2. Nothing needed to be unbanned. The metagame is both diverse and evolving right now (not just stable/stagnant). Add to that a new set release and we really don't need an unban today. We might need it in the future and that's when Wizards will deploy it.
I feel your article missed a very key feature in regards to unbans: This isn't before a Pro Tour. Every unban in Modern has been in the banning announcement immediately preceding a Pro Tour. Now, as I've said before, that could change, but it does show that before a Pro Tour they're significantly more likely to unban something. I feel this honestly was probably a bigger part in their decision than anything else you speculated on in the article.
Unfortunately, there is too much entangled correlation and causation here to weigh in on without a serious analysis of the data. We have too many effects at play. To start, we have PTs, which are certainly a consideration Wizards is going to have (no one wants a *****ty PT metagame). But we also have overall metagame health, which in the case of DRS and Delver/Pod was very unhealthy independently of the PT. So the bans/unbans around then were almost definitely related to this. Speaking of which, we have the possibility that Wizards wants to balance bans with unbans, which means whenever we see bans for some reason, we are likely to see unbans to balance them out. If that's the case, the driving factor isn't the PT (which is maybe just incidental), it's the unhealthy metagame that prompts a ban and in turns prompts an unban to fill the gaps. It's also all speculative to begin with, because Wizards hasn't made a lot of statements about the relationship between bans and PTs, whereas they have made ample statements about ban decisions on their own. So overall, it's just too messy of a question to discuss right now. It either needs more datapoints or a really careful analysis of the data we have. It's not nearly as much an open and shut issue as people are claiming.
I makes a lot of sense. Tom LaPille actually plays at my LGS in Montclair when there are competitive weekend tournaments. I actually haven't asked him anything about Modern because I thought that he no longer worked for WoTC. I guess I should have at least asked. He was on UR Twin, so I took this as "there's no way in hell anything from Twin will ever be banned." While most people here know this already, I think it's worth it to give my 2 cents here for the people that believe or want to believe that something from the combo will be banned. (and I realize that his playing the deck doesn't prove this, but it says something)
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)
2. Nothing needed to be unbanned. The metagame is both diverse and evolving right now (not just stable/stagnant). Add to that a new set release and we really don't need an unban today. We might need it in the future and that's when Wizards will deploy it.
I feel your article missed a very key feature in regards to unbans: This isn't before a Pro Tour. Every unban in Modern has been in the banning announcement immediately preceding a Pro Tour. Now, as I've said before, that could change, but it does show that before a Pro Tour they're significantly more likely to unban something. I feel this honestly was probably a bigger part in their decision than anything else you speculated on in the article.
Unfortunately, there is too much entangled correlation and causation here to weigh in on without a serious analysis of the data. We have too many effects at play. To start, we have PTs, which are certainly a consideration Wizards is going to have (no one wants a *****ty PT metagame). But we also have overall metagame health, which in the case of DRS and Delver/Pod was very unhealthy independently of the PT. So the bans/unbans around then were almost definitely related to this. Speaking of which, we have the possibility that Wizards wants to balance bans with unbans, which means whenever we see bans for some reason, we are likely to see unbans to balance them out. If that's the case, the driving factor isn't the PT (which is maybe just incidental), it's the unhealthy metagame that prompts a ban and in turns prompts an unban to fill the gaps. It's also all speculative to begin with, because Wizards hasn't made a lot of statements about the relationship between bans and PTs, whereas they have made ample statements about ban decisions on their own. So overall, it's just too messy of a question to discuss right now. It either needs more datapoints or a really careful analysis of the data we have. It's not nearly as much an open and shut issue as people are claiming.
Lapille has basically flat out said that the changes were done because of the PT.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing:
Modern: UWUW TronUW
Legacy: WDeath N TaxesW CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Grishoalbrand here I come. Not playing anything else when this is in the format.
See you in the top 8 of the next Pro Tour/Grand Prix/SCG Event then, right?
Anyway pretty much what I thought. No changes are needed. The format is very healthy and you have a fair and interactive deck at the top of the metagame. Can't hope for much more.
For the people wanting thing X or Y unbanned. Keep up the dream, guys. Maybe someday...
If by me you mean the deck, then yes there's a good chance.
I still stand by Simian Spirit Guide ultimately needing a ban. It's essentially just here to speed up busted things. I know it kills one deck out right (Ad Nauseam) but to me, that doesn't outweigh it's need to be banned. It essentially operates as a "fixed"rite of flame. I get to rite of flame because at minimum a card like that would cost R giving a feint impression of R: add RR. However, it doesn't actually cost anything to use. Meaning it creates explosive plays. Sometimes it just powers out T1-2 bloodmoons which in and of itself isn't terrible, other times it creates powerful plays like in Grishoalbrand, those rare T1 amulet bloom senarios, as well as housing the possibility of breaking future cards to be printed. I'm sure i'm in a minority here with this opinion, but the cards only purpose is the break the T4 rule or to cast things essentially for free when you draw a billion cards. This, by the way, is not a knock against grishoal brand specifically. Meaning it's not a choice aimed at hurting that deck, but an opinion designed around the health of the format as a whole.
