and it needs to stop. Yes, amulet got the nut draw on camera. Actually, it got the ultra nut draw - the v-clique which was supposed to take away his dig to get an amulet straight up found him an amulet for free. Even then he was dead to BBD drawing twin, but he drew blanks. Second game, yes he got a titan in past remand. It was have been trivial for him to die to blood moon if BBD had or drew it, but he drew blanks. It happens. It's unfortunate that it happened on camera, so that the masses get out there pitchforks and assume that this is how every game of twin vs bloom plays out.
Also, I love Cedric Phillips but he needs to calm the **** down. When infect kills on turn 2 on camera it's "hey, bad beats, this is modern sometimes this happens." When amulet gets down a titan turn two and doesn't even win until several turns later, it's all aboard the ban-wagon. Let's have some consistency man.
So you don't feel bad about someone casting 3 titans turn 3 against you but you go crazy over hivemind? Hivemind isn't the issue with Amulet, it's the speed of the deck. That's why Summer bloom has to go.
If we keep assuming that bloom always has 3 amulets, I'm going to start assuming infect always has three mutagenic growths, tron always has three tron peices, griselbrand always has everything, burn always has 3 goblin guides, and jund always has TS into bob into lilly into double goyf. With that in mind, my opinion on the format is that we should ban everything.
There are a few things wrong with your assumptions.
A) Infect will never win turn 2 through counter magic and/or removal (if you don't misplay against it). Bloom can win through even counter magic // removal (though it is still difficult to do).
B) When you have the counter magic... and still can't stop your opponent from going off... that's not called drawing a blank. That's called drawing OK and it not being good enough. "Blank" would be a hand that has zero interaction.
I don't think that you understand the deck - if you ban any of the key combo pieces, the deck is gone. Hive mind is the only thing that can be removed without the deck becoming super inconsistent.
I don't think you understand. Hive Mind isn't the issue with the deck at all. The main issue is dying to turn 2/3 titans. The deck needs a ban on it's speed. That's the issue. Banning out one of it's accelerators won't kill the deck. It will slow it down a lot but it won't kill it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
[quote from="Magicman657 »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/617663-current-modern-banlist-discussion-9-28-2015-update?comment=6752"]Hive Mind is the only truly unfair part of Amulet Bloom because tons of decks don't have answers in their colors to deal with Hive Mind, and even when they do, Bloom can spam Pact of Negation on them. Once it resolves the game is almost always immediately over with no chance for a comeback (outside of Angel's Grace which exactly 1 deck can realistically play). Turn 2/3 Titan is brutal but can still be dealt with in most colors by maindeckable removal and thus allows the game to have a chance to progress.
<snip>
There are a few things wrong with your assumptions.
A) Infect will never win turn 2 through counter magic and/or removal (if you don't misplay against it). Bloom can win through even counter magic // removal (though it is still difficult to do).
B) When you have the counter magic... and still can't stop your opponent from going off... that's not called drawing a blank. That's called drawing OK and it not being good enough. "Blank" would be a hand that has zero interaction.
To your first point: first turn fetch glistener elf, turn 2 fetch, mut mut mut groundswell/become immense with apostle's blessing or dispel in hand. I mean it's unlikely, sure, but it happens. Also, infect rarely goes for a turn 2 kill unless you know your opponent can't interact (tron game one, for example). They don't need to when they can kill turn three with much more protection. I would suspect that bloom has more turn 2 kills on average than infect, but infect has far more turn three kills and more kills before turn 4 overall.
To your second point: the bloom player had the nuts. It happens. BBD drew just ok, as you said. He was still able to keep the titan in check with his tappers for several more turns and had plenty of opportunity to find a twin and win on the spot. He didn't. That's what I meant by drawing blank.
IF they ban summer bloom OR amulet, the deck will not be competitive enough to be playable. Its had top-8s and what-not, but it's not THAT oppressive, its hated more for its speed and how hard it is to interact with. So, if you take away the speed, it's just hard to interact with - but it's not killing quick. So they'll be no reason to play amulet (as it's not THAT good now, it's just annoying to play against). Tolaria West is another option that I think would all-but kill the deck.
