The primary issue of unhappiness isn't due to the bannings alone, though. People are putting a lot of money on the line getting into the decks they are playing, to the point that sometimes it almost becomes part of that players identity at a FNM. When something as iconic as splinter twin gets a banning it hits especially hard.
I will tell you the same thing I told cfusionpm, if you cant afford taking a loss, maybe magic is not what you should be investing in. Anything you put money into has risks.
As for decks becoming a players identity, thats a problem in itself. Metas get stale when everyone is playing the same deck week in and week out. Stale enough that some wont play anymore.
The question is, which player spends more money on Magic? The player that plays the same deck week in and week out? Or the player that likes to switch it up regularly and play different things and is not bothered by bans?
Kill the pro tour, you kill support of the format, Modern goes the way of either Extended or Legacy. There is no reason for Wotc to support a format that does not bring money in for the TO's, LGS, or Wotc. But some players dont understand this concept. A format has to be profitable for Wotc to want to support it.
The difficulty in switching up to different decks is what I'm getting at more than anything else. Then again, Magic The Gathering Modern is pretty niche in paper format anyway, so maybe this is falling on deaf ears. Personally, I'd like to see the format expand to more than just competitive pro decks and neck to neck tournaments. EDH is fun for some people, but doesn't have the same appeal as the original 60 card deck formats. Right now it feels as if someone saying to someone else that they play modern means that other person is going to run scurrying off with their tails between their legs (case and point, just about every early college and late high schooler I play against at my LGS ). These guys are the ones who are going to be playing Magic more intensely than anyone.
I actually don't understand why this is. I don't think I've ever seen this kind of situation with other types of games like Pokemon or even YuGiOh.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Are they really 'shake-up' bans? While I agree these bans are rocking the very foundations of the meta, I wouldn't solely apply that's what these bans only are. These bans are things that are needed, and in my opinion they will and SHOULD continue. These decks, these pillars as people call them, that people think need to exist in this format, need to be powered down. Decks like Twin, as we ALL know, keep blue-power-house cards from entering the format, whether that be from unbanning them and/or producing them into new sets.
Bocephus, I agree with you. While many of you have many strong points and I understand some of your blight, I still think you're all wrong with this negativity about where the format is now going to lead. I respect your opinions, but every time I've read this "Modern will die because of this banning" the format has only strengthened each and EVERY time. I have played in so many local metas that I can tell you exactly what is out there. You all say, "Oh, it isn't solved." Bull. I have seen so many decks and players be put down because of Pod, because of Twin, because of Tron. While I love each of these decks, I don't think they should have been as powerful as they were or are. Wizards has shown that they tried to curve them, but the tide never went in their favor.
What happened when they banned Pod? Collected Company. Seething Song? Goblin Electromancer. Maybe now we can finally get nice blue cards without them empowering the madness that was Twin's stagnation of the format. The "Oops, I win" factor that was into the control aspect that was Twin should have been axed a long time ago, but was so accustomed to being a 'pillar' that I sort of accepted it. I actively ALWAYS played around Twin. Time and time again, it was the most puzzling question baring entry into the format for so many decks. Can you handle Twin on turn four? When they actively surprise you with the first half of the combo at the end of your turn and tapping down your mana source? When they're a powerful control deck that can go the distance, switch play styles, and simply take out the combo from their deck if you try rightfully hate it out? Oops, I'm sorry your main deck couldn't deal with Twin, so why don't you go ahead in sideboard in for it? Go head, bring in all 15. I'll just take the combo out and beat you to death with Snapcaster + Bolt.
In my opinion, we should hit Tron too. I absolutely love Tron, do not get me wrong, but it should slow down. The new Eldrazi monster? I may be wrong, but I think that will quickly be an offender to the meta. We shall see.
Regardless of whether or not we will possibly get new blue cards due to Twin's death, we will certainly get so many more decks being played. The diversity, whether you all admit or not, is already happening. Has no one seen the prices rise? Is it solely buyout speculation? No. Could it be coupled with people entering into the format and/or coming back? Is it not the mass amount of Twin players switching decks? Essentially turning one deck into SEVERAL decks? Deck diversity is rising, it's only a matter of time. If we do not get diversity, it will probably be because of other decks swimming in the pool that was once Twin, which in turn they will need to be slowed down or what-have-you. For example, what if Tron and Affinity consume Twin's share? The underlining problem is that maybe these decks are too powerful to begin with and/or other decks need some more proper tools still.
While I agree that it'd be nice to have far more Modern GPs. Hell, if I could, I'd play in a GP once a month if it was Modern, given that I wouldn't have to travel terribly too far for them. I disagree with people that the PT is unhealthy for Modern. You know how many players I know that watch the PT? I think Modern needs to stay apart of the PT.
I think Sam Black knows what he's talking about in relation to the Twin ban, whereas some pros simply throw a tantrum because they can't auto-win or what-have-you and no longer have Twin to fall back onto.
This ban is different, we used to believe the ban list was for broken decks that violate the turn 4 rule and so own. Now we know that wizards is using the ban list to rotate decks which is a different animal. I believe If wizards bans another deck in the next year it will a have a huge ripple effect that will hurt not just modern but standard, just wait and see. People are really frustrated at wizards for be so greedy and for the lack of care for the player base. There's a reason for the lack of communication and double speak from wizards it's misdirection to hide the truth, politicians do it all the time. I thought I read somewhere that standard isn't growing as fast as it has in the past maybe the real problem is wizards needs to make stronger standard sets..
This ban I think has had far more people opposed to it than any ban ever made in modern before. They might get away with it if the metagame doesn't degenerate too badly. But if the meta degenerates badly then there will be literally no defence for this ban and it will be very embarrassing for them, since it shows their priorities were wrong and their competence in understanding the format was severely lacking.
Umm...Twin WAS the best deck...I don't know why I'm having to even argue this...
I'm sorry, but I think you missed the part about increasing modern GPs, along with providing coverage for those events, and the continuation of MM sets. If that isn't support then I don't know what is. If this would keep Modern from suffering shake up bans, then it would retain more players, which is something that is in danger at the moment.
Reading comprehension failure.
I read everything you wrote, I think you are being overly optimistic. You want your cake and want to eat it too. You are thinking solely as a player, not as a business.
