Snapcaster mage is the most powerful card in the entire modern format and it's not particularly close except possibly for goyf.
The fact that there is not a modern deck that plays snapcaster mages and is in tier 1 indicates a problem with blue cards in general. The problems are two fold:
1) There are not any particularly good blue 1 CMC spells, and the format's speed indicates 7 to 11 turn 1 plays or get out. Serum visions is barely passable and is not really exactly what a control deck wants to be doing.
(This is why you see that over time the best "blue" control deck in the format is Scapeshift which can manage to play green 1cmc spells)
2) Blue's interactive spells tend strongly toward countermagic and countermagic is bad. Bounce spells are card disadvantage and don't support a control strategy in general.
Counterspell is probably not good enough, but would make a difference. A 2cmc blue hard removal spell such as UU, put target creature on the bottom of its owner's library, would go a long way.
White core decks have similar issues that are worse in a lot of ways--white removal spells are terribad except for path, and Path is even pretty poor the types of decks modern cards encourage white to play. A reprint of Armageddon or Cataclysm would probably go a long way to making a core white deck feasible, or unbanning Stoneforge. The color is short of removal and efficient beaters.
Summed up nicely...I doubt JTMS even gets blue to where it wants to be in Modern. Blue control does have a decent T1 option in Ancestral Vision, although the fact that it is a nonbo with Snapcaster Mage only further serves to show the problems that blue has right now.
I have been advocating for a Stoneforge Mystic unban for about a year given white's relative position in Modern and equipment's relative position in Modern.
The di has been cast as it were. The format is what it is and I doubt WotC would risk blowing it up after spending 5 years to get it positioned as it is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
A bunch of scrubs don't just show up to all these tournaments and just then consistently fail to make top 32 on a daily basis since July.
If those scrubs are not trying to innovate and instead trying the old tried lists, then yea, they might keep failing to make day 2.
Im not saying blue is Tier 1. Im just saying blue can and is still competitive. Not enough people are trying it. Id like to see day 1 stats on the decks that actually show up.
They aren't playing it because it's bad. People rapidly adopt good decks when they are actually good. See DS Jund. See Bant Eldrazi. See Dredge. See Jeskai Nahiri for about 2 months before the metagame turned against it and people realized it wasn't good. If a deck is good and on the radar, people play it and win with it. Grixis is totally on the radar but just isn't very good so we don't see it.
You put too much faith in people knowing what is good, and what is bad. I dont have that much faith. DSJ works, and is easy to pick up. So a lot of people play it. Simple as that. You're the numbers guy, right? No matter how awesome blue is, if 5% of day 1 decks are blue, then the odds of showing up on day 2 are not with blue.
Remember legacy is a different experiment than modern. From the beginning WotC was clear that bannings were going to be a significant part of the format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Why persist in talking about blue? People are aware of delver/tempo/aggro in blue. Thats not what people are driving at, I bet I could find 10 posts in the last 3 pages that spell it out as REACTIVE blue.
Go nuts with your aggro/tempo plan, thats still not the topic at hand.
Why persist in talking about blue? People are aware of delver/tempo/aggro in blue. Thats not what people are driving at, I bet I could find 10 posts in the last 3 pages that spell it out as REACTIVE blue.
Go nuts with your aggro/tempo plan, thats still not the topic at hand.
People already pointed out that just because a type of deck isn't viable, does not mean it has to be. You have blue options. If WOTC doesn't do anything for you tomorrow, I think it will be clear how they see blue playing its role in the format. And I hope it'll shut some of you up so we can discuss other things (or discuss nothing at all!)
A bunch of scrubs don't just show up to all these tournaments and just then consistently fail to make top 32 on a daily basis since July.
If those scrubs are not trying to innovate and instead trying the old tried lists, then yea, they might keep failing to make day 2.
Im not saying blue is Tier 1. Im just saying blue can and is still competitive. Not enough people are trying it. Id like to see day 1 stats on the decks that actually show up.