As for Unbans: Bloodbraid Elf - I just really don't feel like this card changes anything. People can bring up the "but Aryakin it's 10% of the meta" all they like, but as someone who mains jund at the moment it doesn't change much if anything in the jund deck. It's a different weapon in the arsenal, sure, but it causes shifts in the diagram not some massive exodus to the BG/x archtype. It is also constantly ignored that this offers a boon to aggressive zoo shells, or at the very least an option in that arsenal. In a format that is obsessed with linear non-interactive strategies it's hard for me to understand why something that is simply CA attached to a body get's such a bad rap, particularly when cards like snapcaster mage and Collected Company are above reproach. To me these cards are extremely comparable in their respective shells.
Sword of the Meek - Here is a card most people seem to agree is a "safe unban". Me, not so much, as it does two things to the meta that I, as a player, would dislike. It forces anyone trying to play on a "fair" axis to run BG/x for abrupt decay. Yes, I main jund at the moment, but that is not ultimately where I would like to find myself in the future of this format. Currently I run it because it allows me to play KoCommand, abrupt decay and blood moon in the same deck which is to say, it gives me the best "fair way" to fight "unfair decks". Hopefully this wont always be the case. Hopefully people will have other fair ways to attack the format, but if Sword of the Meek comes off the banned list, I don't see any creature based "fair strategy" being able to compete once the combo is assembled, and I don't see any control deck, which does not play the combo, able to compete without abrupt decay. Now, maybe I'm wrong on this point and maybe aggro decks like Zoo, fish, goblins, or hatebears, or non Gx or Ux control lists like MBC will be able to beat 1: gain 1 life add a 1/1 flyer to the board, but I've yet to see anyone make an argument in this thread to support that. Instead everyone focuses on things like "with twin, amulet and grishoal decks in the format this is perfectly fine". (which is an argument that doesn't work for bloodbraid elf mind you). I guess I'm still hopeful that the format will eventually even out between fair/unfair decks and in that possibility I don't see SoTM as healthy.
These are just my opinions though. I'm not upset about the update, but I am a little disappointed. As for the format being healthy and nothing needing to be changed, I think that's strongly opinion based. not that you can't have an opinion on the matter, but I find the massive amounts of non-interactive linear decks that require such specific hate to be a real problem for the format that only two things can help address, new printings and ban announcements so where some people think it's a healthy format others can find fault with it.
Grishoalbrand here I come. Not playing anything else when this is in the format.
See you in the top 8 of the next Pro Tour/Grand Prix/SCG Event then, right?
Anyway pretty much what I thought. No changes are needed. The format is very healthy and you have a fair and interactive deck at the top of the metagame. Can't hope for much more.
For the people wanting thing X or Y unbanned. Keep up the dream, guys. Maybe someday...
If by me you mean the deck, then yes there's a good chance.
I'll remember how Sam Black and Justin Cohen had the same thoughts, and yet since then the deck has mysteriously failed to top 8 a GP since in three attempts.
Grishoalbrand here I come. Not playing anything else when this is in the format.
See you in the top 8 of the next Pro Tour/Grand Prix/SCG Event then, right?
Anyway pretty much what I thought. No changes are needed. The format is very healthy and you have a fair and interactive deck at the top of the metagame. Can't hope for much more.
For the people wanting thing X or Y unbanned. Keep up the dream, guys. Maybe someday...
If by me you mean the deck, then yes there's a good chance.
Pretty sure there will be more Twin, BG/x or Affinity decks in those top 8s. Are those busted too for doing that?
I makes a lot of sense. Tom LaPille actually plays at my LGS in Montclair when there are competitive weekend tournaments. I actually haven't asked him anything about Modern because I thought that he no longer worked for WoTC. I guess I should have at least asked. He was on UR Twin, so I took this as "there's no way in hell anything from Twin will ever be banned." While most people here know this already, I think it's worth it to give my 2 cents here for the people that believe or want to believe that something from the combo will be banned. (and I realize that his playing the deck doesn't prove this, but it says something)
He doesn't work there anymore, but he was heavily involved with modern, including designing mm2015, as well as being there for the creation of the format. I highly doubt that the companies views have changed all that much since he was there.
