In isolation, yes. In reality, the only real deck that plays it is Eldrazi Tron, which is unfavored in the matchup anyway. But actually this disproves what I said previosly, it has done something in Modern, it's a part of an established top tier deck.
EDIT: It's just, I don't think cards should ever be considered for a ban because of their perceived power, or the problems "they might cause at an undetermined point in the future", or they are unfun to play against. Which is what I always frown upon suggestions like banning Blood Moon (which is, for all intents and purposes of modern, utterly irrelevant), SSG (because it's screaming "do something busted with me" but all it does is screaming because no one does anything good with it), Ensnaring Bridge (because it's only played in a real deck that is basically fringe and there are tens of those that are unfun to play against, like Turns or Mill), etc. And even when I have banged the drum about DS being completely busted, it still doesn't need a ban because it's not causing anything that should be fixed with a ban, or at all, at least for now.
It was played in (Eye of Ugin) Colorless Eldrazi with its BFF - Simian Spirit Guide, RG Breach during Pod/Treasure Delver, and often is a meta call in Merfolk.
While it hasn't been a "super tough player," it certainly has made its impact felt from time to time. Probably the main problem for it is that it's tough to find a deck that is proactive (doing things early), yet doesn't get hurt by it as well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Yes, this is exactly what I was talking about: laziness and/or incompetence. The fact that they thought this level of "testing" was adequate for a game of this size and complexity is exceedingly worrying. The earliest post I can find on Saheeli/Felidar is about an hour and a half after the spoiler dump on Friday. It's fairly embarrassing to think that their entire R&D and testing staff missed something that was spotted so quickly from cards WITHIN THE SAME BLOCK. It's nice that they are making changes now, but this is only coming after multiple Standard bannings and several years of awful Standard seasons, dropped attendance, and massive confidence loss from the playerbase.
But going back to my original comment that you quoted: the FFL is a horrible place to test and their skewed echo-chamber perpetuates myths and perceptions that do not actually exist in the formats for real. You can make excuses for their terrible testing practices all you want, but it has been a pretty awful system for quite a long time. I am happy they are making changes now, but it's frustrating to know that we won't see the fruits of this change for several years.
Back when Splinter Twin slipped into Standard Wotc was still trying to test cards for all formats with Standard being the most tested. After Twin slipping through, they announced they no longer would test for anything other then Standard. After the latest slip they changed the B&R announcements to have 2 very close together. So in essence they are letting the player base decide what it too warping/over powered for the formats with the release of new sets.
I honestly wouldnt be surprised if the FFL is nothing more then them playing cards coming into Standard to see they work with what is there already and what will be coming up. When I say work, I dont mean over powered or broken interactions, I mean synergy and cards that go together.
In short the player base complained so much about a few cards slipping through they are letting the player base do the testing now. Which I dont blame them. You catch 99% and miss 1% and the player base is going to crucify the whole R&D department. Why even try any more.
Not particularly affluent, actually just the opposite. Just players who wish to play the flavor of the week.
Why are draw-go decks considered too strong but Chalice of the Void, a card that can counter half of the cards in certain decks on its own, is still allowed?
Prison style cards are way more oppressive than one-time counters, even if your entire deck is filled with them.
I'm sure Wizards doesn't care about draw-go decks in Modern. Forsythe already stated that Modern is going to have different strategies than you would see in Standard: "Offer different types of decks and gameplay than what you typically see in Standard." (http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptsoi/where-modern-goes-from-here-2016-04-24) The issue is that cards which could help a Modern draw-go strategy need to go through Standard. Cards that are an appropriate power level for Standard are rarely enough to make waves in Modern, which is why draw-go strategies (which would depend on stronger countermagic) are unlikely to be improved too much in the near future. I'm hoping Fatal Push signals a shift away from this issue, but we'll have to wait and see.
Related: cards like Chalice wouldn't see play in Standard but are okay in Modern. Why? See the quote I mentioned above.
I agree. The "it's keeping the format in check" was a great response by mr. Forsythe overall. The truth is that I was always under the impression that WOTC values decks(and cards) that keep the format in check, but the Splinter Twin ban made me question those beliefs.