And as I mentioned, pros dont like Modern, do you really think they would be innovating and bring something new to the tables? It would be a train wreck for Wotc if the GP was 30% split between the 3 top decks and 10% one of random rogue decks. You think people would tune in to watch the same match up round after round?
Again, why would they continue printing Modern Masters sets? That time and money could be better spent on casual sets (commander and Conspiracy type sets). Without support the numbers would get less, not more.
Do standard players gravitate down to modern because of the pro tour? I am not sure that is true. Quite frankly WotC didn't think that was true as well. People pushed for a modern PT so they gave us one. Besides the marketing posters for MM3 would reach more people than pro tour coverage.
Probably has something to do with it, not total, but part. Actually anything that has coverage where new/Standard players can see matches. Not sure a poster can hook as many players as actually seeing play. Any and all game play will sell more then a piece of paper(poster).
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
Slippery slope if you start going after every card that could enable a T3 kill.
You mean like SUMMER BLOOM?
MTGO Stats from December:
Bloom: 4.42% of meta
Infect: 3.54% of meta
Just sayin...
It's a slippery slope Goblin Guide can leed to turn three kills so can Become Immense. Tron playing a turn 3 Ugin Might as well be a turn three kill because 99 percent of time your going to lose the game.
I'm sorry, but I think you missed the part about increasing modern GPs, along with providing coverage for those events, and the continuation of MM sets. If that isn't support then I don't know what is. If this would keep Modern from suffering shake up bans, then it would retain more players, which is something that is in danger at the moment.
Reading comprehension failure.
I read everything you wrote, I think you are being overly optimistic. You want your cake and want to eat it too. You are thinking solely as a player, not as a business.
And as I mentioned, pros dont like Modern, do you really think they would be innovating and bring something new to the tables? It would be a train wreck for Wotc if the GP was 30% split between the 3 top decks and 10% one of random rogue decks. You think people would tune in to watch the same match up round after round?
Again, why would they continue printing Modern Masters sets? That time and money could be better spent on casual sets (commander and Conspiracy type sets). Without support the numbers would get less, not more.
Do standard players gravitate down to modern because of the pro tour? I am not sure that is true. Quite frankly WotC didn't think that was true as well. People pushed for a modern PT so they gave us one. Besides the marketing posters for MM3 would reach more people than pro tour coverage.
Probably has something to do with it, not total, but part. Actually anything that has coverage where new/Standard players can see matches. Not sure a poster can hook as many players as actually seeing play. Any and all game play will sell more then a piece of paper(poster).
Yeah but hooking players into modern is very hard. They have a different psychological profiles than modern, legacy, vintage players. Specifically they are players that are focused on the new and novel experiences of magic. Players that focus on older formats like less novelty in their games. No one really calls out other modern players for playing the same deck for years. If they were a standard player they would be looked at like woolly bear unicorn riding a dinosaur with lasers. This is why they do limited at every pro tour now. Every draft is different and these players that seek new experiences love that. That is not the average modern player though. So what they did is ban splinter twin as a marketing ploy to attract more people to check out this shiny new format, when for the most part modern players want more meat and potatoes.
I'm sorry, but I think you missed the part about increasing modern GPs, along with providing coverage for those events, and the continuation of MM sets. If that isn't support then I don't know what is. If this would keep Modern from suffering shake up bans, then it would retain more players, which is something that is in danger at the moment.
Reading comprehension failure.
I read everything you wrote, I think you are being overly optimistic. You want your cake and want to eat it too. You are thinking solely as a player, not as a business.
And as I mentioned, pros dont like Modern, do you really think they would be innovating and bring something new to the tables? It would be a train wreck for Wotc if the GP was 30% split between the 3 top decks and 10% one of random rogue decks. You think people would tune in to watch the same match up round after round?
Again, why would they continue printing Modern Masters sets? That time and money could be better spent on casual sets (commander and Conspiracy type sets). Without support the numbers would get less, not more.
Do standard players gravitate down to modern because of the pro tour? I am not sure that is true. Quite frankly WotC didn't think that was true as well. People pushed for a modern PT so they gave us one. Besides the marketing posters for MM3 would reach more people than pro tour coverage.
Probably has something to do with it, not total, but part. Actually anything that has coverage where new/Standard players can see matches. Not sure a poster can hook as many players as actually seeing play. Any and all game play will sell more then a piece of paper(poster).
Yeah but hooking players into modern is very hard. They have a different psychological profiles than modern, legacy, vintage players. Specifically they are players that are focused on the new and novel experiences of magic. Players that focus on older formats like less novelty in their games. No one really calls out other modern players for playing the same deck for years. If they were a standard player they would be looked at like woolly bear unicorn riding a dinosaur with lasers. This is why they do limited at every pro tour now. Every draft is different and these players that seek new experiences love that. That is not the average modern player though. So what they did is ban splinter twin as a marketing ploy to attract more people to check out this shiny new format, when for the most part modern players want more meat and potatoes.
I think this starts going down the road of also saying that WoTC intentionally designed the eldrazi to fit well with Tron and even make an entire deck archetype focused on them. What gets people to play modern is pretty simple: If someone doesn't care much for the MTG storyline and just wants to play an effective deck they will pick modern (or no format at all and just build a good deck). I think the best way for someone to get into magic is not bother with format at all. There's plenty of broken / competitive strategies that can be fun to run and affordable when one doesn't constrain themselves to some arbitrary format.
Lets face it, the planeswalkers are kind of a joke and WoTC hasn't had a good storyline for magic since possibly Kamigawa. They have great settings that are fun to learn about, such as Dominaria, Innistrad, Ravnica, etc, but that isn't the same thing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Slippery slope if you start going after every card that could enable a T3 kill.