That's an interview with him specifically about modern and his career. He starts talking about its creation around 21 mins in. At about 27 mins he talks about the original ban list where it was decided that they should "Ban everything that would make people hate this format. Was there a standard deck that would be disgusting and a PR nightmare? What about an extended deck?"
At about 36 mins in. He talks about how banning is a way to invigorate the format. "I think that's the cost of having a modern pro tour every year. Attention is a nonrenewable resource. When you have a format that doesn't rotate and you put a lot of very smart people with incentive, they will fully figure out the format. At that point wizards gets to make a very unpleasant decision. Do we run a boring pro tour, or do we ban cards out of a lot of people's decks in stores. And so far the answer has usually gone we don't run a boring pro tour, we have to ban things." That's the key statement.
Its interesting to hear his opinions on it.
Edit:
So my main takeaway is this: We won't ban or unban things in modern without some large incentive (like the protour) causing us to do so. They'd prefer to leave it completely untouched and they will unless something forces them to do it. I would doubt the metagame was even seriously looked at because there's nothing huge happening to bring lots of PR to modern.
It's a really smart move for them honestly. Can you imagine the potential fall out? "I built this deck to play for modern season and now I can't even play it for the whole time?" It doesn't matter whether the deck was unhealthy it could be really bad PR when for the most part things are going ok.
Unfortunately, there is too much entangled correlation and causation here to weigh in on without a serious analysis of the data. We have too many effects at play. To start, we have PTs, which are certainly a consideration Wizards is going to have (no one wants a *****ty PT metagame). But we also have overall metagame health, which in the case of DRS and Delver/Pod was very unhealthy independently of the PT. So the bans/unbans around then were almost definitely related to this.
But that's just an explanation as to why there were bans then, not unbans. Note that there were no unbans to accompany the Bloodbraid Elf/Seething Song or Second Sunrise bans, bans that did not occur just before a Pro Tour. While one can argue that the bannings before the Pro Tour were incidental due to there being bans not before the Pro Tour, that's not true about unbans.
Speaking of which, we have the possibility that Wizards wants to balance bans with unbans, which means whenever we see bans for some reason, we are likely to see unbans to balance them out. If that's the case, the driving factor isn't the PT (which is maybe just incidental), it's the unhealthy metagame that prompts a ban and in turns prompts an unban to fill the gaps.
But again, the only unbans accompanying bans were just before Pro Tours. In addition to the bannings I've already mentioned, there were also no unbannings accompanying the Wild Nacatl/Punishing Fire bans. Whenever there were bans not before a Pro Tour, there were no unbannings. Whenever there were bans just before a Pro Tour, there were unbannings. And when they did unbannings that weren't accompanied by a banning (Valakut), that was also before a Pro Tour.
I makes a lot of sense. Tom LaPille actually plays at my LGS in Montclair when there are competitive weekend tournaments. I actually haven't asked him anything about Modern because I thought that he no longer worked for WoTC. I guess I should have at least asked. He was on UR Twin, so I took this as "there's no way in hell anything from Twin will ever be banned."
Considering that he said in a podcast that if Erik Lauer was ordered to ban something to shake up the Pro Tour, that he'd probably (after being annoyed for a while), ban Summer Bloom and Splinter Twin, I'm not necessarily sure of that.
Granted, that was from several months ago and that was his speculation on what would happen if it was decided that bannings were necessary to shake things up, but he did indicate Twin as an apparent possibility.
You never know if someone is playing a deck because they want to invest their time and dedication to the deck, get better, and use that experience to do well or play the heck out of the deck until something gets banned. Or they could just play the deck for the other 100 reasons that someone could have...
I just naturally assumed that he knows more than I do about the B&R announcements.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I still stand by Simian Spirit Guide ultimately needing a ban. It's essentially just here to speed up busted things. I know it kills one deck out right (Ad Nauseam) but to me, that doesn't outweigh it's need to be banned. It essentially operates as a "fixed"rite of flame. I get to rite of flame because at minimum a card like that would cost R giving a feint impression of R: add RR. However, it doesn't actually cost anything to use. Meaning it creates explosive plays. Sometimes it just powers out T1-2 bloodmoons which in and of itself isn't terrible, other times it creates powerful plays like in Grishoalbrand, those rare T1 amulet bloom senarios, as well as housing the possibility of breaking future cards to be printed. I'm sure i'm in a minority here with this opinion, but the cards only purpose is the break the T4 rule or to cast things essentially for free when you draw a billion cards. This, by the way, is not a knock against grishoal brand specifically. Meaning it's not a choice aimed at hurting that deck, but an opinion designed around the health of the format as a whole.
I for one agree with you there.
The card solely exists to make combo faster. Banning it wouldn't be a loss for the format at all.
The same thing is true for Pact of Negation. The card is only used in combo decks as protection for the turn they are going off.
