they banned the rituals specifically because they knew that banning grapeshot would do nothing to stop the fast mana that enabled the deck; the fast mana would simply facilitate another broken combo. grape shot with out the broken rituals isn't nearly as good because grape shot isn't the fundamental core of the deck remove grapeshot you can just fill it with some other win conditions.
a more valid comparison to me would seem to be the rituals = amulet; these cards function in very similar ways within the combos they facilitate. banning amulet wouldn't kill the deck, just like banning the broken rituals didn't kill storm; it simply slowed it down to a pace the remainder of the format could compete with.
if you banned amulet it would stifle the deck forcing it to deploy threats the turn after ramping up.
I personally don't play the deck; i also don't think it needs any bans atm. just saying that your ritual argument is slightly off given that amulet is the card that actually helps you generate lots of mana. with out it bloom just drops a few karoo lands and passes the turn.
In my personal opinion, it seems that Amulet of Vigor is really what is allowing the combo to function. Being able to tap a single bounceland multiple times seems pretty bonkers. If anything gets a ban it would be amulet. I don't think they would have nearly the same clock if that is banned, but there are other cards they could abuse (to a lesser extent) if bloom is banned.
i wouldnt mind seeing taken from affinity to slow it down, but i also wouldnt care otherwise. i hardly ever lose to the deck, and it can easily be interacted with via almost all removal spells
affinity, like infect, preys against decks with little to no removal
As much as I groan when champ, plating or ravager hits the board, it can be interacted with reasonably. The deck can fold to pyroclasm or anger of the gods if they overextend
These people you are referring,dear Sheridan, do not have serious arguments, just a personal agenda.
People like kanister(who I know to be a good Amulet pilot), or others like him do not speak like that.
It feels unfair having under one umbrella those people with some others.
I would prefer if you were referring to specific, serious arguments made by specific, serious persons in here on specific, serious posts(aka quotes) so that I can see them.
I am not trying to be some kind of judge now, just trying to identify the people you are talking about.
I generally don't call out specific users, but a more accurate quote would be "some Amulet Bloom defenders". Not everyone moves those goalposts. Some of the defenders even have a few legitimate arguments, even if the evidence against them is often too overwhelming for me to believe those defenses.
they banned the rituals specifically because they knew that banning grapeshot would do nothing to stop the fast mana that enabled the deck; the fast mana would simply facilitate another broken combo. grape shot with out the broken rituals isn't nearly as good because grape shot isn't the fundamental core of the deck remove grapeshot you can just fill it with some other win conditions.
a more valid comparison to me would seem to be the rituals = amulet; these cards function in very similar ways within the combos they facilitate. banning amulet wouldn't kill the deck, just like banning the broken rituals didn't kill storm; it simply slowed it down to a pace the remainder of the format could compete with.
if you banned amulet it would stifle the deck forcing it to deploy threats the turn after ramping up.
I personally don't play the deck; i also don't think it needs any bans atm. just saying that your ritual argument is slightly off given that amulet is the card that actually helps you generate lots of mana. with out it bloom just drops a few karoo lands and passes the turn.
If Wizards really wants to murder the deck, then Amulet is definitely the right call. You are right that it is ritual-esque, although I think Wizards will lean towards leniency and ban the less destructive Bloom instead. The deck can replace Bloom with worse alternatives. The deck can't really replace Amulet with anything. Both cards have the markings of a ritual, but I think historical turn four precedent suggests Wizards won't blow up the deck with the Amulet ban itself.
Not the mana generating part, the part where Slayer's was coming in tapped via Primeval search and Amulet untapping and allowing the multiple stacked triggers for multiple activations part. I get it now. I totally forgot Prime times make lands enter tapped.
Commander GUR Maelstrom Wanderer BWU Sydri, Galvanic Genius BGB Meren of Clan Nel Toth WGW Nazahn, Revered Bladesmith RRR Feldon of the Third Path WWW Heliod, God of the Sun
Affinity has significantly less turn 2-3 wins than Amulet Bloom. By my analysis of MTGO data, it wins on turns 2-3 half as often as Bloom does. We can also confirm this anecdotally, where players report far more experiences of losing to Bloom in the 2-3 range but not to Affinity. When the numbers and the data align, that's always a good sign that we are on the right direction.