With that said, it's good to know that they think highly of a card like Chalice of The Void(this is important because it may be extended to include cards like Blood Moon and other similar cards) and that they have faith in those cards keeping the format in check.
PS/Edit: Still though, a Turn 1 Chalice Of The Void under Simian Spirit Guide is another story and kind of offensive, but this is just the Ape's potential problem.
It's worrying though, that they would place a higher value on cards that literally do not allow you to play the game, while continuing to chastise reasonable countermagic by saying it makes the game "unfun."
I agree. The "it's keeping the format in check" was a great response by mr. Forsythe overall. The truth is that I was always under the impression that WOTC values decks(and cards) that keep the format in check, but the Splinter Twin ban made me question those beliefs.
With that said, it's good to know that they think highly of a card like Chalice of The Void(this is important because it may be extended to include cards like Blood Moon and other similar cards) and that they have faith in those cards keeping the format in check.
PS/Edit: Still though, a Turn 1 Chalice Of The Void under Simian Spirit Guide is another story and kind of offensive, but this is just the Ape's potential problem.
It's worrying though, that they would place a higher value on cards that literally do not allow you to play the game, while continuing to chastise reasonable countermagic by saying it makes the game "unfun."
You're mixing format benchmarks. I'm confident Wizards doesn't care about premium countermagic being unfun in Modern. They care about it in Standard, and that's the bottleneck to Modern entry.
Overall, the format is probably fine if for no other reason than that this thread is arguing about bans like Company and Chalice again. Whenever that happens, it's generally an indicator that the format is fine. When people pile on only 1-2 cards, it generally indicates a ban is pending.
On this standard to modern draw-go dilemma: If they wanted it to be a thing in modern they could print 1 good counterspell every 3 blocks until there is a critical mass in modern, while never having more than 1 of them in standard at a time. As others have mentioned already, we had counterspell and DTT in the same standard as fetchlands and it wasn't an overly oppressive deck.
I've read the last few pages trying to catch back up; I've seen a lot of comments talking about the FFL and their change in testing philosophy but I never actually say any comment from WotC stating they were changing anything. Was it an official comment somewhere, some twiiter comment, or just us as a community noticing they are doing new things?
yes they did officially say it, essentially right after they had to ban copy-cat in long winded variation of 'we f*&$#d up and we are changing our play testing to help make sure it doesn't come to this again'
yes they did officially say it, essentially right after they had to ban copy-cat in long winded variation of 'we f*&$#d up and we are changing our play testing to help make sure it doesn't come to this again'
But did they mention modern specifically or what? I don't want to clog the thread up so if someone can just share where they said this or PM me with it I'd appreciate it.
Would you honestly say that the actual gameplay at T1 is in a good place with Dredge, Burn, ETron, Storm, Elves and Affinity sitting at top. Apart from everyone's pet Jund deck the rest aren't exactly poster boys of interaction.
That does sound bad. Good thing the reality is not the same as you are describing. The most up to date source, AFAIK, shows a tier 1 of Affinity, Burn, Abzan midrange, BGx Shadow and EldraziTron. Two of those are decisively interactive, with eldrazi tron being only moderately interactive.
Seems like tier 1 is divided fairly evenly between interactive and non-interactive.
I don't know why people consistenty underestimate how much interaction decks are packing, but you're not the first to claim that a deck with 12+ interactive cards are non-interactive. I just don't understand where it comes from. Like I said, it's moderately interactive.
GW company/evolution is a mix of builds that doubled in one single week. Hardly a tier 1 deck. Elves is more borderline given a more steady increase, but with only really MTGO results, it's placement in tier 1 is questionable at best. Storm is the closest, but again only MTGO results within a single month make this extremely questionable.
No, I don't think the link you provided is more accurate. What do other readers think? Is GW company a tier 1 deck after a single week of over 3.5% mtgo? Which list is a better reflection of the tier 1?
Beatdown with free removal packed with it is interaction now?
Removal isn't interaction? How is it relevant that it also gives a body? Removal is removal. It's rather obtuse to claim that the card is played for its power and not because it has both interaction and power built in. Look at the way Vendilion Clique is discussed, you'd be laughed out of the room for saying it isn't interactive. The same holds here. Interaction is a gradient, not a binary question.