They sort of already went down that slope now with Twin and Bloom, though with Bloom everyone and their brother knew it was probably going to get hit.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
unlike the surprisingly resilient Bloom, the decks you are mentioning as T4 violators get werecked not only by SB but sometimes even by MB cards, or just having a removal heavy hand in the case of infect
like we've said a millionth times, the way a deck wins before T4 is a stong factor of the magnitude of it's offense, small offenders will not get banned, fringe decks will not get banned
do i need to explain that in a format were for the first T3 rounds you can do whatever you want and still be safe a ton of strategies are by default broken? even mono-green devotion (nykhthos-wave) could get ridiculous in such a slow meta
no T4 kills in Modern mean that no deck can win before T4 against a competent opponent playing an interactive deck
if my deck consists of 26 mountains, 8 mana rituals, 4 SSG,4x Extraplanar Lens,4x Koth of the Hammer,14x Dragons i will definately lose before T4 a considerable amount of times
if i play Jund and i think that a hand like : Ravine,Blackcleave,Mire,Goyf,Lili,Maelstrom Pulse,Olivia is a keep against an unknown opponent, i'm definately going to die before T4 a considerable amount of times
but if i do my job and play properly it's very unlikely that i'll die before T4 and that could only happen if i'm semi-screwed on the draw and facing linear godhands from decent players, or if i'm playing a linear deck myself, that means i had it coming, since i'd probably do the same to my opponent next turn
that's what the T4 rules means, not ban everything that could possibly win by T3, Elves are a T4 violator too, shall we ban Ezuri for this? Suicide Zoo is also a T4 violator, what do we even ban for this one?... Dredgevine can also violate the T4 rule, ban Vengevine?
I saw a game one time were a guy won turn 2 playing a Double Strike pump aggro deck with a play set of Simian Spirit Guide, though it took a perfect hand to do it.
I read everything you wrote, I think you are being overly optimistic. You want your cake and want to eat it too. You are thinking solely as a player, not as a business.
And as I mentioned, pros dont like Modern, do you really think they would be innovating and bring something new to the tables? It would be a train wreck for Wotc if the GP was 30% split between the 3 top decks and 10% one of random rogue decks. You think people would tune in to watch the same match up round after round?
Again, why would they continue printing Modern Masters sets? That time and money could be better spent on casual sets (commander and Conspiracy type sets). Without support the numbers would get less, not more.
Do standard players gravitate down to modern because of the pro tour? I am not sure that is true. Quite frankly WotC didn't think that was true as well. People pushed for a modern PT so they gave us one. Besides the marketing posters for MM3 would reach more people than pro tour coverage.
Probably has something to do with it, not total, but part. Actually anything that has coverage where new/Standard players can see matches. Not sure a poster can hook as many players as actually seeing play. Any and all game play will sell more then a piece of paper(poster).
Yeah but hooking players into modern is very hard. They have a different psychological profiles than modern, legacy, vintage players. Specifically they are players that are focused on the new and novel experiences of magic. Players that focus on older formats like less novelty in their games. No one really calls out other modern players for playing the same deck for years. If they were a standard player they would be looked at like woolly bear unicorn riding a dinosaur with lasers. This is why they do limited at every pro tour now. Every draft is different and these players that seek new experiences love that. That is not the average modern player though. So what they did is ban splinter twin as a marketing ploy to attract more people to check out this shiny new format, when for the most part modern players want more meat and potatoes.
I think this starts going down the road of also saying that WoTC intentionally designed the eldrazi to fit well with Tron and even make an entire deck archetype focused on them. What gets people to play modern is pretty simple: If someone doesn't care much for the MTG storyline and just wants to play an effective deck they will pick modern (or no format at all and just build a good deck). I think the best way for someone to get into magic is not bother with format at all. There's plenty of broken / competitive strategies that can be fun to run and affordable when one doesn't constrain themselves to some arbitrary format.
Lets face it, the planeswalkers are kind of a joke and WoTC hasn't had a good storyline for magic since possibly Kamigawa. They have great settings that are fun to learn about, such as Dominaria, Innistrad, Ravnica, etc, but that isn't the same thing.
Actually, game designers do that all the time. Now they don't do bans solely to market, but they need to change the format often enough to keep a certain subset of players interested. They should segment the market more in my opinion. This is the price to be paid for appealing to more standard players. That is what the nacatl unban was about. It is a way to keep that subset of players interested. Again magic is a huge game and they have the same problems MMOs have, they have to appeal to a lot of fundamentally different people.
Just about any deck that is not a one-dimensional linear strategy can play out any number of ways several times playing against it. With the average local FNM style events being 4-5 rounds and with there being at least 20 viable competitive decks (not counting random brews that LOVE local metas), I really don't see that happening. Even if two people have two decks and everyone else has the same, if you have a 20 person event once a week, I believe the likelihood of running into exactly the same deck enough times to make it stale enough to not want to play is extremely low. I thought you weren't a fan of baseless hyperbole? Plus, it gives you an edge game one when you know that Tommy Infect always plays the same thing. Every time you get paired up, you have an advantage when deciding mulligans and opening hands.
The problem is metas devolve to a few decks everyone plays. Locally of the 3 places I play, 2 had become Twin and Tron all day every day. The 3rd place was Burn and Twin. We went from having a healthy meta of 30+ players at all 3 down to a dozen or so. People got tired of playing the same match ups week in and week out. I am sure if its happening in one place, its happening in more then one.
Its the problem of bringing the Standard (different deck every few weeks) together with the Legacy crowd (play the same deck for years). There is a chasm between them in thinking how the format should evolve.
I can't imagine that being the case everywhere and I honestly don't know why your attendance dropped. Modern GPs and SCG events have been having record turnout and Modern seems to be more popular the last 6 months or so than it has ever been. Sounds like your group has a lot of grumpy players who would be better served by drafting new sets every 3 months.
Which spends more on magic? The Standard and Draft players. Modern players, if they aren't porting their cards over from past Standard seasons are largely buying cards on the secondary market; a market Wizards has no control over, nor makes direct money from. You could argue that they make money from places like CFB and SCG buying thousands of cases to crack and sell as singles, but again, most of that demand is for Standard. Most of the high-demand Modern staples have long since been out of print and Wizards makes exactly 0 dollars on them. Unless they print Modern Masters more often, which has been shown to be a guaranteed sell-out product, no matter what the price is or how skewed the actual quality is.
This has been explained so many times. Wotc is in a partnership with LGS around the country. If singles are selling Wotc has more LGS to sell to. Wotc needs the secondary market to stay in business. Without it Wotc dies.
Vintage does not sell product, Legacy does not sell product, neither of these formats see support or much of it. Modern is seeing support now mainly because it still does sell singles and product. Take away that support and take it out of the eye of the players. That stops and Wotc goes back to just supporting Limited and Standard. But dont take my word for it, we have seen it multiple times in MAgic but hey, it could be different this time.