Guys, we need to stop talking about how Amulet Bloom "isn't oppressive" as some argument against its banning. The deck doesn't have to be "oppressive" to violate the turn four rule. It just has to be top-tier and too consistent. Bloom's performance over 2015 definitely solidifies it as a top-tier deck (especially compared to Storm), and its record in my own calculations and in the qualitative experience of most players probably puts it in the "too consistent" bracket. All of this strongly points to a ban in my view of the format's history.
As for the banning in question, it's either going to be Hive Mind (unlikely) or Summer Bloom (more likely). Bloom is effectively a ritual and we all know how Wizards has treated those spells in past announcements.
Wizards is not a game which needs Nerfing. Stop thinking they will ban suttle cards that help a deck. They will directly ban cards that make a deck broken. That's why rituals were banned in storm, why GSZ was banned, why cloudpost was banned. I expect amulet itself to be banned. Banning anything like primeval titan or summer bloom is just like asking to ban simic growth chamber.
Hive Mind is the only truly unfair part of Amulet Bloom because tons of decks don't have answers in their colors to deal with Hive Mind, and even when they do, Bloom can spam Pact of Negation on them. Once it resolves the game is almost always immediately over with no chance for a comeback (outside of Angel's Grace which exactly 1 deck can realistically play). Turn 2/3 Titan is brutal but can still be dealt with in most colors by maindeckable removal and thus allows the game to have a chance to progress.
Bro, you smiling as you wrote that?
What deck can handle a turn 2 Titan? Let's say I path to Exile your Titan on your turn 2. Turn 3 you tutor another Titan, drop Titan, get more lands, tutor Titan number 3, two Titans swing turn 3 with haste, let's say in some world, Path to Exile number 2 and 3 are in my hand. Kill them. Turn 4 you tutor the last Titan up, you swing for 24 damage? Am I going to win?
**** no
Playing Titan on turn 2 is a soft-lock win, no deck is coming back from that except an Infect player who's going to Glisten elf into the absolute nut hand
Stop it
Titan is not easy to interact with because the next turn you're most likely swinging with two new titans the next turn. No deck is coming back from a turn 2 Titan drop
The only way I'm winning is if my Bloom opponent forgot to pay that pact cost during his upkeep
I've won after pathing the Titan that gets played and hasted turn 2. Multiple times actually.
What you're describing is a nut draw and should not be a decider on what gets banned. Casting a Titan turn 2 and 2 Titans turn 3 requires absolutely perfect cards - what fast deck can't win on turn 3 with a perfect setup?
Wizards is not a game which needs Nerfing. Stop thinking they will ban suttle cards that help a deck. They will directly ban cards that make a deck broken. That's why rituals were banned in storm, why GSZ was banned, why cloudpost was banned. I expect amulet itself to be banned. Banning anything like primeval titan or summer bloom is just like asking to ban simic growth chamber.
I keep seeing people say this, and keep reminding them of both the Rite of Flame and Seething Song bans (which you actually mention here). These were glaring examples where Wizards had a broken turn turn three combo deck winning off a single storm card in Grapeshot. Yet, they didn't ban Grapeshot either time. They banned the ritual that made the deck too fast. Why wouldn't they ban the ritual in this deck too?
You guys keep saying that Amulet should be banned because Wizards likes to ban enablers and not win conditions but Summer Bloom IS the enabler for the deck. It's a much more broken card than Amulet is. Think about it. What tends to be the common denominator among broken combo decks? Fast mana. Summer Bloom is fast mana, it's basically Fastbond for 1 extra mana. Banning Summer Bloom is extremely consistent with what Wizards has banned from Storm decks in the past (Rite of Flame, Seething Song).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Modern decks BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam UB Reanimator
And let's not forget that Bloom's nut draw loses to a single Spell Snare.