And I would like to see some support for the claim that Abzan is tier 1 at the moment. Goldfish has it at 2.95% of the meta, the most recent paper tournament at 14th place finish. The list you posted has it steadily declining metagame share as well.
The support is pretty clear in excel sheet. Agreed, Abzan's tier 1 status is imperiled by its continued slide, and may soon find itself in tier 2.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Its relevant because the entire plan of the deck is ramp into beatdown. Everything else is just there to remove the odd blocker and prevent interference.
Right the deck interacts to enable it's game plan. Since it is not as fast as some decks, it has to interact to not just auto-lose to burn and affinity. What is your point? That's how midrange decks work.
The degree to which the deck is more interactive than affinity is arguably smaller than the degree to which DSJ/Grixis DS has to interact to further its game plan.
This seems incoherent. As far as I can tell, you're claiming DSJ/Grixis DS has a larger amount of interaction than the difference between how much affinity and etron interacts. I mean, yeah, of course. What a weird statement.
If interaction is a gradient then ETron is hardly on the higher side of the scale. And hardly the deck anyone would want representing the format anyway.
How is "moderately" being read as "on the higher side"?
The 'support' for Abazan is an average of a month of steady decline. We're not discussing what was the case three weeks ago, we're discussing the now - and now its played as much as Ad Nauseam and TitanShift.
I guess if you just want to reduce the metagame to the past week of mtgo, you can finally be correct. The value of that single week is highly suspect, but at least you're right!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Proactive decks run interaction primarily to further their game plan.
Reactive decks run interaction primarily to disrupt the opponent's game plan.
Or are we saying that lightning bolt to remove a blocker is not considered interactive, but lightning bolt to remove an attacker is considered interactive ?
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
Proactive decks run interaction primarily to further their game plan.
Reactive decks run interaction primarily to disrupt the opponent's game plan.
Or are we saying that lightning bolt to remove a blocker is not considered interactive, but lightning bolt to remove an attacker is considered interactive ?
This. So much this.Like I discussed a few pages back, decks in the "fair floor" are confronted by a speed-interaction trade-off curve, but there are no deck with literal speed-0 or interaction-0. Even control decks gotta win eventually and even aggro decks interact to win their races. Burn siding in Path, Palm or Revelry and Thought-Knot Seer taking Supreme Verdict are fine examples of interaction, not even taking into account that combat steps are interactive as well. This thread, however, often disregards this and acts like the only decks that interact are the mostly-interactive ones. You know, hyperbole
Also, since you guys were discussing the metagame, here are my updated numbers (and the change from last month):
UR Storm - 8.7% (+2.1%)
Colorless Eldrazi - 7.7% (+1.0%)
Affinity - 7.7% (+1.0%)
Naya Burn - 6.7% (+3.3%)
Abzan Company - 6.7% (+6.3%)
WU Control - 5.6% (+2.3%)
Jund Shadow - 5.1% (+0.8%)
Elves - 4.1% (+0.1%)
Dredge - 3.6% (-4.1%)
Grixis Shadow - 3.1% (-1.9%)
Again, I really like that last month's top dog (Dredge - 7.7%) has been replaced, which to me signals an evolving metagame. And this month's race to the top is a close one as well. Shadow decks remaining at the top, but at much reasonable numbers is also nice. The other notable change would be Abzan Company's rise due to Vizier of Remedies (thanks Amonkhet!). Also, WU Control hasn't been this high since I started tracking this data back in Jan 2016. Any thoughts?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:WU WU Control | WBG Abzan Company Frontier:UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
I think storm's rise on MTGO could signal to WotC that Preordain is not a desirable unban. Moreover, with the gains of UW control, I (to my utter disappointment and frustration) don't see SFM coming down off the banlist either. If the trends hold, I would expect "no changes" on the july announcement.
I'm really looking forward to the upcoming double gp weekend (may 26-28). Those events will help confirm or contradict the trends we are seeing online.
I think it's imperative to remember the limits of how useful MTGO data is: the events are not swiss pairings, and only an ambiguously-generated selection are publicly visible. The data is of unknown value due to the opaque nature of their production/publication, and should be treated as such.
Abzan is not tier 1 or close. And Eldrazi Tron is about as interactive as Infect, literally.