By the way, the guy brewing and making new builds is the person dumping money into the format/LGS, not the guy who plays the same deck for 2 years and *****es about the $10 entry fee to local events and crappy prize support.
I listed several ideas for events and products to make money off Modern. You say Vintage and Legacy do not sell product. Well guess what, neither does Modern, at least not from Wizards. Maybe you missed the entire part I wrote about Wizards not making money from Modern because they choose to let it be run entirely by the secondary market. What exactly constitutes "support" in your mind? A Pro Tour designed and aimed at disenfranchising current players while trying to appeal to those who do not play the format?
Again, I thought you were strongly against outlandish hyperbole? Modern is an extremely popular format because it offers more stability than Standard but doesn't suffer from the "used car prices" Legacy does. There are plenty of ways to make money off it: Modern Masters series, reprinting key staples in otherwise bland sets, printing exciting new cards that have eternal playability, reprinting staples in supplemental products, etc. All of these strategies have shown to move product; Wizards just chooses to play it extremely conservatively.
You are only looking at it from one side. Not everyone wants that stability like Legacy. They want the meta to get 'shaken up'. Yet they dont want to play Standard, a weaker format, no combo, less decks to choose from. As I mentioned above, the melding of the Standard player and the Legacy player is causing a chasm in thinking for the format and some just cant understand the other side.
Completely ignoring my words, again, especially with regards to how Wizards could support Modern AND make money by selling products! What a concept!
And it seems you are implying Modern players don't want a stable metagame that slowly shifts over time with new sets and new printings. We could make a poll and ask the players ourselves instead of just assuming that we players want the threat that any top tier deck could be banned every year to "shake up the meta."
As several have suggested, get Modern the f**k out of the Pro Tour. At least ones associated with new sets. The goal of the Pro Tour is to showcase new sets and Modern rarely ever does this. Give Modern its own separate event once a year, like a Modern Cup with similar prize support, and market it to take place in the summer to coincide with a major Modern product release (like Modern Masters). The Modern Masters 2015 GP in Vegas broke attendance records like crazy and, in addition to being stupidly popular, was regarded as a huge success on all avenues.
Why would Wotc still put out Modern Masters if they can not show case the format in high level events? You want Modern Masters to be a draft format spotlight, not Modern 'the constructed format' the format itself. You take away the supprot, the format will lose players. How many? I am not sure Wotc wants to find out. Or maybe with the baseless speculation of the new format coming soon they knew the writing was on the wall.
Do you actively ignore what other people write? Or do you simply misunderstand? Modern events would be amazing. Events which showcase Modern specifically and are not tied to the Pro Tour. Things like a Modern Cup and the Modern Masters GP. We should have MORE Modern events (something SCG has definitely jumped on). And as long as they aren't these contrived new-player-salesman events like the Pro Tour, it probably wouldn't be facing such thin and arbitrary bans every year.
Modern is an extremely popular format because it offers more stability than Standard but doesn't suffer from the "used car prices" Legacy does
Actually Modern got so popular because the 2 Theros expansions were crap and people got fed up playing against Abzan (25 % metashare!). BFZ was just the nail in the coffin.
And yet, with that meta share, Siege Rhino wasn't banned. Shame.
Bocephus xtreme is packed to the brim with johnnies. Not that this is bad thing, but modern is not a format where the novelty they crave is rewarded, so the player base dries up. As for them not making money off of it like standard, they don't need to. Even if they just do the bans, run GP events, let other places like SCg do larger modern event and come out with yearly MM sets they will have far more money than they normally would. This is basically extra icing on their money cake. Coliseum runs modern fnm and it has almost completely swallowed up the standard fnm. Besides shops make more money from singles than boosters.
Modern is an extremely popular format because it offers more stability than Standard but doesn't suffer from the "used car prices" Legacy does
Actually Modern got so popular because the 2 Theros expansions were crap and people got fed up playing against Abzan (25 % metashare!). BFZ was just the nail in the coffin.
There are several reasons Modern is so popular (as indicated by the passion demonstrated in this thread, whichever side you favour -- pro Twin ban or the right side . But you absolutely can't discount the fact that WotC has produced two full years of utter crap sets. There have been a few bright spots here and there for sure, but generally speaking Theros was terribad and Born and Oath are both crap. Really, any set they feel is so weak they have to gimmick it up (Expeditions) to drive sales, you just know it's awful. Devoid has to be one of the lamest abilities they've had since Rampage. I'd rather have Banding back and there were very good reasons for letting THAT one die.
Considering this, it should not be at all surprizing that players are migrating to Modern. It's no more expensive to get into than Standard, but usually the investment holds its value over many seasons -- unlike Standard which drops off by 90% in just a few months. It's usually more interactive and the games often reward the ability to change your strategic approach from one game to another. Even the hyper linnear aggro decks like Infect and Boggles can reward pilots with a cool explosion of pump spells or enchantments. Personally that's not my thing, but I have had enjoyable games with people who top deck the last few points they needed with a Rancor and go from dead on board to winning. By comparison Standard is just so boring...I quit the format with Theros block myself. I don't even like drafting the set they are producing these days and haven't bothered even going to a pre-release in two years.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Some people like to win MtG matches in the Red Zone. I prefer to win the way God intended: on the stack.
Modern is an extremely popular format because it offers more stability than Standard but doesn't suffer from the "used car prices" Legacy does
Actually Modern got so popular because the 2 Theros expansions were crap and people got fed up playing against Abzan (25 % metashare!). BFZ was just the nail in the coffin.
And yet, with that meta share, Siege Rhino wasn't banned. Shame.
Pretty sure Delver and Black Devotion had metashares that high or even higher. It's not exactly an irregularity in Standard to have the format largely defined by one deck. If they were to ban based on that then we'd be seeing bannings every other year in Standard. They deal with it by just waiting for rotation. They're only going to ban in Standard when things are so wildly out of control (e.g. Affinity, Caw-Blade) that waiting for rotation is no longer an option.
Modern is an extremely popular format because it offers more stability than Standard but doesn't suffer from the "used car prices" Legacy does
Actually Modern got so popular because the 2 Theros expansions were crap and people got fed up playing against Abzan (25 % metashare!). BFZ was just the nail in the coffin.