Untapped land that produces green
Simian spirit guide
Simian Spirit guide
Summer bloom
Bounceland that produces blue
Hive mind
Pact
Top deck pact of negation because your opponent went first to have a land in play
I think this works, although I think most lists dropped the guides.
Guys, we need to stop talking about how Amulet Bloom "isn't oppressive" as some argument against its banning. The deck doesn't have to be "oppressive" to violate the turn four rule. It just has to be top-tier and too consistent. Bloom's performance over 2015 definitely solidifies it as a top-tier deck (especially compared to Storm), and its record in my own calculations and in the qualitative experience of most players probably puts it in the "too consistent" bracket. All of this strongly points to a ban in my view of the format's history.
As for the banning in question, it's either going to be Hive Mind (unlikely) or Summer Bloom (more likely). Bloom is effectively a ritual and we all know how Wizards has treated those spells in past announcements.
While I have been a champion of the deck for months, I have to say that Cincy was the worst possible outcome for it. Not only did it win but the fashion in which he won on camera was pretty much the final nail in the coffin. I was probably 25/75 that it was going to be hit before this weekend, now I am 75/25 that they will kill it based on the bad PR alone. I still think that is a bad reason, but they will have to cave to the pro pressure at some point.
If anyone is worried about a ban and play the deck, I recommend trading/selling off the expensive pieces this week if you can't take the hit (Vesuva, Azusa, Amulets, GPacts). There will probably be players wanting to take the deck to Charlotte as a last hurrah and will be missing some key pieces. I agree that banning Bloom won't necessarily kill it though as you only really need Bloom for the early wins. After T2 or 3 Bloom becomes less vital and almost a dead draw in some circumstances. Banning Amulet will kill the deck completely though.
i agree with ktk on this one summer bloom is the obvious ban target.
Contrary to what people are saying banning summer bloom will not "kill the deck". Bloom can play many other cards that allow additional lands per turn.
Having to switch to any of these other cards will indeed slow the deck down making it worse but the deck can continue to exist in its current for but be slowed down a turn or 2. Which is the only reason this deck would catch a ban in the first place. (top tier deck and a turn 4 violator that cannot be interacted with easily)
None of those decks would be banned under the turn four rule. Bloom doesn't need to be a Tier 1 format pillar to fall under that rule. It just needs to be "top-tier", and it is definitely top-tier based on its metagame shares throughout 2015 and its T8/T16 history (three T8s in GPs/PTs, three T16s, and three SCG T8s).
You're underemphasizing one aspect of the rule. Here's what Matt Lauer said during the Rite of Flame ban:
Before Pro Tour Philadelphia, the DCI’s stated guideline for the Modern format was to avoid having decks that consistently win the game on turn three. With the results of the Pro Tour in, we are tweaking that goal to not having top-tier decks that consistently win on turn three (or earlier). We also have the goal of maintaining a diverse format.
Here's his statement during the Seething Song ban:
The DCI’s other primary goal for Modern is to not have top tier decks that frequently win on turn three (or earlier).
Note the use of the terms "consistent" and "frequent". Please show me the data that indicates that Amulet Bloom consistently wins on any turn numbered less than four in actual tournament results, omitting all use of that one player who was banned for palming cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
These days, some wizards are finding they have a little too much deck left at the end of their $$$.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
None of those decks would be banned under the turn four rule. Bloom doesn't need to be a Tier 1 format pillar to fall under that rule. It just needs to be "top-tier", and it is definitely top-tier based on its metagame shares throughout 2015 and its T8/T16 history (three T8s in GPs/PTs, three T16s, and three SCG T8s).
You're underemphasizing one aspect of the rule. Here's what Matt Lauer said during the Rite of Flame ban:
Before Pro Tour Philadelphia, the DCI’s stated guideline for the Modern format was to avoid having decks that consistently win the game on turn three. With the results of the Pro Tour in, we are tweaking that goal to not having top-tier decks that consistently win on turn three (or earlier). We also have the goal of maintaining a diverse format.
Here's his statement during the Seething Song ban:
The DCI’s other primary goal for Modern is to not have top tier decks that frequently win on turn three (or earlier).