But Affinity is still a much better deck than Bloom Titan and has been Tier 1 since the inception of the format. The point is that if everyone says (and even shows statistically) that Affinity kills on early turns less often than Bloom, it doesn't take into account for later turns or the sheer consistency of Affinity. Ancient Grudge, Stony Silence, Shatterstorm, Kologhan's Command, Lightning Bolt, Lingering Souls, yes they are good cards against Affinity. Yet, Affinity pilots have laughed at these cards while racking up the wins. Let's ask the TWO top 8 Affinity pilots how easy Affinity is to disrupt while Bloom Titan is impossible. We didn't see those pilots on camera drawing the nuts (like the Bloom players) and killing a helpless opponent. We didn't see the Affinity pilot cast and equip Cranial Plating before Stony Silence came down, making it look a lot less ... Stony. On the subject of Ancient Grudge, which we all know beats Affinity straight up. Did you know that Ancient Grudge also can destroy Amulet of Vigor? If the Bloom player had all the pieces, but Amulet is gone, they are forced to Summer Bloom turn 2 into turn 3 Titan. Turn 3 Titan without haste is not something that is "broken" by Modern standards, sorry.
My point is that the other Tier 1 decks may not kill on turn 3 as consistently, but they make up for it by having a large share of the metagame and being a more consistent deck. Is Bloom consistent? Certainly yes. But those decks are more consistent and I believe they've proven it as a show of Day 2s, top 8s, and metashare overall.
I noticed someone said that they have never lost after having turn 2 Titan. This makes me think that nobody can afford Blood Moon in their meta. If you use Summoner's Pact for that Titan, even if you have Pact of Negation, you will not have enough mana to pay for both next turn if they cast Blood Moon on turn 3. You will have 8 mana on your upkeep and this is even if you had Amulet, Summoner's Pact, Pact of Negation, Karoo, Gemstone Mind, and Summer Bloom in your opener.
People here want to act like since it didn't happen on camera, it didn't happen. I'm sure the Affinity players and Ali Aintrazi on GR Tron did some degenerate stuff over the course of 14-15 rounds. But since we didn't see it, it didn't happen and those decks are 100% unbannable, while Bloom has a 90% chance of something being hit. Nevermind the douchebag who said that the deck he played and probably borrowed should be banned.
*P.S. - Nobody is discussing former Bloom player Sam Black moving on to Affinity. This is the 3rd time I'm posting this.
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Affinity has significantly less turn 2-3 wins than Amulet Bloom. By my analysis of MTGO data, it wins on turns 2-3 half as often as Bloom does. We can also confirm this anecdotally, where players report far more experiences of losing to Bloom in the 2-3 range but not to Affinity. When the numbers and the data align, that's always a good sign that we are on the right direction.
But Affinity is still a much better deck than Bloom Titan and has been Tier 1 since the inception of the format. The point is that if everyone says (and even shows statistically) that Affinity kills on early turns less often than Bloom, it doesn't take into account for later turns or the sheer consistency of Affinity. Ancient Grudge, Stony Silence, Shatterstorm, Kologhan's Command, Lightning Bolt, Lingering Souls, yes they are good cards against Affinity. Yet, Affinity pilots have laughed at these cards while racking up the wins. Let's ask the TWO top 8 Affinity pilots how easy Affinity is to disrupt while Bloom Titan is impossible. We didn't see those pilots on camera drawing the nuts (like the Bloom players) and killing a helpless opponent. We didn't see the Affinity pilot cast and equip Cranial Plating before Stony Silence came down, making it look a lot less ... Stony. On the subject of Ancient Grudge, which we all know beats Affinity straight up. Did you know that Ancient Grudge also can destroy Amulet of Vigor? If the Bloom player had all the pieces, but Amulet is gone, they are forced to Summer Bloom turn 2 into turn 3 Titan. Turn 3 Titan without haste is not something that is "broken" by Modern standards, sorry.
My point is that the other Tier 1 decks may not kill on turn 3 as consistently, but they make up for it by having a large share of the metagame and being a more consistent deck. Is Bloom consistent? Certainly yes. But those decks are more consistent and I believe they've proven it as a show of Day 2s, top 8s, and metashare overall.
I noticed someone said that they have never lost after having turn 2 Titan. This makes me think that nobody can afford Blood Moon in their meta. If you use Summoner's Pact for that Titan, even if you have Pact of Negation, you will not have enough mana to pay for both next turn. You will have 8 mana on your upkeep and this is even if you had Amulet, Summoner's Pact, Pact of Negation, Karoo, Gemstone Mind, and Summer Bloom in your opener.