Sadly that isn't how bannings work. There has to be some evidence that these cards are actual problems for them to be banned even though it's pretty clear that these two cards in particular are only there to be abused by combo.
Grishoalbrand here I come. Not playing anything else when this is in the format.
See you in the top 8 of the next Pro Tour/Grand Prix/SCG Event then, right?
Anyway pretty much what I thought. No changes are needed. The format is very healthy and you have a fair and interactive deck at the top of the metagame. Can't hope for much more.
For the people wanting thing X or Y unbanned. Keep up the dream, guys. Maybe someday...
If by me you mean the deck, then yes there's a good chance.
I'll remember how Sam Black and Justin Cohen had the same thoughts, and yet since then the deck has mysteriously failed to top 8 a GP since in three attempts.
% of players that run the deck compared to T8 decks in those GPs?
Pretty sure there will be more Twin, BG/x or Affinity decks in those top 8s. Are those busted too for doing that?
Due to the sheer number of people running already built proven decks, of course there will be more of them in T8.
I feel like the "Tier 1 Criteria" post should be required reading to post in this topic, since we always seem to have people making arguments based off their own feelings on what "tier" should mean, and we have a very methodological characterization due to ktkenshinx.
The fact that every tournament will have Amulet and Grishoalbrand still doesn't mean you'll ever sit down across from them. Prevalence is just such an important consideration in this. In most situations, the meta is fairly self correcting.
I still stand by Simian Spirit Guide ultimately needing a ban. It's essentially just here to speed up busted things. I know it kills one deck out right (Ad Nauseam) but to me, that doesn't outweigh it's need to be banned. It essentially operates as a "fixed"rite of flame. I get to rite of flame because at minimum a card like that would cost R giving a feint impression of R: add RR. However, it doesn't actually cost anything to use. Meaning it creates explosive plays. Sometimes it just powers out T1-2 bloodmoons which in and of itself isn't terrible, other times it creates powerful plays like in Grishoalbrand, those rare T1 amulet bloom senarios, as well as housing the possibility of breaking future cards to be printed. I'm sure i'm in a minority here with this opinion, but the cards only purpose is the break the T4 rule or to cast things essentially for free when you draw a billion cards. This, by the way, is not a knock against grishoal brand specifically. Meaning it's not a choice aimed at hurting that deck, but an opinion designed around the health of the format as a whole.
I for one agree with you there.
The card solely exists to make combo faster. Banning it wouldn't be a loss for the format at all.
The same thing is true for Pact of Negation. The card is only used in combo decks as protection for the turn they are going off.
Sadly that isn't how bannings work. There has to be some evidence that these cards are actual problems for them to be banned even though it's pretty clear that these two cards in particular are only there to be abused by combo.
This is interesting to me, but I'll actually defend the cards.
The colorshifted nature of guide makes it not worth running outside of ad nauseam (where it plays a critical part in the decks ability to win on time/at all)--if other decks run it effectively its only ever to ramp because red is useless to most combo (which is when we should be typically talking about a ban), if it were black or blue...we'd be in a lot of trouble. It takes a massive amount of library fixing to take advantage of this card because of how little you get for the card slot, its why ornathopter only fits in 1 deck--its the same concept at work and why we don't see it in twin, or in winning amulet lists--despite the potential payoff.
I do think pact of negation is special, it is used almost exclusively unfairly but in those decks it also adds inconsistency until its time to win--is that fair enough a trade off? I generally think so. The card should see more play in control whenever that becomes a thing, but I guess not yet. All the non-black pacts fairness really hinges on hivemind, which we've just received word on is a totally fine card for modern legality. Super early un-interactive kills are lame (we all can agree), but with the limited frequency in which it actually happens, we're totally fine--take your lumps and pack disruption or a clock like you should and modern will treat you well.
I give it 'till page 8 before we're back to rehashing past ban thread discussions.
Page 8 is far too high. I would say page 5 at the latest.
Obviously you don't got it. In fact, I don't think you got my original point at all. I consider it to be the best combo deck in modern, and also will T8 at least (if not multiple) majors before the year is out once it gains traction. The fact the deck has a very good game against burn (~8-10% of the meta) and also a very good matchup against Tron decks makes it a very strong competitor. Maybe you're mad you didn't jump on the bandwagon before the cards spiked or whatever I couldn't care less, I'm going to play the deck, have fun and watch it tear stuff up. You've made essentially no points so far in this convo ("Pretty sure there will be more Twin, BG/x or Affinity decks in those top 8s. Are those busted too for doing that?" What does that even mean?) so there's really no point in keeping this going. Cheers.