Note the use of the terms "consistent" and "frequent". Please show me the data that indicates that Amulet Bloom consistently wins on any turn numbered less than four in actual tournament footage.
No, neither I nor others have missed that. In fact, I have a big set of hard data on Bloom's speed and am publishing it next week in my banlist article. Honestly, that data also shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone; there are way too many anecdotal stories about Bloom being too fast for the numbers to not align with the stories.
I'm a little annoyed that Bloom defenders keep moving the goal posts for the deck. For the longest time it was "Bloom isn't top-tier". Then it was "Bloom isn't consistently winning too fast" once the deck's tiering became indefensible. Then it was "Bloom isn't oppressive". I've played Modern since 2011 and I can't remember a time where so many players were so united against a combo deck and the combo deck survived a ban announcement. The last time the data aligned so well against a deck was Storm which, lo and behold, ate the 2013 ban.
You're absolutely right. Though I would prefer that hive mind be banned, there's no telling what summer bloom could enable in the future, so it is better to ban the enabler.
It just makes me sad because I like land shenanigans a lot. Like summers bloom and crucible of world's to recur tec edge three times.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Come watch me stream over at my twitch channel. I play Loam Pox, Ad Nauseam, and jank in modern on MTGO.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wizards ALWAYS bans the enabler whenever a card or deck becomes a problem. That's why GSZ is banned and not Dryad Arbor. That's why Cloudpost is banned and not Vesuva or Glimmerpost. That's why Birthing Pod is banned and not a bunch of creatures that piggyback off of Pod. They would follow the same pattern by banning Amulet of Vigor instead of other cards. It would kill the deck, but that's sort of the point. The last thing you want is to ban a card and to still have the deck causing problems because you banned the wrong card.
This is my thinking. Ban Primeval Titan and make it play like Tron or other ramp decks. I think this way the deck can still be played, just have to change a bit. Might have to hit Hivemind also but I dont see Wotc killing the deck all together right away.
If Amulet was on Wotc's radar before yesterday, I expect a ban from the deck in 2 weeks. Its possible they give it another 3 months if its been under the radar even with all the talk from pros and such.
I can not see Wotc banning or nerfing one combo deck and allowing another one into the format with an unban in SotM. I understand they do different things but its still a combo deck.
Someone mentioned a Vesuva ban and unbanning Cloudpost. Wotc would have to ban Thespian's Stage also. So all we could play is 8 post.
I suspect <something> will be banned from bloom. It's just too fast and non-interactive.
The only unban I'm expecting is Stoneforge Mystic.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
Doesn't the deck have fewer Top 8s than Affinity, Twin, or burn? Am I wrong here? What am I missing? I can't help but get the impression that psychologically, it's more frustrating to lose to Primeval Titan than Arcbound Ravager even though they're winning at about the same speed. When you lose to Affinity, you just wish you drew your Ancient Grudge, but when you lose to Amulet, it feels unfair, and you want a ban.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
Hivemind isn't the issue. I'm a little bored hearing about summer bloom, you guys can play 4 Asuzas, that way the average interactive deck can stop you from ramping up storm style, the ability to interact is why a two card combo like splinter twin isn't an issue (that, and being turn 4)
I don't think a turn 4 titan with mana is unreasonable, a turn 2 titan is
I was kinda split on amulet before yesterday, seeing a turn 2 titan go through a Remand with 16 mana is utterly broken
I get it, that's not a normal hand, but it does it just enough to be a problem, and if storm is any indication, something is going to go.
It's one thing when we have people on reddit and forums here crying about it, but the pros are strongly vocing their opinions too
While Bobby was a little classless with his speech, he hurt that deck as a representative winner of that deck and talking about its inherent power and how unfair it is
Thought seize may not actually be enough. I've had games where I had thought-seize and still lost due to the land transmute.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
The problem card is hive mind. It's one of the hardest types of permanent in modern to deal with in the early game (enchantment) because the only main deck enchantment hate I can think of is abrupt decay, which it dodges. It comes down too quickly for a counterspell in the ideal scenario, and when your opponent plays it they win the game in a way most decks can't interact with at all.