They aren't playing it because it's bad. People rapidly adopt good decks when they are actually good. See DS Jund. See Bant Eldrazi. See Dredge. See Jeskai Nahiri for about 2 months before the metagame turned against it and people realized it wasn't good. If a deck is good and on the radar, people play it and win with it. Grixis is totally on the radar but just isn't very good so we don't see it.
You put too much faith in people knowing what is good, and what is bad. I dont have that much faith. DSJ works, and is easy to pick up. So a lot of people play it. Simple as that. You're the numbers guy, right? No matter how awesome blue is, if 5% of day 1 decks are blue, then the odds of showing up on day 2 are not with blue.
I'm saying that the Day 1 numbers don't matter. If a deck is on the radar like Grixis (literally two appearances in a T8 in the past month) but doesn't show up elsewhere at the Day 2 or T32 level, it's not a good deck. It means those T8s were exceptions. It's the same effect as Skred Red or Elves or Lantern Control winning a GP. They are cool anomalies, maybe even temporarily well-positioned decks, but not good decks overall. When decks are actually good, people pick them up after their breakout success story. This is even true of complicated decks like the challenging Amulet Bloom; once it had the breakout performance, people learned it.
Blue decks aren't hard to play because they are complicated. They aren't absent on Day 2 and in the T32 because they are sleepers. They are hard to play because they aren't good. They are absent because, despite many knowing about them, they are worse than other options.
Another T8 with no reactive blue. Let's see how many converted to T16 and T32?
Maybe Wizards saw this problem last week or the week before in time for an unban. It was certainly clear 1-2 weeks ago, but I don't know if they were looking for it. Unless we see that unban tomorrow, I'll be pushing for the major blue unban in the next update. Articles, including the full post-Twin blue breakdown, are pending!
Saying this is fine and all, but why is this a problem? I like blue as much as the next person. I have nothing against it. But exactly when in Modern's history has reactive blue put up consistent results? And again, Twin doesn't count as "reactive blue."
Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
Nobody has a gun to your head (I hope!) about posting in here.
No unbans for REACTIVE blue to try and utilize tomorrow? I assume you will be disappointed with the next 70 pages of this thread.
Dont worry. My lack of faith in people extends to those who will keep complaining when nothing happens tomorrow. And if something does happen, Ill welcome it. Im not anit-unban anything, really.
A bunch of scrubs don't just show up to all these tournaments and just then consistently fail to make top 32 on a daily basis since July.
If those scrubs are not trying to innovate and instead trying the old tried lists, then yea, they might keep failing to make day 2.
Im not saying blue is Tier 1. Im just saying blue can and is still competitive. Not enough people are trying it. Id like to see day 1 stats on the decks that actually show up.
They aren't playing it because it's bad. People rapidly adopt good decks when they are actually good. See DS Jund. See Bant Eldrazi. See Dredge. See Jeskai Nahiri for about 2 months before the metagame turned against it and people realized it wasn't good. If a deck is good and on the radar, people play it and win with it. Grixis is totally on the radar but just isn't very good so we don't see it.
You put too much faith in people knowing what is good, and what is bad. I dont have that much faith. DSJ works, and is easy to pick up. So a lot of people play it. Simple as that. You're the numbers guy, right? No matter how awesome blue is, if 5% of day 1 decks are blue, then the odds of showing up on day 2 are not with blue.
Another T8 with no reactive blue. Let's see how many converted to T16 and T32?
Maybe Wizards saw this problem last week or the week before in time for an unban. It was certainly clear 1-2 weeks ago, but I don't know if they were looking for it. Unless we see that unban tomorrow, I'll be pushing for the major blue unban in the next update. Articles, including the full post-Twin blue breakdown, are pending!
Saying this is fine and all, but why is this a problem? I like blue as much as the next person. I have nothing against it. But exactly when in Modern's history has reactive blue put up consistent results? And again, Twin doesn't count as "reactive blue."
Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
Unless you played a deck that ran discard and removal. Then it became a durdley control deck that wants to rely on Remands and Cryptic Commands until it can win with a slow, five mana not-creature or hope that Snaps and Bolts will get there. Sounds like a control deck to me.