People here want to act like since it didn't happen on camera, it didn't happen. I'm sure the Affinity players and Ali Aintrazi on GR Tron did some degenerate stuff over the course of 14-15 rounds. But since we didn't see it, it didn't happen and those decks are 100% unbannable, while Bloom has a 90% chance of something being hit. Nevermind the douchebag who said that the deck he played and probably borrowed should be banned.
*P.S. - Nobody is discussing former Bloom player Sam Black moving on to Affinity. This is the 3rd time I'm posting this.
Affinity has significantly less turn 2-3 wins than Amulet Bloom. By my analysis of MTGO data, it wins on turns 2-3 half as often as Bloom does. We can also confirm this anecdotally, where players report far more experiences of losing to Bloom in the 2-3 range but not to Affinity. When the numbers and the data align, that's always a good sign that we are on the right direction.
But Affinity is still a much better deck than Bloom Titan and has been Tier 1 since the inception of the format. The point is that if everyone says (and even shows statistically) that Affinity kills on early turns less often than Bloom, it doesn't take into account for later turns or the sheer consistency of Affinity. Ancient Grudge, Stony Silence, Shatterstorm, Kologhan's Command, Lightning Bolt, Lingering Souls, yes they are good cards against Affinity. Yet, Affinity pilots have laughed at these cards while racking up the wins. Let's ask the TWO top 8 Affinity pilots how easy Affinity is to disrupt while Bloom Titan is impossible. We didn't see those pilots on camera drawing the nuts (like the Bloom players) and killing a helpless opponent. We didn't see the Affinity pilot cast and equip Cranial Plating before Stony Silence came down, making it look a lot less ... Stony. On the subject of Ancient Grudge, which we all know beats Affinity straight up. Did you know that Ancient Grudge also can destroy Amulet of Vigor? If the Bloom player had all the pieces, but Amulet is gone, they are forced to Summer Bloom turn 2 into turn 3 Titan. Turn 3 Titan without haste is not something that is "broken" by Modern standards, sorry.
My point is that the other Tier 1 decks may not kill on turn 3 as consistently, but they make up for it by having a large share of the metagame and being a more consistent deck. Is Bloom consistent? Certainly yes. But those decks are more consistent and I believe they've proven it as a show of Day 2s, top 8s, and metashare overall.
I noticed someone said that they have never lost after having turn 2 Titan. This makes me think that nobody can afford Blood Moon in their meta. If you use Summoner's Pact for that Titan, even if you have Pact of Negation, you will not have enough mana to pay for both next turn if they cast Blood Moon on turn 3. You will have 8 mana on your upkeep and this is even if you had Amulet, Summoner's Pact, Pact of Negation, Karoo, Gemstone Mind, and Summer Bloom in your opener.
People here want to act like since it didn't happen on camera, it didn't happen. I'm sure the Affinity players and Ali Aintrazi on GR Tron did some degenerate stuff over the course of 14-15 rounds. But since we didn't see it, it didn't happen and those decks are 100% unbannable, while Bloom has a 90% chance of something being hit. Nevermind the douchebag who said that the deck he played and probably borrowed should be banned.
*P.S. - Nobody is discussing former Bloom player Sam Black moving on to Affinity. This is the 3rd time I'm posting this.
I mean, a lot of that is true but it doesn't matter because the turn four rule doesn't care. Wizards places a premium on top-tier decks being unable to consistently win before turn four. That rule exists independently of dominant Tier 1 decks that DON'T consistently win before turn four, which Affinity clearly falls under. It doesn't matter if the other decks are winning consistently on later turns. It just matters if they are consistently winning before turn four. Once we realize Wizards places this premium on the win-turn, we can stop analyzing Bloom under the same logic we would analyze other top-tier decks that don't win before turn four.
By all historical standards, the turn four rule doesn't care about the deck's performance past turn four. It just cares if the deck is top-tier and if it is also consistently winning before turn four. Affinity is top-tier but is not consistently winning on turns 2-3, so the rule doesn't apply. The same goes for Twin, Burn, and Jund, along with most other top-tier decks. We need to stop grouping Bloom with these decks as a way to explain away Bloom's issues. There are different ban criteria that apply.
Affinity has significantly less turn 2-3 wins than Amulet Bloom. By my analysis of MTGO data, it wins on turns 2-3 half as often as Bloom does. We can also confirm this anecdotally, where players report far more experiences of losing to Bloom in the 2-3 range but not to Affinity. When the numbers and the data align, that's always a good sign that we are on the right direction.