Banning hive mind is one of the few cards you could ban out of amulet bloom without completely killing the deck.
I also agree with the poster above me on his point of is the deck really unfair? Or does it just feel unfair?
At first I was inclined to agree. But after continuing coverage of the deck... terminate isn't even good enough if they go off turn 2 and they are on the play.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
You omit some of the most obvious counterexamples from this. Wizards didn't ban Grapeshot from Storm back during PT Philly. They banned Rite. They didn't ban it again in 2013. They banned Seething Song. Indeed, they even explicitly state this disposition to not kill a fast combo deck in the announcement: "The DCI looked for a card that was very important to the turn-three wins but not one of the cards that make this deck unique."
I think you get into trouble when you apply ban rationale for decks that weren't turn four violators to decks that are. Summer Bloom seems like the obvious ban because it follows the "ban ritual" model Wizards has taken in the past, and because it kills the deck less than Amulet of Vigor. It also has existing, worse replacements in Explore and Journey of Discovery, which I'm sure Wizards will mention or refer to in their announcement.
None of those decks would be banned under the turn four rule. Bloom doesn't need to be a Tier 1 format pillar to fall under that rule. It just needs to be "top-tier", and it is definitely top-tier based on its metagame shares throughout 2015 and its T8/T16 history (three T8s in GPs/PTs, three T16s, and three SCG T8s).
People need to remember all the aspects of the turn four rule if we are to have this conversation about Bloom. I'm just going to paste my article on it here so we can see where the rule comes from and how it's applied.
http://modernnexus.com/understanding-the-turn-four-rule/
Also: A titan can get another pact via Tolaria West
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
I'm trying to figure out how your hypothetical even works. So first we have the turn 2 amulet, karoo, summer bloom, titan (not pact for titan since we're playing more titans turn 3 mind you). Obviously this is a standard bloom hand, happens every game. We've triple karoo'ed and bounced the turn 1 land, then played titan and presumably gotten growth chamber + t-west to transmute for a summoner's pact. Then you path, giving us another basic. So we end the turn with two karoos and a basic, 5 mana. Got it.
Now we're going into turn three. We have five mana and a least one land bounced back to hand. We're going to pact to get a titan, then use that titan to tutor for another titan. Let's try. We'll play the land we bounced turn 2 and pact for a titan, play titan and get growth chamber t-west to transmute for another titan. Wait, we're out of mana. And our titan doesn't have haste. We need another amulet! Ok, standard operating procedure, bloom clearly always has 2 amulets by turn three. But we need to cast it! So we need another karoo to play turn three to get up to 7 mana to cast our other amulet. Now let's try. Damn, still three mana short. Ok, so no we need another summer bloom in addition to the second amulet, or we need three amulets.
But you've killed both titans regardless, what luck, so we have to go to turn 4. We paid 8 mana for two pacts and obviously drew the fourth titan, since our turn three hasty titan play required us to get boros-stronghold rather than another t-west for the last titan (if we had three amulets why didn't we go for the third titan turn three? Oh well, bloom titan can handle sloppy plays, it's so easy to play that it wins anyway). We need to spend 14 mana total to get this titan into play after paying for all our pacts, but with three amulets that's not too hard. So we play our fourth naturally drawn titan with three amulets out, get vesuva to copy the slayer's stronghold and a gruul turf for the triple red. We already have the boros garrison in play and don't run two vesuvas, but hopefully we can find two more white mana from somewhere. Now we swing with our 12/6 hasty titan and get our sunhome and a gemstone mine to kill you. In our scenario naturally drew or started with three amulets, two titans, 1-2 summer blooms, 1-2 karoos, and our opponent wisely went after our titans instead of our amulets, lands, or hand. This clearly happens every game. I am, of course, lying.