Not close? I guess it depends on where you draw the line, because even mtggoldfish has it at 3.31% right now. To me that's close no matter where you draw the line, and depending on how one sources data, could be considered tier 1.
I'm glad you agree that there is a gradient of interactivity among decks, and that Etron is "about" as interactive as Infect: notably more interactive than the most uninteractive decks in the format like Ad Nauseam, Storm, Elves, burn and affinity (to keep the list short). We wouldn't want some crazy misunderstanding like claiming that Etron/Infect is not interactive at all.
edit:
But as always, these numbers don't say much. Dredge is down, Bus49 told me he was bored and stopped playing it. He gets unbored, plays it for some weeks and in a month we are saying Dredge is back with a vengeance!!
Paraphrasing Holydiva: "Here's some data to support my position, but I agree the data source is bad and useless."
Yeah those tks are just 4/4s for 4 and walking ballista is a more efficient endless one. Chalice and all is dust are just fillers, while endbringer fills the "5/5 for 6 mana" slot. Looks just like storm indeed!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Also, since you guys were discussing the metagame, here are my updated numbers (and the change from last month):
UR Storm - 8.7% (+2.1%)
Colorless Eldrazi - 7.7% (+1.0%)
Affinity - 7.7% (+1.0%)
Naya Burn - 6.7% (+3.3%)
Abzan Company - 6.7% (+6.3%)
WU Control - 5.6% (+2.3%)
Jund Shadow - 5.1% (+0.8%)
Elves - 4.1% (+0.1%)
Dredge - 3.6% (-4.1%)
Grixis Shadow - 3.1% (-1.9%)
Again, I really like that last month's top dog (Dredge - 7.7%) has been replaced, which to me signals an evolving metagame. And this month's race to the top is a close one as well. Shadow decks remaining at the top, but at much reasonable numbers is also nice. The other notable change would be Abzan Company's rise due to Vizier of Remedies (thanks Amonkhet!). Also, WU Control hasn't been this high since I started tracking this data back in Jan 2016. Any thoughts?
Top deck changed again. Modern is in a cycle and this is as healthy as it gets. Abzan Company at 6.7% ha? Well, I called it. It's going to be a Tier 1 deck. This is some great news people.
Colourless Eldrazi has some interaction(although not an interactive deck), WU Control is a totally interactive deck adn the same goes for Jund DS and Grixis Shadow as well. Abzan company is an interactive deck also. About Elves, it's not a totally uninteractive deck as some of its creatures are interacting and it plays a minimal interaction at its sideboard.
I understand the fact that UR Storm, Affinity, Dredge are totally uninteractive decks, but overall I like those numbers and those decks.
Typical Elves lists have 0 ways of interacting with your opponent(obviously not counting sideboard) not even creatures, Abzan company plays something like 2-3 creatures main deck that are able to interact. For comparison Storm usually plays 3 Remands and 1 Echoing Truth.
Basically, there's 3 decks in the top15 that can really be considered as interactive: DS Jund, Grixis Shadow and Junk. If we go down just a tiny bit we also include UW Control in the lot.
So, for most intents and purposes we can say there are 4 interactive decks in Modern. And they add to 14.5% of the numbers in MTGGoldfish.
For reference, Eldrazi Tron and Affinity add to 12.5%.
But as always, these numbers don't say much. Dredge is down, Bus49 told me he was bored and stopped playing it. He gets unbored, plays it for some weeks and in a month we are saying Dredge is back with a vengeance!!
Even if mtgo data is not completely accurate in terms of what the meta game is. it still paints a relevant picture to what actually is the meta game overall. and im sure if you pulled up accurate metagame stats you would find similiar findings in terms of highly interactive decks.
and the reason I personally don't enjoy this is because when you have so many solitaireish like decks in the top of the game it tends to get boring quick. I personally miss the days when I had my legacy decks and half of my opponents at least where playing highly interactive decks, unfortunately I traded them for modern cards. also im not saying such a blue saturated format is healthy in legacy, but it does go to show how different modern and legacy are.
Modern is like russian roulette and legacy is like chess.