I still stand by Simian Spirit Guide ultimately needing a ban. It's essentially just here to speed up busted things. I know it kills one deck out right (Ad Nauseam) but to me, that doesn't outweigh it's need to be banned. It essentially operates as a "fixed"rite of flame. I get to rite of flame because at minimum a card like that would cost R giving a feint impression of R: add RR. However, it doesn't actually cost anything to use. Meaning it creates explosive plays. Sometimes it just powers out T1-2 bloodmoons which in and of itself isn't terrible, other times it creates powerful plays like in Grishoalbrand, those rare T1 amulet bloom senarios, as well as housing the possibility of breaking future cards to be printed. I'm sure i'm in a minority here with this opinion, but the cards only purpose is the break the T4 rule or to cast things essentially for free when you draw a billion cards. This, by the way, is not a knock against grishoal brand specifically. Meaning it's not a choice aimed at hurting that deck, but an opinion designed around the health of the format as a whole.
As for Unbans: Bloodbraid Elf - I just really don't feel like this card changes anything. People can bring up the "but Aryakin it's 10% of the meta" all they like, but as someone who mains jund at the moment it doesn't change much if anything in the jund deck. It's a different weapon in the arsenal, sure, but it causes shifts in the diagram not some massive exodus to the BG/x archtype. It is also constantly ignored that this offers a boon to aggressive zoo shells, or at the very least an option in that arsenal. In a format that is obsessed with linear non-interactive strategies it's hard for me to understand why something that is simply CA attached to a body get's such a bad rap, particularly when cards like snapcaster mage and Collected Company are above reproach. To me these cards are extremely comparable in their respective shells.
Sword of the Meek - Here is a card most people seem to agree is a "safe unban". Me, not so much, as it does two things to the meta that I, as a player, would dislike. It forces anyone trying to play on a "fair" axis to run BG/x for abrupt decay. Yes, I main jund at the moment, but that is not ultimately where I would like to find myself in the future of this format. Currently I run it because it allows me to play KoCommand, abrupt decay and blood moon in the same deck which is to say, it gives me the best "fair way" to fight "unfair decks". Hopefully this wont always be the case. Hopefully people will have other fair ways to attack the format, but if Sword of the Meek comes off the banned list, I don't see any creature based "fair strategy" being able to compete once the combo is assembled, and I don't see any control deck, which does not play the combo, able to compete without abrupt decay. Now, maybe I'm wrong on this point and maybe aggro decks like Zoo, fish, goblins, or hatebears, or non Gx or Ux control lists like MBC will be able to beat 1: gain 1 life add a 1/1 flyer to the board, but I've yet to see anyone make an argument in this thread to support that. Instead everyone focuses on things like "with twin, amulet and grishoal decks in the format this is perfectly fine". (which is an argument that doesn't work for bloodbraid elf mind you). I guess I'm still hopeful that the format will eventually even out between fair/unfair decks and in that possibility I don't see SoTM as healthy.
These are just my opinions though. I'm not upset about the update, but I am a little disappointed. As for the format being healthy and nothing needing to be changed, I think that's strongly opinion based. not that you can't have an opinion on the matter, but I find the massive amounts of non-interactive linear decks that require such specific hate to be a real problem for the format that only two things can help address, new printings and ban announcements so where some people think it's a healthy format others can find fault with it.
This has been said many times but I'll say it again, bloodbraid elf is uninteractive b/c the ability happens as long as its cast.
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.
I still stand by Simian Spirit Guide ultimately needing a ban. It's essentially just here to speed up busted things. I know it kills one deck out right (Ad Nauseam) but to me, that doesn't outweigh it's need to be banned. It essentially operates as a "fixed"rite of flame. I get to rite of flame because at minimum a card like that would cost R giving a feint impression of R: add RR. However, it doesn't actually cost anything to use. Meaning it creates explosive plays. Sometimes it just powers out T1-2 bloodmoons which in and of itself isn't terrible, other times it creates powerful plays like in Grishoalbrand, those rare T1 amulet bloom senarios, as well as housing the possibility of breaking future cards to be printed. I'm sure i'm in a minority here with this opinion, but the cards only purpose is the break the T4 rule or to cast things essentially for free when you draw a billion cards. This, by the way, is not a knock against grishoal brand specifically. Meaning it's not a choice aimed at hurting that deck, but an opinion designed around the health of the format as a whole.
As for Unbans: Bloodbraid Elf - I just really don't feel like this card changes anything. People can bring up the "but Aryakin it's 10% of the meta" all they like, but as someone who mains jund at the moment it doesn't change much if anything in the jund deck. It's a different weapon in the arsenal, sure, but it causes shifts in the diagram not some massive exodus to the BG/x archtype. It is also constantly ignored that this offers a boon to aggressive zoo shells, or at the very least an option in that arsenal. In a format that is obsessed with linear non-interactive strategies it's hard for me to understand why something that is simply CA attached to a body get's such a bad rap, particularly when cards like snapcaster mage and Collected Company are above reproach. To me these cards are extremely comparable in their respective shells.