This is ridiculous hyperbole and it needs to stop. Yes, amulet got the nut draw on camera. Actually, it got the ultra nut draw - the v-clique which was supposed to take away his dig to get an amulet straight up found him an amulet for free. Even then he was dead to BBD drawing twin, but he drew blanks. Second game, yes he got a titan in past remand. It was have been trivial for him to die to blood moon if BBD had or drew it, but he drew blanks. It happens. It's unfortunate that it happened on camera, so that the masses get out there pitchforks and assume that this is how every game of twin vs bloom plays out.
Also, I love Cedric Phillips but he needs to calm the **** down. When infect kills on turn 2 on camera it's "hey, bad beats, this is modern sometimes this happens." When amulet gets down a titan turn two and doesn't even win until several turns later, it's all aboard the ban-wagon. Let's have some consistency man.
If we keep assuming that bloom always has 3 amulets, I'm going to start assuming infect always has three mutagenic growths, tron always has three tron peices, griselbrand always has everything, burn always has 3 goblin guides, and jund always has TS into bob into lilly into double goyf. With that in mind, my opinion on the format is that we should ban everything.
EDIT:
To keep productive conversation going, as a bloom player I personally support a hive mind ban. Titans can be dealt with. It's not easy, but that's kinda what makes the deck good. Turn three Karn isn't easy to deal with either. Hive mind requires you to interact with their hand or interact on the stack, something which a number of decks (basically anything not running black or blue) are incapable of doing. It's won me games I didn't deserve. It feels cheesy, and I think is the main source of a lot of ill will towards the deck. Further, banning hive mind allows the deck to continue to function. It's possible that losing hive minds allows maindeck Hornet Queen and maybe something else, pushing bloom more towards a midrange ramp deck than pure combo deck. And I think that would be ok.
Also, stoneforge can come off. People grossly overestimate how good she is, especially in a format with far more removal than legacy and without access to Jitte. She's great, I'd love to play her, but people in this thread are saying stoneforge decks would be 40% of the PT and that's absurd. Delver didn't get that, and it was playing ANCESTRAL RECALL. AV can come off. Control needs all the help it can get, and honestly I don't think even AV is enough to push it over the top. AV is an ok control card which helps control in the long game but does NOTHING to address control's biggest problem in this format, which is that you can't go long against Tron. If you want to talk about decks warping the meta, can we talk about the fact that one deck basically makes an entire archetype tier 2? Yes, grixis control is a thing as long as you fade tron all day. And given that a trained monkey can pilot tron and it's relatively inexpensive, fading tron has become impossible where I'm from.
There are a few things wrong with your assumptions.
A) Infect will never win turn 2 through counter magic and/or removal (if you don't misplay against it). Bloom can win through even counter magic // removal (though it is still difficult to do).
B) When you have the counter magic... and still can't stop your opponent from going off... that's not called drawing a blank. That's called drawing OK and it not being good enough. "Blank" would be a hand that has zero interaction.
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
I don't think you understand. Hive Mind isn't the issue with the deck at all. The main issue is dying to turn 2/3 titans. The deck needs a ban on it's speed. That's the issue. Banning out one of it's accelerators won't kill the deck. It will slow it down a lot but it won't kill it.
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
To your first point: first turn fetch glistener elf, turn 2 fetch, mut mut mut groundswell/become immense with apostle's blessing or dispel in hand. I mean it's unlikely, sure, but it happens. Also, infect rarely goes for a turn 2 kill unless you know your opponent can't interact (tron game one, for example). They don't need to when they can kill turn three with much more protection. I would suspect that bloom has more turn 2 kills on average than infect, but infect has far more turn three kills and more kills before turn 4 overall.
To your second point: the bloom player had the nuts. It happens. BBD drew just ok, as you said. He was still able to keep the titan in check with his tappers for several more turns and had plenty of opportunity to find a twin and win on the spot. He didn't. That's what I meant by drawing blank.
Guys, we need to stop talking about how Amulet Bloom "isn't oppressive" as some argument against its banning. The deck doesn't have to be "oppressive" to violate the turn four rule. It just has to be top-tier and too consistent. Bloom's performance over 2015 definitely solidifies it as a top-tier deck (especially compared to Storm), and its record in my own calculations and in the qualitative experience of most players probably puts it in the "too consistent" bracket. All of this strongly points to a ban in my view of the format's history.