Also, since you guys were discussing the metagame, here are my updated numbers (and the change from last month):
UR Storm - 8.7% (+2.1%)
Colorless Eldrazi - 7.7% (+1.0%)
Affinity - 7.7% (+1.0%)
Naya Burn - 6.7% (+3.3%)
Abzan Company - 6.7% (+6.3%)
WU Control - 5.6% (+2.3%)
Jund Shadow - 5.1% (+0.8%)
Elves - 4.1% (+0.1%)
Dredge - 3.6% (-4.1%)
Grixis Shadow - 3.1% (-1.9%)
Again, I really like that last month's top dog (Dredge - 7.7%) has been replaced, which to me signals an evolving metagame. And this month's race to the top is a close one as well. Shadow decks remaining at the top, but at much reasonable numbers is also nice. The other notable change would be Abzan Company's rise due to Vizier of Remedies (thanks Amonkhet!). Also, WU Control hasn't been this high since I started tracking this data back in Jan 2016. Any thoughts?
Top deck changed again. Modern is in a cycle and this is as healthy as it gets. Abzan Company at 6.7% ha? Well, I called it. It's going to be a Tier 1 deck. This is some great news people.
Colourless Eldrazi has some interaction(although not an interactive deck), WU Control is a totally interactive deck adn the same goes for Jund DS and Grixis Shadow as well. Abzan company is an interactive deck also. About Elves, it's not a totally uninteractive deck as some of its creatures are interacting and it plays a minimal interaction at its sideboard.
I understand the fact that UR Storm, Affinity, Dredge are totally uninteractive decks, but overall I like those numbers and those decks.
Storm is the best deck in the game? I bet wizards loves this.
Also its nice seeing a control deck represented soo well.
it goes to show though that although a decks tier does loosely define its power level, there is still wiggle room in the top 2 tiers of the game in regards to movement due to metagame shifts.
Its telling that the decks that more or less cannot win without interaction run the best of everything in their respective colors to stay competitive, and required a card as busted as DS to get back in the game.
I watch the current Magic Gathering strat Grixis Delver series and its sad how the deck struggles, even while running one of the best one drops, one of the best two drops, one of the best delve creatures and the best removal in the game.
I always found delvers flip to be way too inconsistent, also hes a bad topdeck especially without better cantrips in this format.
and most of all free conditional countermagic I think is the key too making shadowless grixis delver great in modern.
It would also be decent for blue control as they could tap out with their big win con and also hold up countermagic.
Its telling that the decks that more or less cannot win without interaction run the best of everything in their respective colors to stay competitive, and required a card as busted as DS to get back in the game.
I watch the current Magic Gathering strat Grixis Delver series and its sad how the deck struggles, even while running one of the best one drops, one of the best two drops, one of the best delve creatures and the best removal in the game.
That goes to back to whole "redundancy" argument from a few pages back. Either you lose to value decks and targeted discard, or you run fast enough and redundant enough to ignore value decks and targeted discard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
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.
Storm has had so many cards banned from it, yet it's still a powerful deck.
Maybe it's time to just bite the bullet and ban Grapeshot. Let's just all admit the mechanic is awful and completely unfun for the person on the other side of the table...
Storm has had so many cards banned from it, yet it's still a powerful deck.
Maybe it's time to just bite the bullet and ban Grapeshot. Let's just all admit the mechanic is awful and completely unfun for the person on the other side of the table...
Can we also ban Ensnaring Bridge, Cryptic Command, Snapcaster Mage, Eidolon of Great Revel, and Liliana of the Veil? These are completely unfun for the person on the otherside of the table and we should bite the bullet and ban them.
Storm has had so many cards banned from it, yet it's still a powerful deck.
Maybe it's time to just bite the bullet and ban Grapeshot. Let's just all admit the mechanic is awful and completely unfun for the person on the other side of the table...
Can we also ban Ensnaring Bridge, Cryptic Command, Snapcaster Mage, Eidolon of Great Revel, and Liliana of the Veil? These are completely unfun for the person on the otherside of the table and we should bite the bullet and ban them.
Yeah those cards are pretty unfun too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern RGTron UGInfect URStorm WUBRAd Nauseam BRGrishoalbrand URGScapeshift WBGAbzan Company WUBRGAmulet Titan BRGLiving End WGBogles
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It was played in (Eye of Ugin) Colorless Eldrazi with its BFF - Simian Spirit Guide, RG Breach during Pod/Treasure Delver, and often is a meta call in Merfolk.