Another T8 with no reactive blue. Let's see how many converted to T16 and T32?
Maybe Wizards saw this problem last week or the week before in time for an unban. It was certainly clear 1-2 weeks ago, but I don't know if they were looking for it. Unless we see that unban tomorrow, I'll be pushing for the major blue unban in the next update. Articles, including the full post-Twin blue breakdown, are pending!
Saying this is fine and all, but why is this a problem? I like blue as much as the next person. I have nothing against it. But exactly when in Modern's history has reactive blue put up consistent results? And again, Twin doesn't count as "reactive blue."
Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
The issue isn't just that reactive blue decks are bad; the issue is that reactive decks in general are poorly positioned. Modern is hostile towards purely reactive decks; historically, the best blue decks have been able to play proactively (see: twin, any form of delver, etc). The reason blue has been falling off is because blue doesn't have as powerful of a proactive plan as other colors do. Blue's best spells are mostly reactive, which makes them mostly bad in modern. Without proactive card filtering and proactive threats (Delver of Secrets just isn't enough anymore), there's no reason to play blue when other colors are better at being proactive. There are 2 ways to bring more blue into the format: 1. give blue better proactive cards, or 2. make the format less hostile to reactive decks. I don't know the exact way to go about implementing either of these options, but I think that is where the focus needs to be.
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
I disagree with this, heavily. BGx and other archetypes do not have the same kind of infatuation in the playerbase that blue does to generate substantial outrage if they ever became weak.
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
I disagree with this, heavily. BGx and other archetypes do not have the same kind of infatuation in the playerbase that blue does to generate substantial outrage.
I think that's a tall claim to make. If after years of being a format pillar, Wizards banned the GBx archetype into a tier-2-at-best pile with a constant downward conversion-rate trend, you don't think there would be similar fallout a year later?
Impossible to say, of course, but I think you have a pretty rosy appraisal.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing UX Mana Denial until Modern gets the answers it needs.
WUBRG Humans BRW Mardu Pyromancer UW UW "Control" UR Blue Moon
Another T8 with no reactive blue. Let's see how many converted to T16 and T32?
Maybe Wizards saw this problem last week or the week before in time for an unban. It was certainly clear 1-2 weeks ago, but I don't know if they were looking for it. Unless we see that unban tomorrow, I'll be pushing for the major blue unban in the next update. Articles, including the full post-Twin blue breakdown, are pending!
Saying this is fine and all, but why is this a problem? I like blue as much as the next person. I have nothing against it. But exactly when in Modern's history has reactive blue put up consistent results? And again, Twin doesn't count as "reactive blue."
Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
My point is that I'm wondering if you take Twin out of the equation, when has reactive blue EVER put up consistent results in Modern? The lack of this type of deck isn't new to the format, and it took a completely unfair combo interaction to make it good. Modern's simply not a good environment for blue and it never has been.
A bunch of scrubs don't just show up to all these tournaments and just then consistently fail to make top 32 on a daily basis since July.
If those scrubs are not trying to innovate and instead trying the old tried lists, then yea, they might keep failing to make day 2.
Im not saying blue is Tier 1. Im just saying blue can and is still competitive. Not enough people are trying it. Id like to see day 1 stats on the decks that actually show up.
They aren't playing it because it's bad. People rapidly adopt good decks when they are actually good. See DS Jund. See Bant Eldrazi. See Dredge. See Jeskai Nahiri for about 2 months before the metagame turned against it and people realized it wasn't good. If a deck is good and on the radar, people play it and win with it. Grixis is totally on the radar but just isn't very good so we don't see it.
You put too much faith in people knowing what is good, and what is bad. I dont have that much faith. DSJ works, and is easy to pick up. So a lot of people play it. Simple as that. You're the numbers guy, right? No matter how awesome blue is, if 5% of day 1 decks are blue, then the odds of showing up on day 2 are not with blue.
but people know blue isn't really good....