But Affinity is still a much better deck than Bloom Titan and has been Tier 1 since the inception of the format. The point is that if everyone says (and even shows statistically) that Affinity kills on early turns less often than Bloom, it doesn't take into account for later turns or the sheer consistency of Affinity. Ancient Grudge, Stony Silence, Shatterstorm, Kologhan's Command, Lightning Bolt, Lingering Souls, yes they are good cards against Affinity. Yet, Affinity pilots have laughed at these cards while racking up the wins. Let's ask the TWO top 8 Affinity pilots how easy Affinity is to disrupt while Bloom Titan is impossible. We didn't see those pilots on camera drawing the nuts (like the Bloom players) and killing a helpless opponent. We didn't see the Affinity pilot cast and equip Cranial Plating before Stony Silence came down, making it look a lot less ... Stony. On the subject of Ancient Grudge, which we all know beats Affinity straight up. Did you know that Ancient Grudge also can destroy Amulet of Vigor? If the Bloom player had all the pieces, but Amulet is gone, they are forced to Summer Bloom turn 2 into turn 3 Titan. Turn 3 Titan without haste is not something that is "broken" by Modern standards, sorry.
My point is that the other Tier 1 decks may not kill on turn 3 as consistently, but they make up for it by having a large share of the metagame and being a more consistent deck. Is Bloom consistent? Certainly yes. But those decks are more consistent and I believe they've proven it as a show of Day 2s, top 8s, and metashare overall.
I noticed someone said that they have never lost after having turn 2 Titan. This makes me think that nobody can afford Blood Moon in their meta. If you use Summoner's Pact for that Titan, even if you have Pact of Negation, you will not have enough mana to pay for both next turn if they cast Blood Moon on turn 3. You will have 8 mana on your upkeep and this is even if you had Amulet, Summoner's Pact, Pact of Negation, Karoo, Gemstone Mind, and Summer Bloom in your opener.
People here want to act like since it didn't happen on camera, it didn't happen. I'm sure the Affinity players and Ali Aintrazi on GR Tron did some degenerate stuff over the course of 14-15 rounds. But since we didn't see it, it didn't happen and those decks are 100% unbannable, while Bloom has a 90% chance of something being hit. Nevermind the douchebag who said that the deck he played and probably borrowed should be banned.
*P.S. - Nobody is discussing former Bloom player Sam Black moving on to Affinity. This is the 3rd time I'm posting this.
I mean, a lot of that is true but it doesn't matter because the turn four rule doesn't care. Wizards places a premium on top-tier decks being unable to consistently win before turn four. That rule exists independently of dominant Tier 1 decks that DON'T consistently win before turn four, which Affinity clearly falls under. It doesn't matter if the other decks are winning consistently on later turns. It just matters if they are consistently winning before turn four. Once we realize Wizards places this premium on the win-turn, we can stop analyzing Bloom under the same logic we would analyze other top-tier decks that don't win before turn four.
By all historical standards, the turn four rule doesn't care about the deck's performance past turn four. It just cares if the deck is top-tier and if it is also consistently winning before turn four. Affinity is top-tier but is not consistently winning on turns 2-3, so the rule doesn't apply. The same goes for Twin, Burn, and Jund, along with most other top-tier decks. We need to stop grouping Bloom with these decks as a way to explain away Bloom's issues. There are differeunt ban criteria that apply.
Bro, your arguments and them being backed up by statistics, and past data along with elegant writing is poetry
I will try to be objective here(because I do not wish something banned-except from Hive Mind or Vesuva and I will try to prove that if Summer Bloom is banned, the deck is viable again.
This of course, is the best scenario that can happen, if NO interaction happens, if NO disruption happens, etc etc (which is hard).
Would anybody appeal on this deck's power?
Or would anybody think that it is too "weak"?
I would sell the deck the same day the ban is announced if this is the best it is capable of. Why would I play something that inconsistently does unfair things in a format with a half dozen decks that consistently do unfair things?
Affinity feels a lot fairer to play against than Amulet
I mean, it's just a bunch of weenie artifact creatures with some good equipment and a couple of good creatures that get put on the battlefield at a blistering fast pace. It's resilient in that it has good manlands, ravager protects against removal, and cranial plating makes any of their evasive threats deadly.
When you play against amulet, they start doing all this wacky weird *****, tutoring through their deck for 0 mana multiple times, digging through their deck with cantrips, casting 6 mana creatures on turn 2-3 by bouncing the same land to their hand and playing it multiple times.
Interaction is the difference, there's more opportunities to interact with affinity and they are more vulnerable to maindeckable cards and broader sideboard options.