As for the banning in question, it's either going to be Hive Mind (unlikely) or Summer Bloom (more likely). Bloom is effectively a ritual and we all know how Wizards has treated those spells in past announcements.
I've won after pathing the Titan that gets played and hasted turn 2. Multiple times actually.
What you're describing is a nut draw and should not be a decider on what gets banned. Casting a Titan turn 2 and 2 Titans turn 3 requires absolutely perfect cards - what fast deck can't win on turn 3 with a perfect setup?
I keep seeing people say this, and keep reminding them of both the Rite of Flame and Seething Song bans (which you actually mention here). These were glaring examples where Wizards had a broken turn turn three combo deck winning off a single storm card in Grapeshot. Yet, they didn't ban Grapeshot either time. They banned the ritual that made the deck too fast. Why wouldn't they ban the ritual in this deck too?
BGW Junk / URB Grixis Shadow / RGB Lantern Control / WUBCBant Eldrazi
Current Legacy decks
BUG Shardless BUG / UWR Predict Miracles / RUG Canadian Thresh / WRBG 4c Loam
UB Reanimator
Untapped land that produces green
Simian spirit guide
Simian Spirit guide
Summer bloom
Bounceland that produces blue
Hive mind
Pact
Top deck pact of negation because your opponent went first to have a land in play
I think this works, although I think most lists dropped the guides.
Edit: forgot amulet, yeah...
If anyone is worried about a ban and play the deck, I recommend trading/selling off the expensive pieces this week if you can't take the hit (Vesuva, Azusa, Amulets, GPacts). There will probably be players wanting to take the deck to Charlotte as a last hurrah and will be missing some key pieces. I agree that banning Bloom won't necessarily kill it though as you only really need Bloom for the early wins. After T2 or 3 Bloom becomes less vital and almost a dead draw in some circumstances. Banning Amulet will kill the deck completely though.
Edited for clarity.
Contrary to what people are saying banning summer bloom will not "kill the deck". Bloom can play many other cards that allow additional lands per turn.
Having to switch to any of these other cards will indeed slow the deck down making it worse but the deck can continue to exist in its current for but be slowed down a turn or 2. Which is the only reason this deck would catch a ban in the first place. (top tier deck and a turn 4 violator that cannot be interacted with easily)
You're underemphasizing one aspect of the rule. Here's what Matt Lauer said during the Rite of Flame ban:
Before Pro Tour Philadelphia, the DCI’s stated guideline for the Modern format was to avoid having decks that consistently win the game on turn three. With the results of the Pro Tour in, we are tweaking that goal to not having top-tier decks that consistently win on turn three (or earlier). We also have the goal of maintaining a diverse format.
Here's his statement during the Seething Song ban:
The DCI’s other primary goal for Modern is to not have top tier decks that frequently win on turn three (or earlier).
Note the use of the terms "consistent" and "frequent". Please show me the data that indicates that Amulet Bloom consistently wins on any turn numbered less than four in actual tournament results, omitting all use of that one player who was banned for palming cards.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
No, neither I nor others have missed that. In fact, I have a big set of hard data on Bloom's speed and am publishing it next week in my banlist article. Honestly, that data also shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone; there are way too many anecdotal stories about Bloom being too fast for the numbers to not align with the stories.
I'm a little annoyed that Bloom defenders keep moving the goal posts for the deck. For the longest time it was "Bloom isn't top-tier". Then it was "Bloom isn't consistently winning too fast" once the deck's tiering became indefensible. Then it was "Bloom isn't oppressive". I've played Modern since 2011 and I can't remember a time where so many players were so united against a combo deck and the combo deck survived a ban announcement. The last time the data aligned so well against a deck was Storm which, lo and behold, ate the 2013 ban.
It just makes me sad because I like land shenanigans a lot. Like summers bloom and crucible of world's to recur tec edge three times.