I think it is mkre people know you have to be proactive in modern and the known good proactive plans syrgenize better with discard rather than countermagic and draw spells. Cantrips counterspells and draw spells are best paired with some kind of combo or something that locks the game immediately or with things like delver (which is not reliable enough to flip with the lack of cantrips and lack of land destruction and free spells to tempo people out).
CounterTop would be so good right now. Unban Sensei Top, DTT, and print Counterspell There isn't a reason that being reactive is bad other than the cards suck for that. The answer then is to print better reactive cards so it closes parity with being proactive. Do it WoTC. Do it. (Top makes Fatal Push sooo much better lol)
Saying this is fine and all, but why is this a problem? I like blue as much as the next person. I have nothing against it. But exactly when in Modern's history has reactive blue put up consistent results? And again, Twin doesn't count as "reactive blue."
Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
My point is that I'm wondering if you take Twin out of the equation, when has reactive blue EVER put up consistent results in Modern? The lack of this type of deck isn't new to the format, and it took a completely unfair combo interaction to make it good. Modern's simply not a good environment for blue and it never has been.
Maybe this is just a terminological disagreement. I don't care if Delver is the new top-tier viable blue deck of choice. Or Jeskai Nahiri. Or Copy Cat. Or the more traditional reactive decks like UW Control or Esper Control. I'd group any of those decks into a reactive blue category, but honestly, we can call that category whatever you want to call it. It's deliberately a huge category covering a lot of different blue decks, because any of them would be welcome. But whatever we call it, those decks would still all be bad right now and have still been bad since August 2016.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
Saying this is fine and all, but why is this a problem? I like blue as much as the next person. I have nothing against it. But exactly when in Modern's history has reactive blue put up consistent results? And again, Twin doesn't count as "reactive blue."
Whoa there. Why is Twin not reactive blue? I don't think I've ever heard a reputable or Wizards-based source make that argument before.
Why does it have to come from WOTC? It's just how the deck played. It was a tempo-combo deck. Any tempo deck has reactive elements to it of course, and in Twin those were blue, sure. But when people on these boards say "reactive blue deck" I hear "control." Twin was absolutely not "control."
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
My point is that I'm wondering if you take Twin out of the equation, when has reactive blue EVER put up consistent results in Modern? The lack of this type of deck isn't new to the format, and it took a completely unfair combo interaction to make it good. Modern's simply not a good environment for blue and it never has been.
I do not feel twin is unfair in an enviornment such as modern. Many decks do a lot more degenerate things that are fine in the meta. Twin was a very easy to interact with combo but just having my strong thing to do to win is important in eternal formats. It is just that your gameplan to win has to mesh well with your gameplan which is why you never seen twin run a lot of discard despite being played in grixis shells. The best compact proactive plans in modern are goyf and deaths shadow and discard compliments that plan much better than countermagic and blue cantrips.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Summed up nicely...I doubt JTMS even gets blue to where it wants to be in Modern. Blue control does have a decent T1 option in Ancestral Vision, although the fact that it is a nonbo with Snapcaster Mage only further serves to show the problems that blue has right now.
I have been advocating for a Stoneforge Mystic unban for about a year given white's relative position in Modern and equipment's relative position in Modern.
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
You put too much faith in people knowing what is good, and what is bad. I dont have that much faith. DSJ works, and is easy to pick up. So a lot of people play it. Simple as that. You're the numbers guy, right? No matter how awesome blue is, if 5% of day 1 decks are blue, then the odds of showing up on day 2 are not with blue.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Got it. Green win cons with a suite of blue counters and (red) removal is NOT a blue deck. Got it.
Edit: Oh, and Delver in that same shell still doesn't make it blue. Also got it.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
Go nuts with your aggro/tempo plan, thats still not the topic at hand.
Spirits
People already pointed out that just because a type of deck isn't viable, does not mean it has to be. You have blue options. If WOTC doesn't do anything for you tomorrow, I think it will be clear how they see blue playing its role in the format. And I hope it'll shut some of you up so we can discuss other things (or discuss nothing at all!)