I think if Summer Bloom gets the axe everything should be ok, since Amulet of Bloom itself can be abrupt decay's and kolaghan's commanded, while Summer Bloom is a sorcery (uninteractive card type)
Tournament results by now should show that their really isn't much interaction with affinity. You play the hate and still lose.
Not a single copy of Jund was in the top 32 of the SCG open. Jund is actually very weak right now, despite it's popularity keeping it in tier 1 in terms of meta %. Any fear of BBE making Jund too good is really not warranted. BBE is a fun magic card that was banned because another card (DRS) was broken and is definitely not too strong for this format, especially now. And before anyone says "but it's so OP with Kolaghan's Command!!"...please. It's no more "broken" with Kolaghan's Command than Snapcaster Mage is.
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
Why is Affinity suddenly the scapegoat for Bloom ban discussion? There are highly effective hate cards in every single color, some of them main deck able, and it is very possible to interact with them at every step of the game. The same cannot be said for Amulet Bloom, even ignoring the fact that one is a combo deck and the other is an (admittedly fast) aggro deck. They are two entirely different beasts that are checked and judged on entirely different criteria. It was more relevant to try and compare to infect's early win rate but even that wasn't a very strong comparison or argument.
Tournament results by now should show that their really isn't much interaction with affinity. You play the hate and still lose.
You play the hate (and interact with them) and still lose (sometimes).
Interacting with them doesn't automatically mean they lose. Affinity's resilience, as I outlined in my post, is why it's tier 1.
That is just as bad to me, if not worse.
"Gaze upon me as I throw this pebble at the oncoming freight train"
I guess the way I feel about it doesn't matter, affinity will be around forever taking multiple T8s and no one will even mention it.
Lots of people feel lots of ways about a lot of things, but feelings aren't good criteria for the modern ban list. If you play a deck that CANNOT beat affinity, don't play that deck or find a way to beat it. Hell, I play Merfolk and I'm fine with Affinity's existence despite it being one of the worst possible matchups in all of modern (it's like 20-80 at best). There's ALWAYS going to be a deck that beats your deck, learning to deal with it and overcome it is the only way to make it.
Not a single copy of Jund was in the top 32 of the SCG open. Jund is actually very weak right now, despite it's popularity keeping it in tier 1 in terms of meta %. Any fear of BBE making Jund too good is really not warranted. BBE is a fun magic card that was banned because another card (DRS) was broken and is definitely not too strong for this format, especially now. And before anyone says "but it's so OP with Kolaghan's Command!!"...please. It's no more "broken" with Kolaghan's Command than Snapcaster Mage is.
I don't understand why Wizards would unban BBE, a card that so clearly slots into a top-tier deck, when they could unban something more niche like Sword that might actually enable something new. No one in Wizards is going to look at Jund and say "oh man, there's a deck that needs help!" All of their past unbans targeted nonexistent decks (Valakut in Scapeshift, Nacatl in Zoo, BB in Faeries, GGT in Dredge), and I don't see them suddenly reversing that with a card that fits so narrowly into one top-tier deck. I'd bet on a Mystic unban before a BBE unban, because at least with Mystic it's unclear where the card would optimally fall. BBE is just so specific.
I will try to be objective here(because I do not wish something banned-except from Hive Mind or Vesuva and I will try to prove that if Summer Bloom is banned, the deck is viable again.
This of course, is the best scenario that can happen, if NO interaction happens, if NO disruption happens, etc etc (which is hard).
Would anybody appeal on this deck's power?
Or would anybody think that it is too "weak"?
What would happen if you added Journey of Discovery to that equation instead of Explore? It might be a bit convoluted but you might still be able to cast Primeval Titan on turn 2. I understand you were going for a more "realistic" approach but knowing what your best draws are is just as important as knowing the worst ones.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
Guys. Please. What cards Wizards unbanned in Modern so far? Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle. Bitterblossom. Golgari Grave-Troll. See the pattern? None of those cards slotted into existing decks, they were a "here have a new toy". They're not gonna unban Bloodbraid Elf because "here Jund does bad, have a boost".
Well...No...Bitterblossom slotted into BW Tokens which was always a deck, and GGT slotted into dredgevine which was also already a deck.
Affinity is kinda fine if Twin remains as the best deck.
Although it doesnt have bad matchups besides twin and the only way to blow them out is a perfectly timed artifact wrath, then they just can grind you And that is awful considering that it can win as early as turn 3.
I expect the following: Ban Summer bloom if the data is crushingly hard And no thing comes out of the ban list.