There are several reasons Modern is so popular (as indicated by the passion demonstrated in this thread, whichever side you favour -- pro Twin ban or the right side . But you absolutely can't discount the fact that WotC has produced two full years of utter crap sets. There have been a few bright spots here and there for sure, but generally speaking Theros was terribad and Born and Oath are both crap. Really, any set they feel is so weak they have to gimmick it up (Expeditions) to drive sales, you just know it's awful. Devoid has to be one of the lamest abilities they've had since Rampage. I'd rather have Banding back and there were very good reasons for letting THAT one die.
Considering this, it should not be at all surprizing that players are migrating to Modern. It's no more expensive to get into than Standard, but usually the investment holds its value over many seasons -- unlike Standard which drops off by 90% in just a few months. It's usually more interactive and the games often reward the ability to change your strategic approach from one game to another. Even the hyper linnear aggro decks like Infect and Boggles can reward pilots with a cool explosion of pump spells or enchantments. Personally that's not my thing, but I have had enjoyable games with people who top deck the last few points they needed with a Rancor and go from dead on board to winning. By comparison Standard is just so boring...I quit the format with Theros block myself. I don't even like drafting the set they are producing these days and haven't bothered even going to a pre-release in two years.
I agree with every point you've made. Standard so boring and weak, that's why players are leaving standard in groves. I personally hate drafting too.
i don't believe cutting the pro tour would cause modern to go the way of legacy, legacy has problems that are downright unfixable at this point, which is the whole reason they created modern in the first place. cutting the pro tour to then cut these yearly shake up bans would allow modern to serve it's original purpose.
be a non-rotating format without the card availability of legacy/vintage.
modern is a (relatively) cheap format to get in that allows you to root for your deck to do well year in and year out, much like one roots for their football team to do well and hopefully win the super bowl. this is not the case with these disruptive bans, you instead get down on your knees and pray your team loses the super bowl so that the NFL doesn't ban your team. in addition, instead of players hoping that the next set brings their new deck new toys to help it compete more in the format, or trying to adjust their deck to be more competitive in the current meta, players just scream for bans when their deck didn't win. modern should be a format about customer retention, not customer acquisition. it is pretty hard to justify to a new player to spend $500+ on a deck, and that $500 would not go directly to WOTC's pockets anyway. new player's should be directed to standard. modern should be for current players who cannot get into legacy for price restriction/availability, and are sick of cards rotating and spending the money over again building a new deck. people who want modern to be a forced rotation format with shake up bans should be the ones redirected to standard, the format who's primary intention is to do just that, modern should not be warped from it's original intention to please those who want modern to be something it is not.
saying wizard's cannot make money from modern is ridiculous. literally, if they increased the print run/frequency of mm, and dropped the price from it's ridiculous $10 price tag, they would make tons of money with modern. obviously they do need to be responsible about how much they do this, but i firmly belive they are being overly cautious. if they increased the frequency of gp's as a response to getting rid of the PT, they would make money. beyond those things, wizard's makes money from modern purely based off it's support to LGS. people buy singles to play modern. buying singles supports lgs. lgs buy more sealed product from wizards when magic does well for them. its quite simple. wizards will always need a non rotating format for their old customers who have grown tired of standard and just wish to stick with one deck for awhile. if they ditch that format, they lose their old customers, and therefore LGS get less support, leading to magic being less succesful overall
the problems with legacy that lead to it's issues stem deeper than lack of support. in legacy, you will spend upwards of $1200 constructing a manabase for MOST decks, i know there is exceptions, but im speaking of the average legacy deck. in addition, color balance in legacy is beyond ruined. force of will is in 75% of legacy decks. force of will can not just be thrown in any deck, you need to design your deck around having a critical mass of blue cards to run force of will. therefore, 75% of legacy decks are blue decks. a lot of people do not enjoy playing blue, and even more despise playing against blue. legacy is not a format that is inviting to all types of players, even before you talk about budget. compare this to modern, with competitive decks starting around $400 and capping out around $1200, ignoring bgx decks, you can build a competitive deck for less than the cost of the required force of will playset entry cost to legacy. compare this to modern, which, while still not perfect, allows you to realistically play any color you wish and it will be at least somewhat viable, as well as any strategy you wish. color balance is not perfect, however every color except blue has at least one card played in 30% of deck, and no color has a card over 40% prevelance.
in addition, the reserved list causes supply problems in legacy. if WOTC decided to start supporting and hyping legacy, there just would not be enough cards to support a large playerbase of the format, and they have dragged themselves into a wall with the reserved list preventing them from ever repairing this damage
between all of these things is why legacy is not very popular. WOTC does not support legacy BECAUSE it is not popular, not the other way around. even if they were able to push it's popularity, it has constraints on how large it can even grow due to the reserved list.
i don't believe cutting the pro tour would cause modern to go the way of legacy, legacy has problems that are downright unfixable at this point, which is the whole reason they created modern in the first place. cutting the pro tour to then cut these yearly shake up bans would allow modern to serve it's original purpose.
be a non-rotating format without the card availability of legacy/vintage.
modern is a (relatively) cheap format to get in that allows you to root for your deck to do well year in and year out, much like one roots for their football team to do well and hopefully win the super bowl. this is not the case with these disruptive bans, you instead get down on your knees and pray your team loses the super bowl so that the NFL doesn't ban your team. in addition, instead of players hoping that the next set brings their new deck new toys to help it compete more in the format, or trying to adjust their deck to be more competitive in the current meta, players just scream for bans when their deck didn't win. modern should be a format about customer retention, not customer acquisition. it is pretty hard to justify to a new player to spend $500+ on a deck, and that $500 would not go directly to WOTC's pockets anyway. new player's should be directed to standard. modern should be for current players who cannot get into legacy for price restriction/availability, and are sick of cards rotating and spending the money over again building a new deck. people who want modern to be a forced rotation format with shake up bans should be the ones redirected to standard, the format who's primary intention is to do just that, modern should not be warped from it's original intention to please those who want modern to be something it is not.