While it hasn't been a "super tough player," it certainly has made its impact felt from time to time. Probably the main problem for it is that it's tough to find a deck that is proactive (doing things early), yet doesn't get hurt by it as well.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Back when Splinter Twin slipped into Standard Wotc was still trying to test cards for all formats with Standard being the most tested. After Twin slipping through, they announced they no longer would test for anything other then Standard. After the latest slip they changed the B&R announcements to have 2 very close together. So in essence they are letting the player base decide what it too warping/over powered for the formats with the release of new sets.
I honestly wouldnt be surprised if the FFL is nothing more then them playing cards coming into Standard to see they work with what is there already and what will be coming up. When I say work, I dont mean over powered or broken interactions, I mean synergy and cards that go together.
In short the player base complained so much about a few cards slipping through they are letting the player base do the testing now. Which I dont blame them. You catch 99% and miss 1% and the player base is going to crucify the whole R&D department. Why even try any more.
Not particularly affluent, actually just the opposite. Just players who wish to play the flavor of the week.
I'm sure Wizards doesn't care about draw-go decks in Modern. Forsythe already stated that Modern is going to have different strategies than you would see in Standard: "Offer different types of decks and gameplay than what you typically see in Standard." (http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptsoi/where-modern-goes-from-here-2016-04-24) The issue is that cards which could help a Modern draw-go strategy need to go through Standard. Cards that are an appropriate power level for Standard are rarely enough to make waves in Modern, which is why draw-go strategies (which would depend on stronger countermagic) are unlikely to be improved too much in the near future. I'm hoping Fatal Push signals a shift away from this issue, but we'll have to wait and see.
Related: cards like Chalice wouldn't see play in Standard but are okay in Modern. Why? See the quote I mentioned above.
It's worrying though, that they would place a higher value on cards that literally do not allow you to play the game, while continuing to chastise reasonable countermagic by saying it makes the game "unfun."
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
You're mixing format benchmarks. I'm confident Wizards doesn't care about premium countermagic being unfun in Modern. They care about it in Standard, and that's the bottleneck to Modern entry.
Overall, the format is probably fine if for no other reason than that this thread is arguing about bans like Company and Chalice again. Whenever that happens, it's generally an indicator that the format is fine. When people pile on only 1-2 cards, it generally indicates a ban is pending.
I've read the last few pages trying to catch back up; I've seen a lot of comments talking about the FFL and their change in testing philosophy but I never actually say any comment from WotC stating they were changing anything. Was it an official comment somewhere, some twiiter comment, or just us as a community noticing they are doing new things?
But did they mention modern specifically or what? I don't want to clog the thread up so if someone can just share where they said this or PM me with it I'd appreciate it.
Seems like tier 1 is divided fairly evenly between interactive and non-interactive.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I don't know why people consistenty underestimate how much interaction decks are packing, but you're not the first to claim that a deck with 12+ interactive cards are non-interactive. I just don't understand where it comes from. Like I said, it's moderately interactive.
GW company/evolution is a mix of builds that doubled in one single week. Hardly a tier 1 deck. Elves is more borderline given a more steady increase, but with only really MTGO results, it's placement in tier 1 is questionable at best. Storm is the closest, but again only MTGO results within a single month make this extremely questionable.
No, I don't think the link you provided is more accurate. What do other readers think? Is GW company a tier 1 deck after a single week of over 3.5% mtgo? Which list is a better reflection of the tier 1?
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
The support is pretty clear in excel sheet. Agreed, Abzan's tier 1 status is imperiled by its continued slide, and may soon find itself in tier 2.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
How is "moderately" being read as "on the higher side"?
I guess if you just want to reduce the metagame to the past week of mtgo, you can finally be correct. The value of that single week is highly suspect, but at least you're right!
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Reactive decks run interaction primarily to disrupt the opponent's game plan.
Or are we saying that lightning bolt to remove a blocker is not considered interactive, but lightning bolt to remove an attacker is considered interactive ?