Guys. Please. What cards Wizards unbanned in Modern so far? Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle. Bitterblossom. Golgari Grave-Troll. See the pattern? None of those cards slotted into existing decks, they were a "here have a new toy". They're not gonna unban Bloodbraid Elf because "here Jund does bad, have a boost".
Well...No...Bitterblossom slotted into BW Tokens which was always a deck, and GGT slotted into dredgevine which was also already a deck.
Sorry, by "existing deck", I meant a top tier one. My bad for not clarifying. Jund is still tier 1, maybe 1.5. Those decks were what, tier 3, 4?
Bingo - huge difference between slotting into tokens/dredgevine and Jund. Huge.
Not a single copy of Jund was in the top 32 of the SCG open. Jund is actually very weak right now, despite it's popularity keeping it in tier 1 in terms of meta %. Any fear of BBE making Jund too good is really not warranted. BBE is a fun magic card that was banned because another card (DRS) was broken and is definitely not too strong for this format, especially now. And before anyone says "but it's so OP with Kolaghan's Command!!"...please. It's no more "broken" with Kolaghan's Command than Snapcaster Mage is.
I don't understand why Wizards would unban BBE, a card that so clearly slots into a top-tier deck, when they could unban something more niche like Sword that might actually enable something new. No one in Wizards is going to look at Jund and say "oh man, there's a deck that needs help!" All of their past unbans targeted nonexistent decks (Valakut in Scapeshift, Nacatl in Zoo, BB in Faeries, GGT in Dredge), and I don't see them suddenly reversing that with a card that fits so narrowly into one top-tier deck. I'd bet on a Mystic unban before a BBE unban, because at least with Mystic it's unclear where the card would optimally fall. BBE is just so specific.
I'm not saying they'd unban BBE with the sole intention of helping Jund. Unbanning a card just to help one deck is indeed kind of silly. But I think BBE is a card that is absolutely not too strong for the format, and the only thing keeping it on the banlist was the fear that it would make Jund too good. I'm arguing that there is not really any merit behind that fear, and thus it's a safe card to unban. It's far lower in power level than Stoneforge Mystic and would likely warp the format a lot less, so it's a much "safer" unban than SFM I think. Out of the 3 "fair" cards that people are calling for to be unbanned (AV, BBE, SFM), BBE seems like the safest option.
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
I'm not saying they'd unban BBE with the sole intention of helping Jund. Unbanning a card just to help one deck is indeed kind of silly. But I think BBE is a card that is absolutely not too strong for the format, and the only thing keeping it on the banlist was the fear that it would make Jund too good. I'm arguing that there is not really any merit behind that fear, and thus it's a safe card to unban. It's far lower in power level than Stoneforge Mystic and would likely warp the format a lot less, so it's a much "safer" unban than SFM I think. Out of the 3 "fair" cards that people are calling for to be unbanned (AV, BBE, SFM), BBE seems like the safest option.
Mostly agreed. But the thing is, the Modern banlist is full of cards that could probably be unbanned. It's a question of what order WotC decides to tackle them, which is a matter of what WotC's goals are at the moment. The last bunch of unbans were clearly targeted specifically at boosting niche strategies with (reasonably) safe unbans. I don't think there's much reason to assume there priorities have changed, but I also don't think there's much reason to assume they'll always have the same motivation.
Either way, they'll make their way through the unbannable cards eventually. It's not a question of X getting unbanned instead of Y, it's a question of X getting banned ahead of Y.
IMO.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing UX Mana Denial until Modern gets the answers it needs.
WUBRG Humans BRW Mardu Pyromancer UW UW "Control" UR Blue Moon
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
a more valid comparison to me would seem to be the rituals = amulet; these cards function in very similar ways within the combos they facilitate. banning amulet wouldn't kill the deck, just like banning the broken rituals didn't kill storm; it simply slowed it down to a pace the remainder of the format could compete with.
if you banned amulet it would stifle the deck forcing it to deploy threats the turn after ramping up.
I personally don't play the deck; i also don't think it needs any bans atm. just saying that your ritual argument is slightly off given that amulet is the card that actually helps you generate lots of mana. with out it bloom just drops a few karoo lands and passes the turn.
As much as I groan when champ, plating or ravager hits the board, it can be interacted with reasonably. The deck can fold to pyroclasm or anger of the gods if they overextend
I generally don't call out specific users, but a more accurate quote would be "some Amulet Bloom defenders". Not everyone moves those goalposts. Some of the defenders even have a few legitimate arguments, even if the evidence against them is often too overwhelming for me to believe those defenses.