Sword of the Meek - Here is a card most people seem to agree is a "safe unban". Me, not so much, as it does two things to the meta that I, as a player, would dislike. It forces anyone trying to play on a "fair" axis to run BG/x for abrupt decay. Yes, I main jund at the moment, but that is not ultimately where I would like to find myself in the future of this format. Currently I run it because it allows me to play KoCommand, abrupt decay and blood moon in the same deck which is to say, it gives me the best "fair way" to fight "unfair decks". Hopefully this wont always be the case. Hopefully people will have other fair ways to attack the format, but if Sword of the Meek comes off the banned list, I don't see any creature based "fair strategy" being able to compete once the combo is assembled, and I don't see any control deck, which does not play the combo, able to compete without abrupt decay. Now, maybe I'm wrong on this point and maybe aggro decks like Zoo, fish, goblins, or hatebears, or non Gx or Ux control lists like MBC will be able to beat 1: gain 1 life add a 1/1 flyer to the board, but I've yet to see anyone make an argument in this thread to support that. Instead everyone focuses on things like "with twin, amulet and grishoal decks in the format this is perfectly fine". (which is an argument that doesn't work for bloodbraid elf mind you). I guess I'm still hopeful that the format will eventually even out between fair/unfair decks and in that possibility I don't see SoTM as healthy.
These are just my opinions though. I'm not upset about the update, but I am a little disappointed. As for the format being healthy and nothing needing to be changed, I think that's strongly opinion based. not that you can't have an opinion on the matter, but I find the massive amounts of non-interactive linear decks that require such specific hate to be a real problem for the format that only two things can help address, new printings and ban announcements so where some people think it's a healthy format others can find fault with it.
This has been said many times but I'll say it again, bloodbraid elf is uninteractive b/c the ability happens as long as its cast.
That's a really poor excuse though. It still uses the stack so in fact can be interacted with, and the 3/2 haste body it leaves behind is very lackluster. If snapcaster, coco,and cryptic are safe for the format then in a vacuum so is BBE. The issue is simply the prevalence of the most popular deck it slots into.
I've gotten to the point where when I saw the "no bans" announcement, my first thought was "hmmmm, how can I make money off of this?". I'm sure somebody wants my Summer Blooms now.
I give it 'till page 8 before we're back to rehashing past ban thread discussions.
Page 8 is far too high. I would say page 5 at the latest.
Obviously you don't got it. In fact, I don't think you got my original point at all. I consider it to be the best combo deck in modern, and also will T8 at least (if not multiple) majors before the year is out once it gains traction. The fact the deck has a very good game against burn (~8-10% of the meta) and also a very good matchup against Tron decks makes it a very strong competitor. Maybe you're mad you didn't jump on the bandwagon before the cards spiked or whatever I couldn't care less, I'm going to play the deck, have fun and watch it tear stuff up. You've made essentially no points so far in this convo ("Pretty sure there will be more Twin, BG/x or Affinity decks in those top 8s. Are those busted too for doing that?" What does that even mean?) so there's really no point in keeping this going. Cheers.
Galerion used common sense! It's super effective! Dizzy fainted!
But seriously if grishoalbrand would be way more represented if it actually was that consistently good. People don't not play over powered decks due to ban scares, and it's not like grishoalbrand is secret tech at this point. It's just not broken. Also not agreeing with your point /= not getting it.
I've actually still only played the old crappy version of the deck that either died to itself, annihilated everyone in a fit of card drawing glory, or got hated out with the occasional odd grindy win. In paper I see this new list being 100% better as its more resilient, but it looks like needing interdependent cards to be drawn and in hand together is still this decks downfall.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Unfortunately, there is too much entangled correlation and causation here to weigh in on without a serious analysis of the data. We have too many effects at play. To start, we have PTs, which are certainly a consideration Wizards is going to have (no one wants a *****ty PT metagame). But we also have overall metagame health, which in the case of DRS and Delver/Pod was very unhealthy independently of the PT. So the bans/unbans around then were almost definitely related to this. Speaking of which, we have the possibility that Wizards wants to balance bans with unbans, which means whenever we see bans for some reason, we are likely to see unbans to balance them out. If that's the case, the driving factor isn't the PT (which is maybe just incidental), it's the unhealthy metagame that prompts a ban and in turns prompts an unban to fill the gaps. It's also all speculative to begin with, because Wizards hasn't made a lot of statements about the relationship between bans and PTs, whereas they have made ample statements about ban decisions on their own. So overall, it's just too messy of a question to discuss right now. It either needs more datapoints or a really careful analysis of the data we have. It's not nearly as much an open and shut issue as people are claiming.