Also, since you guys were discussing the metagame, here are my updated numbers (and the change from last month):
- UR Storm - 8.7% (+2.1%)
- Colorless Eldrazi - 7.7% (+1.0%)
- Affinity - 7.7% (+1.0%)
- Naya Burn - 6.7% (+3.3%)
- Abzan Company - 6.7% (+6.3%)
- WU Control - 5.6% (+2.3%)
- Jund Shadow - 5.1% (+0.8%)
- Elves - 4.1% (+0.1%)
- Dredge - 3.6% (-4.1%)
- Grixis Shadow - 3.1% (-1.9%)
Again, I really like that last month's top dog (Dredge - 7.7%) has been replaced, which to me signals an evolving metagame. And this month's race to the top is a close one as well. Shadow decks remaining at the top, but at much reasonable numbers is also nice. The other notable change would be Abzan Company's rise due to Vizier of Remedies (thanks Amonkhet!). Also, WU Control hasn't been this high since I started tracking this data back in Jan 2016. Any thoughts?Frontier: UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
I think storm's rise on MTGO could signal to WotC that Preordain is not a desirable unban. Moreover, with the gains of UW control, I (to my utter disappointment and frustration) don't see SFM coming down off the banlist either. If the trends hold, I would expect "no changes" on the july announcement.
I'm really looking forward to the upcoming double gp weekend (may 26-28). Those events will help confirm or contradict the trends we are seeing online.
I think it's imperative to remember the limits of how useful MTGO data is: the events are not swiss pairings, and only an ambiguously-generated selection are publicly visible. The data is of unknown value due to the opaque nature of their production/publication, and should be treated as such.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I'm glad you agree that there is a gradient of interactivity among decks, and that Etron is "about" as interactive as Infect: notably more interactive than the most uninteractive decks in the format like Ad Nauseam, Storm, Elves, burn and affinity (to keep the list short). We wouldn't want some crazy misunderstanding like claiming that Etron/Infect is not interactive at all.
edit:
Paraphrasing Holydiva: "Here's some data to support my position, but I agree the data source is bad and useless."
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
Typical Elves lists have 0 ways of interacting with your opponent(obviously not counting sideboard) not even creatures, Abzan company plays something like 2-3 creatures main deck that are able to interact. For comparison Storm usually plays 3 Remands and 1 Echoing Truth.
Even if mtgo data is not completely accurate in terms of what the meta game is. it still paints a relevant picture to what actually is the meta game overall. and im sure if you pulled up accurate metagame stats you would find similiar findings in terms of highly interactive decks.
and the reason I personally don't enjoy this is because when you have so many solitaireish like decks in the top of the game it tends to get boring quick. I personally miss the days when I had my legacy decks and half of my opponents at least where playing highly interactive decks, unfortunately I traded them for modern cards. also im not saying such a blue saturated format is healthy in legacy, but it does go to show how different modern and legacy are.
Modern is like russian roulette and legacy is like chess.
Both have their appeal I suppose.
decks playing:
none
Storm is the best deck in the game? I bet wizards loves this.
Also its nice seeing a control deck represented soo well.
it goes to show though that although a decks tier does loosely define its power level, there is still wiggle room in the top 2 tiers of the game in regards to movement due to metagame shifts.
decks playing:
none
I always found delvers flip to be way too inconsistent, also hes a bad topdeck especially without better cantrips in this format.
and most of all free conditional countermagic I think is the key too making shadowless grixis delver great in modern.
It would also be decent for blue control as they could tap out with their big win con and also hold up countermagic.
decks playing:
none
That goes to back to whole "redundancy" argument from a few pages back. Either you lose to value decks and targeted discard, or you run fast enough and redundant enough to ignore value decks and targeted discard.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Maybe it's time to just bite the bullet and ban Grapeshot. Let's just all admit the mechanic is awful and completely unfun for the person on the other side of the table...
Can we also ban Ensnaring Bridge, Cryptic Command, Snapcaster Mage, Eidolon of Great Revel, and Liliana of the Veil? These are completely unfun for the person on the otherside of the table and we should bite the bullet and ban them.
My H/W list
Yeah those cards are pretty unfun too.
RGTron
UGInfect
URStorm
WUBRAd Nauseam
BRGrishoalbrand
URGScapeshift
WBGAbzan Company
WUBRGAmulet Titan
BRGLiving End
WGBogles