If Wizards really wants to murder the deck, then Amulet is definitely the right call. You are right that it is ritual-esque, although I think Wizards will lean towards leniency and ban the less destructive Bloom instead. The deck can replace Bloom with worse alternatives. The deck can't really replace Amulet with anything. Both cards have the markings of a ritual, but I think historical turn four precedent suggests Wizards won't blow up the deck with the Amulet ban itself.
I would argue that it's a control deck.
Not the mana generating part, the part where Slayer's was coming in tapped via Primeval search and Amulet untapping and allowing the multiple stacked triggers for multiple activations part. I get it now. I totally forgot Prime times make lands enter tapped.
GURB Grixis/Jund Shadow
RBG Dredge
xUx U Ballista Tron
Commander
GUR Maelstrom Wanderer
BWU Sydri, Galvanic Genius
BGB Meren of Clan Nel Toth
WGW Nazahn, Revered Bladesmith
RRR Feldon of the Third Path
WWW Heliod, God of the Sun
But Affinity is still a much better deck than Bloom Titan and has been Tier 1 since the inception of the format. The point is that if everyone says (and even shows statistically) that Affinity kills on early turns less often than Bloom, it doesn't take into account for later turns or the sheer consistency of Affinity. Ancient Grudge, Stony Silence, Shatterstorm, Kologhan's Command, Lightning Bolt, Lingering Souls, yes they are good cards against Affinity. Yet, Affinity pilots have laughed at these cards while racking up the wins. Let's ask the TWO top 8 Affinity pilots how easy Affinity is to disrupt while Bloom Titan is impossible. We didn't see those pilots on camera drawing the nuts (like the Bloom players) and killing a helpless opponent. We didn't see the Affinity pilot cast and equip Cranial Plating before Stony Silence came down, making it look a lot less ... Stony. On the subject of Ancient Grudge, which we all know beats Affinity straight up. Did you know that Ancient Grudge also can destroy Amulet of Vigor? If the Bloom player had all the pieces, but Amulet is gone, they are forced to Summer Bloom turn 2 into turn 3 Titan. Turn 3 Titan without haste is not something that is "broken" by Modern standards, sorry.
My point is that the other Tier 1 decks may not kill on turn 3 as consistently, but they make up for it by having a large share of the metagame and being a more consistent deck. Is Bloom consistent? Certainly yes. But those decks are more consistent and I believe they've proven it as a show of Day 2s, top 8s, and metashare overall.
I noticed someone said that they have never lost after having turn 2 Titan. This makes me think that nobody can afford Blood Moon in their meta. If you use Summoner's Pact for that Titan, even if you have Pact of Negation, you will not have enough mana to pay for both next turn if they cast Blood Moon on turn 3. You will have 8 mana on your upkeep and this is even if you had Amulet, Summoner's Pact, Pact of Negation, Karoo, Gemstone Mind, and Summer Bloom in your opener.
People here want to act like since it didn't happen on camera, it didn't happen. I'm sure the Affinity players and Ali Aintrazi on GR Tron did some degenerate stuff over the course of 14-15 rounds. But since we didn't see it, it didn't happen and those decks are 100% unbannable, while Bloom has a 90% chance of something being hit. Nevermind the douchebag who said that the deck he played and probably borrowed should be banned.
*P.S. - Nobody is discussing former Bloom player Sam Black moving on to Affinity. This is the 3rd time I'm posting this.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)So you just auto-loose if you are on the draw?
Twitter: twitter.com/axmanonline
Stream: twitch.tv/axman
Current Decks
Modern: Affinity
Standard: BW Control
Legacy: Death and Taxes :symw::symr:
Vintage: NA
I mean, a lot of that is true but it doesn't matter because the turn four rule doesn't care. Wizards places a premium on top-tier decks being unable to consistently win before turn four. That rule exists independently of dominant Tier 1 decks that DON'T consistently win before turn four, which Affinity clearly falls under. It doesn't matter if the other decks are winning consistently on later turns. It just matters if they are consistently winning before turn four. Once we realize Wizards places this premium on the win-turn, we can stop analyzing Bloom under the same logic we would analyze other top-tier decks that don't win before turn four.
By all historical standards, the turn four rule doesn't care about the deck's performance past turn four. It just cares if the deck is top-tier and if it is also consistently winning before turn four. Affinity is top-tier but is not consistently winning on turns 2-3, so the rule doesn't apply. The same goes for Twin, Burn, and Jund, along with most other top-tier decks. We need to stop grouping Bloom with these decks as a way to explain away Bloom's issues. There are different ban criteria that apply.