I predict a Sword of the Meek unban before the Pro Tour.
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)Lapille has basically flat out said that the changes were done because of the PT.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
If by me you mean the deck, then yes there's a good chance.
As for Unbans:
Bloodbraid Elf - I just really don't feel like this card changes anything. People can bring up the "but Aryakin it's 10% of the meta" all they like, but as someone who mains jund at the moment it doesn't change much if anything in the jund deck. It's a different weapon in the arsenal, sure, but it causes shifts in the diagram not some massive exodus to the BG/x archtype. It is also constantly ignored that this offers a boon to aggressive zoo shells, or at the very least an option in that arsenal. In a format that is obsessed with linear non-interactive strategies it's hard for me to understand why something that is simply CA attached to a body get's such a bad rap, particularly when cards like snapcaster mage and Collected Company are above reproach. To me these cards are extremely comparable in their respective shells.
Sword of the Meek - Here is a card most people seem to agree is a "safe unban". Me, not so much, as it does two things to the meta that I, as a player, would dislike. It forces anyone trying to play on a "fair" axis to run BG/x for abrupt decay. Yes, I main jund at the moment, but that is not ultimately where I would like to find myself in the future of this format. Currently I run it because it allows me to play KoCommand, abrupt decay and blood moon in the same deck which is to say, it gives me the best "fair way" to fight "unfair decks". Hopefully this wont always be the case. Hopefully people will have other fair ways to attack the format, but if Sword of the Meek comes off the banned list, I don't see any creature based "fair strategy" being able to compete once the combo is assembled, and I don't see any control deck, which does not play the combo, able to compete without abrupt decay. Now, maybe I'm wrong on this point and maybe aggro decks like Zoo, fish, goblins, or hatebears, or non Gx or Ux control lists like MBC will be able to beat 1: gain 1 life add a 1/1 flyer to the board, but I've yet to see anyone make an argument in this thread to support that. Instead everyone focuses on things like "with twin, amulet and grishoal decks in the format this is perfectly fine". (which is an argument that doesn't work for bloodbraid elf mind you). I guess I'm still hopeful that the format will eventually even out between fair/unfair decks and in that possibility I don't see SoTM as healthy.
These are just my opinions though. I'm not upset about the update, but I am a little disappointed. As for the format being healthy and nothing needing to be changed, I think that's strongly opinion based. not that you can't have an opinion on the matter, but I find the massive amounts of non-interactive linear decks that require such specific hate to be a real problem for the format that only two things can help address, new printings and ban announcements so where some people think it's a healthy format others can find fault with it.
I'll remember how Sam Black and Justin Cohen had the same thoughts, and yet since then the deck has mysteriously failed to top 8 a GP since in three attempts.
Grixis Death's Shadow, Jund, UW Tron, Jeskai Control, Storm, Counters Company, Eldrazi Tron, Affinity, Living End, Infect, Merfolk, Dredge, Ad Nauseam, Amulet, Bogles, Eldrazi Tron, Mono U Tron, Lantern, Mardu Pyromancer
Pretty sure there will be more Twin, BG/x or Affinity decks in those top 8s. Are those busted too for doing that?
He doesn't work there anymore, but he was heavily involved with modern, including designing mm2015, as well as being there for the creation of the format. I highly doubt that the companies views have changed all that much since he was there.
http://www.rocketjump.com/listen/the-problem-with-modern-pro-tours-with-tom-lapille
That's an interview with him specifically about modern and his career. He starts talking about its creation around 21 mins in. At about 27 mins he talks about the original ban list where it was decided that they should "Ban everything that would make people hate this format. Was there a standard deck that would be disgusting and a PR nightmare? What about an extended deck?"
At about 36 mins in. He talks about how banning is a way to invigorate the format. "I think that's the cost of having a modern pro tour every year. Attention is a nonrenewable resource. When you have a format that doesn't rotate and you put a lot of very smart people with incentive, they will fully figure out the format. At that point wizards gets to make a very unpleasant decision. Do we run a boring pro tour, or do we ban cards out of a lot of people's decks in stores. And so far the answer has usually gone we don't run a boring pro tour, we have to ban things." That's the key statement.
Its interesting to hear his opinions on it.
Edit:
So my main takeaway is this: We won't ban or unban things in modern without some large incentive (like the protour) causing us to do so. They'd prefer to leave it completely untouched and they will unless something forces them to do it. I would doubt the metagame was even seriously looked at because there's nothing huge happening to bring lots of PR to modern.