saying wizard's cannot make money from modern is ridiculous. literally, if they increased the print run/frequency of mm, and dropped the price from it's ridiculous $10 price tag, they would make tons of money with modern. obviously they do need to be responsible about how much they do this, but i firmly belive they are being overly cautious. if they increased the frequency of gp's as a response to getting rid of the PT, they would make money. beyond those things, wizard's makes money from modern purely based off it's support to LGS. people buy singles to play modern. buying singles supports lgs. lgs buy more sealed product from wizards when magic does well for them. its quite simple. wizards will always need a non rotating format for their old customers who have grown tired of standard and just wish to stick with one deck for awhile. if they ditch that format, they lose their old customers, and therefore LGS get less support, leading to magic being less succesful overall
the problems with legacy that lead to it's issues stem deeper than lack of support. in legacy, you will spend upwards of $1200 constructing a manabase for MOST decks, i know there is exceptions, but im speaking of the average legacy deck. in addition, color balance in legacy is beyond ruined. force of will is in 75% of legacy decks. force of will can not just be thrown in any deck, you need to design your deck around having a critical mass of blue cards to run force of will. therefore, 75% of legacy decks are blue decks. a lot of people do not enjoy playing blue, and even more despise playing against blue. legacy is not a format that is inviting to all types of players, even before you talk about budget. compare this to modern, with competitive decks starting around $400 and capping out around $1200, ignoring bgx decks, you can build a competitive deck for less than the cost of the required force of will playset entry cost to legacy. compare this to modern, which, while still not perfect, allows you to realistically play any color you wish and it will be at least somewhat viable, as well as any strategy you wish. color balance is not perfect, however every color except blue has at least one card played in 30% of deck, and no color has a card over 40% prevelance.
in addition, the reserved list causes supply problems in legacy. if WOTC decided to start supporting and hyping legacy, there just would not be enough cards to support a large playerbase of the format, and they have dragged themselves into a wall with the reserved list preventing them from ever repairing this damage
between all of these things is why legacy is not very popular. WOTC does not support legacy BECAUSE it is not popular, not the other way around. even if they were able to push it's popularity, it has constraints on how large it can even grow due to the reserved list.
ITT: people who think that every opinion they or someone else has constitutes factuality.
I'm sorry, but just because someone has not enjoyed some standard does NOT mean that it is universally not liked. Every set that has come out has sold more than the previous set and Wizards CONSISTENTLY mentions increasingly high approval ratings in relation to player satisfaction surveys. Sure, some players don't like aspects of this standard or past standards but sales HAVE NOT suffered, so if you have concrete evidence to back up an assertion of player dissatisfaction as some reason for the uptick in modern attendance, then that would at least give some of these arguments some validity. It's VERY possible that some players just like the larger card pool and non-rotating aspects of modern. Others very much enjoy the frequent changes and metagaming element of competitive standard. Apples. Oranges.
I'm also increasingly frustrated that people think that Wizards is just spinning the wheel and banning decks at random. It takes the absolute most pessimistic view of EVERYTHING that has happened to assume that just because a deck has won somethiong means they are planning on banning it. I'd encourage everyone to read this article for a more nuanced view of the bannings: http://modernnexus.com/a-defense-of-the-splinter-twin-ban/.
We ALL want more transparency out of wizards and their communication with the player base, I think that much we can all get behind, but so much of the other crap that is being spouted is just fear mongering. Wizards hasn't deflated prices on your decks. Your investments have never been at risk. The meta is still wide open.
I'm also increasingly frustrated that people think that Wizards is just spinning the wheel and banning decks at random. It takes the absolute most pessimistic view of EVERYTHING that has happened to assume that just because a deck has won somethiong means they are planning on banning it. I'd encourage everyone to read this article for a more nuanced view of the bannings: http://modernnexus.com/a-defense-of-the-splinter-twin-ban/.
We ALL want more transparency out of wizards and their communication with the player base, I think that much we can all get behind, but so much of the other crap that is being spouted is just fear mongering. Wizards hasn't deflated prices on your decks. Your investments have never been at risk. The meta is still wide open.
I don't think anyone is saying these bans are "spinning a wheel" random, it's that Splinter Twin did not explicitly break any of the rules of Modern described and communicated to the public by Wizards themselves. Therefore, we can conclude that ANY top tier deck, which is successful and popular, will be banned for nothing more than BEING successful and popular. These ramifications are much more terrifying than simply the shock of banning a pillar of Modern. And it has a lot more impact than banning decks which blatantly and obviously break rules (notice that no one is at all surprised or upset with Summer Bloom's ban).
I don't think anyone is saying these bans are "spinning a wheel" random, it's that Splinter Twin did not explicitly break any of the rules of Modern described and communicated to the public by Wizards themselves. Therefore, we can conclude that ANY top tier deck, which is successful and popular, will be banned for nothing more than BEING successful and popular. These ramifications are much more terrifying than simply the shock of banning a pillar of Modern. And it has a lot more impact than banning decks which blatantly and obviously break rules (notice that no one is at all surprised or upset with Summer Bloom's ban).
I FULLY disagree with this assertion. Splinter Twin did MUCH more to the modern metagame than win a little bit for a short period of time - Twin has dominated modern for almost the entirety of the format, has near unparalleled top 8 and win percentages, limited space in URx, and abused the turn 4 rule to it's fullest extent. If you disagree with one or two of those things, sure, but to disagree with ALL of those things is just plugging your ears.
I do not think Wizards has set a ban precedent at all based ONLY on their successes. They've set a precedent for the TIMING of their announcements, but other than that, I think much of what was true about our assumptions of bannings continue to be true. This leads to my main point, we ALL want more transparency out of wizards so that this IS NOT an issue.
I don't think anyone is saying these bans are "spinning a wheel" random, it's that Splinter Twin did not explicitly break any of the rules of Modern described and communicated to the public by Wizards themselves. Therefore, we can conclude that ANY top tier deck, which is successful and popular, will be banned for nothing more than BEING successful and popular. These ramifications are much more terrifying than simply the shock of banning a pillar of Modern. And it has a lot more impact than banning decks which blatantly and obviously break rules (notice that no one is at all surprised or upset with Summer Bloom's ban).
I FULLY disagree with this assertion. Splinter Twin did MUCH more to the modern metagame than win a little bit for a short period of time - Twin has dominated modern for almost the entirety of the format, has near unparalleled top 8 and win percentages, limited space in URx, and abused the turn 4 rule to it's fullest extent. If you disagree with one or two of those things, sure, but to disagree with ALL of those things is just plugging your ears.