Bro, your arguments and them being backed up by statistics, and past data along with elegant writing is poetry
Bro, you're classy as *****
RG Tron is an odd mix of Ramp, Combo, Midrange and Control.
But it's meant to be played with a control mindset - don't lose, stop the opponent from doing anything, then win with an unstoppable bomb.
I would sell the deck the same day the ban is announced if this is the best it is capable of. Why would I play something that inconsistently does unfair things in a format with a half dozen decks that consistently do unfair things?
Tournament results by now should show that their really isn't much interaction with affinity. You play the hate and still lose.
If Affinity always won through hate then it would have higher than an 8% meta share and more wins. Affinity is fine.
That is just as bad to me, if not worse.
"Gaze upon me as I throw this pebble at the oncoming freight train"
I guess the way I feel about it doesn't matter, affinity will be around forever taking multiple T8s and no one will even mention it.
Banned: Summer Bloom
Unbanned: Bloodbraid Elf
Not a single copy of Jund was in the top 32 of the SCG open. Jund is actually very weak right now, despite it's popularity keeping it in tier 1 in terms of meta %. Any fear of BBE making Jund too good is really not warranted. BBE is a fun magic card that was banned because another card (DRS) was broken and is definitely not too strong for this format, especially now. And before anyone says "but it's so OP with Kolaghan's Command!!"...please. It's no more "broken" with Kolaghan's Command than Snapcaster Mage is.
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
Lots of people feel lots of ways about a lot of things, but feelings aren't good criteria for the modern ban list. If you play a deck that CANNOT beat affinity, don't play that deck or find a way to beat it. Hell, I play Merfolk and I'm fine with Affinity's existence despite it being one of the worst possible matchups in all of modern (it's like 20-80 at best). There's ALWAYS going to be a deck that beats your deck, learning to deal with it and overcome it is the only way to make it.
I don't understand why Wizards would unban BBE, a card that so clearly slots into a top-tier deck, when they could unban something more niche like Sword that might actually enable something new. No one in Wizards is going to look at Jund and say "oh man, there's a deck that needs help!" All of their past unbans targeted nonexistent decks (Valakut in Scapeshift, Nacatl in Zoo, BB in Faeries, GGT in Dredge), and I don't see them suddenly reversing that with a card that fits so narrowly into one top-tier deck. I'd bet on a Mystic unban before a BBE unban, because at least with Mystic it's unclear where the card would optimally fall. BBE is just so specific.
What would happen if you added Journey of Discovery to that equation instead of Explore? It might be a bit convoluted but you might still be able to cast Primeval Titan on turn 2. I understand you were going for a more "realistic" approach but knowing what your best draws are is just as important as knowing the worst ones.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
Well...No...Bitterblossom slotted into BW Tokens which was always a deck, and GGT slotted into dredgevine which was also already a deck.
Although it doesnt have bad matchups besides twin and the only way to blow them out is a perfectly timed artifact wrath, then they just can grind you And that is awful considering that it can win as early as turn 3.
I expect the following: Ban Summer bloom if the data is crushingly hard And no thing comes out of the ban list.
Bingo - huge difference between slotting into tokens/dredgevine and Jund. Huge.
I'm not saying they'd unban BBE with the sole intention of helping Jund. Unbanning a card just to help one deck is indeed kind of silly. But I think BBE is a card that is absolutely not too strong for the format, and the only thing keeping it on the banlist was the fear that it would make Jund too good. I'm arguing that there is not really any merit behind that fear, and thus it's a safe card to unban. It's far lower in power level than Stoneforge Mystic and would likely warp the format a lot less, so it's a much "safer" unban than SFM I think. Out of the 3 "fair" cards that people are calling for to be unbanned (AV, BBE, SFM), BBE seems like the safest option.
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
Mostly agreed. But the thing is, the Modern banlist is full of cards that could probably be unbanned. It's a question of what order WotC decides to tackle them, which is a matter of what WotC's goals are at the moment. The last bunch of unbans were clearly targeted specifically at boosting niche strategies with (reasonably) safe unbans. I don't think there's much reason to assume there priorities have changed, but I also don't think there's much reason to assume they'll always have the same motivation.
Either way, they'll make their way through the unbannable cards eventually. It's not a question of X getting unbanned instead of Y, it's a question of X getting banned ahead of Y.
IMO.
WUBRG Humans
BRW Mardu Pyromancer
UW UW "Control"
UR Blue Moon