It's a really smart move for them honestly. Can you imagine the potential fall out? "I built this deck to play for modern season and now I can't even play it for the whole time?" It doesn't matter whether the deck was unhealthy it could be really bad PR when for the most part things are going ok.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
But again, the only unbans accompanying bans were just before Pro Tours. In addition to the bannings I've already mentioned, there were also no unbannings accompanying the Wild Nacatl/Punishing Fire bans. Whenever there were bans not before a Pro Tour, there were no unbannings. Whenever there were bans just before a Pro Tour, there were unbannings. And when they did unbannings that weren't accompanied by a banning (Valakut), that was also before a Pro Tour.
Granted, that was from several months ago and that was his speculation on what would happen if it was decided that bannings were necessary to shake things up, but he did indicate Twin as an apparent possibility.
I just naturally assumed that he knows more than I do about the B&R announcements.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)I for one agree with you there.
The card solely exists to make combo faster. Banning it wouldn't be a loss for the format at all.
The same thing is true for Pact of Negation. The card is only used in combo decks as protection for the turn they are going off.
Sadly that isn't how bannings work. There has to be some evidence that these cards are actual problems for them to be banned even though it's pretty clear that these two cards in particular are only there to be abused by combo.
% of players that run the deck compared to T8 decks in those GPs?
Due to the sheer number of people running already built proven decks, of course there will be more of them in T8.
I give it 'till page 8 before we're back to rehashing past ban thread discussions.
The fact that every tournament will have Amulet and Grishoalbrand still doesn't mean you'll ever sit down across from them. Prevalence is just such an important consideration in this. In most situations, the meta is fairly self correcting.
So better, proven decks put up more results than decks which are not? Got it.
Don't see anything broken or wrong there though.
Page 8 is far too high. I would say page 5 at the latest.
This is interesting to me, but I'll actually defend the cards.
The colorshifted nature of guide makes it not worth running outside of ad nauseam (where it plays a critical part in the decks ability to win on time/at all)--if other decks run it effectively its only ever to ramp because red is useless to most combo (which is when we should be typically talking about a ban), if it were black or blue...we'd be in a lot of trouble. It takes a massive amount of library fixing to take advantage of this card because of how little you get for the card slot, its why ornathopter only fits in 1 deck--its the same concept at work and why we don't see it in twin, or in winning amulet lists--despite the potential payoff.
I do think pact of negation is special, it is used almost exclusively unfairly but in those decks it also adds inconsistency until its time to win--is that fair enough a trade off? I generally think so. The card should see more play in control whenever that becomes a thing, but I guess not yet. All the non-black pacts fairness really hinges on hivemind, which we've just received word on is a totally fine card for modern legality. Super early un-interactive kills are lame (we all can agree), but with the limited frequency in which it actually happens, we're totally fine--take your lumps and pack disruption or a clock like you should and modern will treat you well.
Obviously you don't got it. In fact, I don't think you got my original point at all. I consider it to be the best combo deck in modern, and also will T8 at least (if not multiple) majors before the year is out once it gains traction. The fact the deck has a very good game against burn (~8-10% of the meta) and also a very good matchup against Tron decks makes it a very strong competitor. Maybe you're mad you didn't jump on the bandwagon before the cards spiked or whatever I couldn't care less, I'm going to play the deck, have fun and watch it tear stuff up. You've made essentially no points so far in this convo ("Pretty sure there will be more Twin, BG/x or Affinity decks in those top 8s. Are those busted too for doing that?" What does that even mean?) so there's really no point in keeping this going. Cheers.
This has been said many times but I'll say it again, bloodbraid elf is uninteractive b/c the ability happens as long as its cast.
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/)
That's a really poor excuse though. It still uses the stack so in fact can be interacted with, and the 3/2 haste body it leaves behind is very lackluster. If snapcaster, coco,and cryptic are safe for the format then in a vacuum so is BBE. The issue is simply the prevalence of the most popular deck it slots into.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
So what now? Back to the same Ban/Unban arguments about the same cards until september? Ewww...
*Closes thread and schedules it to open again around september 21, 2015*
"When you get your opponent down to 0 sanity, you win the game!"
I've gotten to the point where when I saw the "no bans" announcement, my first thought was "hmmmm, how can I make money off of this?". I'm sure somebody wants my Summer Blooms now.
Anyway, hoping for a Sword of the Meek unban in September.
PucaTrade Invite. Sign up and enjoy the first 500 points ($5) free!
Galerion used common sense! It's super effective! Dizzy fainted!
But seriously if grishoalbrand would be way more represented if it actually was that consistently good. People don't not play over powered decks due to ban scares, and it's not like grishoalbrand is secret tech at this point. It's just not broken. Also not agreeing with your point /= not getting it.