I do not think Wizards has set a ban precedent at all based ONLY on their successes. They've set a precedent for the TIMING of their announcements, but other than that, I think much of what was true about our assumptions of bannings continue to be true. This leads to my main point, we ALL want more transparency out of wizards so that this IS NOT an issue.
Not disagreeing with all points, but abusing the turn 4 rule is beyond ridiculous. There are many justifications for a twin ban, that is never one.
Restricting URx is less ridiculous, but still silly. URx was mostly Splinter Twin because the card pool for URx in modern is such that it can't win consistently in the meta without twin.
If you want to claim your stance as fact, do it without ridiculous statements and dont claim others are "plugging their ears" if they disagree with you, who knows maybe they will bring in an actual fact or piece of data to the table
The difficulty in switching up to different decks is what I'm getting at more than anything else. Then again, Magic The Gathering Modern is pretty niche in paper format anyway, so maybe this is falling on deaf ears. Personally, I'd like to see the format expand to more than just competitive pro decks and neck to neck tournaments. EDH is fun for some people, but doesn't have the same appeal as the original 60 card deck formats. Right now it feels as if someone saying to someone else that they play modern means that other person is going to run scurrying off with their tails between their legs (case and point, just about every early college and late high schooler I play against at my LGS
I actually don't understand why this is. I don't think I've ever seen this kind of situation with other types of games like Pokemon or even YuGiOh.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Busted card. Way too good. I just keep getting killed on turn 3 over and over because of this card.
Wizards needs to be consistent, they have slowed down Bloom and Twin now it's time to slow down Infect.
Obviously we will have to be seeing the deck winning but I think we will.
Spirits
Umm...Twin WAS the best deck...I don't know why I'm having to even argue this...
Probably has something to do with it, not total, but part. Actually anything that has coverage where new/Standard players can see matches. Not sure a poster can hook as many players as actually seeing play. Any and all game play will sell more then a piece of paper(poster).
You mean like SUMMER BLOOM?
MTGO Stats from December:
Bloom: 4.42% of meta
Infect: 3.54% of meta
Just sayin...
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Yeah but hooking players into modern is very hard. They have a different psychological profiles than modern, legacy, vintage players. Specifically they are players that are focused on the new and novel experiences of magic. Players that focus on older formats like less novelty in their games. No one really calls out other modern players for playing the same deck for years. If they were a standard player they would be looked at like woolly bear unicorn riding a dinosaur with lasers. This is why they do limited at every pro tour now. Every draft is different and these players that seek new experiences love that. That is not the average modern player though. So what they did is ban splinter twin as a marketing ploy to attract more people to check out this shiny new format, when for the most part modern players want more meat and potatoes.
I think this starts going down the road of also saying that WoTC intentionally designed the eldrazi to fit well with Tron and even make an entire deck archetype focused on them. What gets people to play modern is pretty simple: If someone doesn't care much for the MTG storyline and just wants to play an effective deck they will pick modern (or no format at all and just build a good deck). I think the best way for someone to get into magic is not bother with format at all. There's plenty of broken / competitive strategies that can be fun to run and affordable when one doesn't constrain themselves to some arbitrary format.
Lets face it, the planeswalkers are kind of a joke and WoTC hasn't had a good storyline for magic since possibly Kamigawa. They have great settings that are fun to learn about, such as Dominaria, Innistrad, Ravnica, etc, but that isn't the same thing.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
They sort of already went down that slope now with Twin and Bloom, though with Bloom everyone and their brother knew it was probably going to get hit.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Actually, game designers do that all the time. Now they don't do bans solely to market, but they need to change the format often enough to keep a certain subset of players interested. They should segment the market more in my opinion. This is the price to be paid for appealing to more standard players. That is what the nacatl unban was about. It is a way to keep that subset of players interested. Again magic is a huge game and they have the same problems MMOs have, they have to appeal to a lot of fundamentally different people.
I can't imagine that being the case everywhere and I honestly don't know why your attendance dropped. Modern GPs and SCG events have been having record turnout and Modern seems to be more popular the last 6 months or so than it has ever been. Sounds like your group has a lot of grumpy players who would be better served by drafting new sets every 3 months.
I listed several ideas for events and products to make money off Modern. You say Vintage and Legacy do not sell product. Well guess what, neither does Modern, at least not from Wizards. Maybe you missed the entire part I wrote about Wizards not making money from Modern because they choose to let it be run entirely by the secondary market. What exactly constitutes "support" in your mind? A Pro Tour designed and aimed at disenfranchising current players while trying to appeal to those who do not play the format?
Completely ignoring my words, again, especially with regards to how Wizards could support Modern AND make money by selling products! What a concept!
And it seems you are implying Modern players don't want a stable metagame that slowly shifts over time with new sets and new printings. We could make a poll and ask the players ourselves instead of just assuming that we players want the threat that any top tier deck could be banned every year to "shake up the meta."
Do you actively ignore what other people write? Or do you simply misunderstand? Modern events would be amazing. Events which showcase Modern specifically and are not tied to the Pro Tour. Things like a Modern Cup and the Modern Masters GP. We should have MORE Modern events (something SCG has definitely jumped on). And as long as they aren't these contrived new-player-salesman events like the Pro Tour, it probably wouldn't be facing such thin and arbitrary bans every year.
And yet, with that meta share, Siege Rhino wasn't banned. Shame.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Oh, god, here comes the "ban everything that makes me salty" thread
There are several reasons Modern is so popular (as indicated by the passion demonstrated in this thread, whichever side you favour -- pro Twin ban or the right side
Considering this, it should not be at all surprizing that players are migrating to Modern. It's no more expensive to get into than Standard, but usually the investment holds its value over many seasons -- unlike Standard which drops off by 90% in just a few months. It's usually more interactive and the games often reward the ability to change your strategic approach from one game to another. Even the hyper linnear aggro decks like Infect and Boggles can reward pilots with a cool explosion of pump spells or enchantments. Personally that's not my thing, but I have had enjoyable games with people who top deck the last few points they needed with a Rancor and go from dead on board to winning. By comparison Standard is just so boring...I quit the format with Theros block myself. I don't even like drafting the set they are producing these days and haven't bothered even going to a pre-release in two years.
be a non-rotating format without the card availability of legacy/vintage.