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
I'm saying that the Day 1 numbers don't matter. If a deck is on the radar like Grixis (literally two appearances in a T8 in the past month) but doesn't show up elsewhere at the Day 2 or T32 level, it's not a good deck. It means those T8s were exceptions. It's the same effect as Skred Red or Elves or Lantern Control winning a GP. They are cool anomalies, maybe even temporarily well-positioned decks, but not good decks overall. When decks are actually good, people pick them up after their breakout success story. This is even true of complicated decks like the challenging Amulet Bloom; once it had the breakout performance, people learned it.
Blue decks aren't hard to play because they are complicated. They aren't absent on Day 2 and in the T32 because they are sleepers. They are hard to play because they aren't good. They are absent because, despite many knowing about them, they are worse than other options.
No unbans for REACTIVE blue to try and utilize tomorrow? I assume you will be disappointed with the next 70 pages of this thread.
Spirits
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
Dont worry. My lack of faith in people extends to those who will keep complaining when nothing happens tomorrow. And if something does happen, Ill welcome it. Im not anit-unban anything, really.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
decks playing:
none
Unless you played a deck that ran discard and removal. Then it became a durdley control deck that wants to rely on Remands and Cryptic Commands until it can win with a slow, five mana not-creature or hope that Snaps and Bolts will get there. Sounds like a control deck to me.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
It had control elements, as well as combo and tempo elements. Whatever you want to call it, that kind of deck is not good in Modern today and has been bad since August 2016. If BGx were performing this badly, I guarantee a different group of players would be rioting. It just happens to be the blue players. As for me, I just go where the numbers point, and right now they point to a major blue decline that almost certainly was unintended by Wizards.
I disagree with this, heavily. BGx and other archetypes do not have the same kind of infatuation in the playerbase that blue does to generate substantial outrage if they ever became weak.
I think that's a tall claim to make. If after years of being a format pillar, Wizards banned the GBx archetype into a tier-2-at-best pile with a constant downward conversion-rate trend, you don't think there would be similar fallout a year later?
Impossible to say, of course, but I think you have a pretty rosy appraisal.
WUBRG Humans
BRW Mardu Pyromancer
UW UW "Control"
UR Blue Moon
Spirits
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 think it is mkre people know you have to be proactive in modern and the known good proactive plans syrgenize better with discard rather than countermagic and draw spells. Cantrips counterspells and draw spells are best paired with some kind of combo or something that locks the game immediately or with things like delver (which is not reliable enough to flip with the lack of cantrips and lack of land destruction and free spells to tempo people out).
Maybe this is just a terminological disagreement. I don't care if Delver is the new top-tier viable blue deck of choice. Or Jeskai Nahiri. Or Copy Cat. Or the more traditional reactive decks like UW Control or Esper Control. I'd group any of those decks into a reactive blue category, but honestly, we can call that category whatever you want to call it. It's deliberately a huge category covering a lot of different blue decks, because any of them would be welcome. But whatever we call it, those decks would still all be bad right now and have still been bad since August 2016.
When Wizards unbans two cards to help blue strategies (AV for "blue-based control or attrition decks" and Sword for "controlling combo decks") and those decks are still bad almost a year later, that's a problem. It's doubly a problem when the Twin unban was supposed to open up space for all the allegedly "supplant[ed]" decks, and then those decks don't emerge in any serious competitive capacity. I don't understand why people don't see this as a problem; the failure of the AV/Sword unban alone would be troubling even if we ignored the Twin context.
I do not feel twin is unfair in an enviornment such as modern. Many decks do a lot more degenerate things that are fine in the meta. Twin was a very easy to interact with combo but just having my strong thing to do to win is important in eternal formats. It is just that your gameplan to win has to mesh well with your gameplan which is why you never seen twin run a lot of discard despite being played in grixis shells. The best compact proactive plans in modern are goyf and deaths shadow and discard compliments that plan much better than countermagic and blue cantrips.