modern is a (relatively) cheap format to get in that allows you to root for your deck to do well year in and year out, much like one roots for their football team to do well and hopefully win the super bowl. this is not the case with these disruptive bans, you instead get down on your knees and pray your team loses the super bowl so that the NFL doesn't ban your team. in addition, instead of players hoping that the next set brings their new deck new toys to help it compete more in the format, or trying to adjust their deck to be more competitive in the current meta, players just scream for bans when their deck didn't win. modern should be a format about customer retention, not customer acquisition. it is pretty hard to justify to a new player to spend $500+ on a deck, and that $500 would not go directly to WOTC's pockets anyway. new player's should be directed to standard. modern should be for current players who cannot get into legacy for price restriction/availability, and are sick of cards rotating and spending the money over again building a new deck. people who want modern to be a forced rotation format with shake up bans should be the ones redirected to standard, the format who's primary intention is to do just that, modern should not be warped from it's original intention to please those who want modern to be something it is not.
saying wizard's cannot make money from modern is ridiculous. literally, if they increased the print run/frequency of mm, and dropped the price from it's ridiculous $10 price tag, they would make tons of money with modern. obviously they do need to be responsible about how much they do this, but i firmly belive they are being overly cautious. if they increased the frequency of gp's as a response to getting rid of the PT, they would make money. beyond those things, wizard's makes money from modern purely based off it's support to LGS. people buy singles to play modern. buying singles supports lgs. lgs buy more sealed product from wizards when magic does well for them. its quite simple. wizards will always need a non rotating format for their old customers who have grown tired of standard and just wish to stick with one deck for awhile. if they ditch that format, they lose their old customers, and therefore LGS get less support, leading to magic being less succesful overall
the problems with legacy that lead to it's issues stem deeper than lack of support. in legacy, you will spend upwards of $1200 constructing a manabase for MOST decks, i know there is exceptions, but im speaking of the average legacy deck. in addition, color balance in legacy is beyond ruined. force of will is in 75% of legacy decks. force of will can not just be thrown in any deck, you need to design your deck around having a critical mass of blue cards to run force of will. therefore, 75% of legacy decks are blue decks. a lot of people do not enjoy playing blue, and even more despise playing against blue. legacy is not a format that is inviting to all types of players, even before you talk about budget. compare this to modern, with competitive decks starting around $400 and capping out around $1200, ignoring bgx decks, you can build a competitive deck for less than the cost of the required force of will playset entry cost to legacy. compare this to modern, which, while still not perfect, allows you to realistically play any color you wish and it will be at least somewhat viable, as well as any strategy you wish. color balance is not perfect, however every color except blue has at least one card played in 30% of deck, and no color has a card over 40% prevelance.
in addition, the reserved list causes supply problems in legacy. if WOTC decided to start supporting and hyping legacy, there just would not be enough cards to support a large playerbase of the format, and they have dragged themselves into a wall with the reserved list preventing them from ever repairing this damage
between all of these things is why legacy is not very popular. WOTC does not support legacy BECAUSE it is not popular, not the other way around. even if they were able to push it's popularity, it has constraints on how large it can even grow due to the reserved list.
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR
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
I'm sorry, but just because someone has not enjoyed some standard does NOT mean that it is universally not liked. Every set that has come out has sold more than the previous set and Wizards CONSISTENTLY mentions increasingly high approval ratings in relation to player satisfaction surveys. Sure, some players don't like aspects of this standard or past standards but sales HAVE NOT suffered, so if you have concrete evidence to back up an assertion of player dissatisfaction as some reason for the uptick in modern attendance, then that would at least give some of these arguments some validity. It's VERY possible that some players just like the larger card pool and non-rotating aspects of modern. Others very much enjoy the frequent changes and metagaming element of competitive standard. Apples. Oranges.
I'm also increasingly frustrated that people think that Wizards is just spinning the wheel and banning decks at random. It takes the absolute most pessimistic view of EVERYTHING that has happened to assume that just because a deck has won somethiong means they are planning on banning it. I'd encourage everyone to read this article for a more nuanced view of the bannings: http://modernnexus.com/a-defense-of-the-splinter-twin-ban/.
We ALL want more transparency out of wizards and their communication with the player base, I think that much we can all get behind, but so much of the other crap that is being spouted is just fear mongering. Wizards hasn't deflated prices on your decks. Your investments have never been at risk. The meta is still wide open.
I don't think anyone is saying these bans are "spinning a wheel" random, it's that Splinter Twin did not explicitly break any of the rules of Modern described and communicated to the public by Wizards themselves. Therefore, we can conclude that ANY top tier deck, which is successful and popular, will be banned for nothing more than BEING successful and popular. These ramifications are much more terrifying than simply the shock of banning a pillar of Modern. And it has a lot more impact than banning decks which blatantly and obviously break rules (notice that no one is at all surprised or upset with Summer Bloom's ban).
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I FULLY disagree with this assertion. Splinter Twin did MUCH more to the modern metagame than win a little bit for a short period of time - Twin has dominated modern for almost the entirety of the format, has near unparalleled top 8 and win percentages, limited space in URx, and abused the turn 4 rule to it's fullest extent. If you disagree with one or two of those things, sure, but to disagree with ALL of those things is just plugging your ears.
I do not think Wizards has set a ban precedent at all based ONLY on their successes. They've set a precedent for the TIMING of their announcements, but other than that, I think much of what was true about our assumptions of bannings continue to be true. This leads to my main point, we ALL want more transparency out of wizards so that this IS NOT an issue.
Not disagreeing with all points, but abusing the turn 4 rule is beyond ridiculous. There are many justifications for a twin ban, that is never one.
Restricting URx is less ridiculous, but still silly. URx was mostly Splinter Twin because the card pool for URx in modern is such that it can't win consistently in the meta without twin.
If you want to claim your stance as fact, do it without ridiculous statements and dont claim others are "plugging their ears" if they disagree with you, who knows maybe they will bring in an actual fact or piece of data to the table
UWRjeskai nahiri UWR
UBRgrixis titi UBR
UBRgrixis delverUBR
UR ur kikimite UR
EDH
RUG Riku of Two Reflections RUG
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose UBR
UBRGYidris, Maelstrom Wielder UBRG
UBRJeleva, Nephalia's ScourgeUBR