Obviously Eldrazi is doing things differently to Jund, but that's not really my point.
My point is this, and simply this: every tier 1 deck, whether it's doing things on curve or not, whether the creatures its casting are vanilla beaters or Eldrazi things, warps the meta around it by changing what other decks need to do to deal with it.
And, frankly, while Thought Knot Seer is much more efficient than TS into Goyf into Lily, I find EldraziTron to be a less warping deck than Jund is due to the limitations on the deck - EldraziTron's nut draws are very good, but also reasonably rare. It's not that common that they're going to be able to TKS you on turn 2.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
See: Twin, Cruise Delver, UW Eldrazi, DRS Jund, etc.
Can you define unfair in a sentence?
Let me describe in a sentence to you why those people think it's unfair:
Free mana. When one casts a X drop (that has the abilities and stats a X drop and not a X-1/X-2drop should have) on turn X-Y, where Y is 1 or more,(meaning a 4 drop on turn 2 or a 5 drop on turn 3, a 7 drop at turn 3 or a 10 drop at turn 4), it's no the exact turn you are supposed to cast it, thus you kind of cheating a bomb into play early in the game, thus it becomes slightly unfair.
By this definition, Birds of Paradise and Desperate Ritual are unfair cards. IMO there's nothing "free" about needing to assemble three colorless lands with different names (Tron) or open a four-of land and also be shoehorned into a specific tribe (Eldrazi).
the card itself really isn't worth the card board its printed on...does it serve a purpose? Sure its a blue 1 drop that might not be a 1/1. I would not put it in a list and expect to win a PTQ or GP though.
See: Twin, Cruise Delver, UW Eldrazi, DRS Jund, etc.
Can you define unfair in a sentence?
Let me describe in a sentence to you why those people think it's unfair:
Free mana. When one casts a X drop (that has the abilities and stats a X drop and not a X-1/X-2drop should have) on turn X-Y, where Y is 1 or more,(meaning a 4 drop on turn 2 or a 5 drop on turn 3, a 7 drop at turn 3 or a 10 drop at turn 4), it's no the exact turn you are supposed to cast it, thus you kind of cheating a bomb into play early in the game, thus it becomes slightly unfair.
By this definition, Birds of Paradise and Desperate Ritual are unfair cards. IMO there's nothing "free" about needing to assemble three colorless lands with different names (Tron) or open a four-of land and also be shoehorned into a specific tribe (Eldrazi).
Come on, man, I know you're trolling
Are you really comparing a birds of paradise to Temple? I can bolt the bird, as most decks can, that's not so accessible to the poor land destruction in modern. The fact that WOTC decided to go overboard with breaking the color piechart in Return to Zendikar barely justifies the, "but temple is so constricting!"
Obviously Eldrazi is doing things differently to Jund, but that's not really my point.
My point is this, and simply this: every tier 1 deck, whether it's doing things on curve or not, whether the creatures its casting are vanilla beaters or Eldrazi things, warps the meta around it by changing what other decks need to do to deal with it.
And, frankly, while Thought Knot Seer is much more efficient than TS into Goyf into Lily, I find EldraziTron to be a less warping deck than Jund is due to the limitations on the deck - EldraziTron's nut draws are very good, but also reasonably rare. It's not that common that they're going to be able to TKS you on turn 2.
I understand your reasoning, but I think that there is a key difference between jund and Etron at the top tables.
Jund has always been a very good deck, but there are very clear (and MANY!) paths to get a good Jund matchup. These include:
going tall (Tron, Valakut, Green devotion, R/G Ponza, Skred)
going wide (tokens)
going grind (Jund has a hard time to deal with multiple kitchen finks /voice of resurgence / tireless tracker)
going control (UW control, Esper control, Nahiri control)
There are a lot of different play styles that can defeat jund. In addition to that, most of the maindboard interaction is great against jund. Junds threats die to all removal spells, counterspells are great, discard is good, etc.)
Etron is a lot harder to hate out. They have access to cavern of souls against counterspell.dec, have a one sides board wipe with all is dust, their threats match up great against many common interaction spells (inquisition is bad, bolt is bad, push is bad). And sometimes, Charlice on 0/1/2 is just an "I win"-button that few other decks have in addition to their strong plan A.
I do NOT say that something from Etron needs to be banned, and I do NOT think that Jund always needs to be top tier!
All I want is to point out is that Etron is a little more oppressive at the top tiers than jund...but I am confident that there is another way besides bannings to get to an even healthier meta than what we have right now!
Pretty spot on, and I agree. Jund/Junk don't always need to be a tier 1 deck.
I do think E-Tron and decks similar to it is why we saw a midrange deck trying to cheat out huge threats for 1 mana, it's the only way to keep up with decks trying to do unfair things (even if they're fair by nature).
Fatal push was also a huge detriment to Goyf, dodging bolt was always one of his hugest strengths.
Chalice can be an oppressive card, the thoughtseize stapled to a 4/4 body is rough, one sided wipes. The tron lands are just a bonus, they don't need it to truly function.
If for some odd reason shadow ate a ban, I think it'd be wise to dual ban it with temple.
I do think it's interesting that Shadow decks are the scapegoats when I really think the author completely nailed it, it's secretly E-Tron warping the meta.
I said it before and I'll say it again, Return to Zendikar was a massive mistake of a set by WOTC, they need to stop printing so many powerful colorless cards, it always damages multiple formats when they do.
The format is great, people are just mad that their pet decks from 2015 and 2016 aren't as good anymore. There is no rule in modern that Jund has to be good (even though DSJund is viable anyways) or draw-go control has to be good (looks at UW control as about 4% of the meta, good for 8th place on MtgGoldfish)
I love how TKS has it's ability "stapled" to it's body, conjuring images of unnatural and haphazard design, while cards like Clique are all good. But hey, Clique is cool, it's blue. If you ask me that card breaks the colour pie a lot more.
The format is great, people are just mad that their pet decks from 2015 and 2016 aren't as good anymore. There is no rule in modern that Jund has to be good (even though DSJund is viable anyways) or draw-go control has to be good (looks at UW control as about 4% of the meta, good for 8th place on MtgGoldfish)
Yes, but they will never admit that. They will contort stats and cherry pick results and claim to be valiant fighters for colour and archetype balance, willfully ignoring any indication that blue is doing fine (it's not their kind of blue.) It's an elaborate dance to hide the fact that they just want their pet cards back or for their "pillar" decks to be more relevant once more.
As far as the jund side of things, it's more reasonable, but there is a palpable resentment of the Eldatron that pushed them out of the meta. For them, it doesn't feel natural having jund slide from tiers and Eldrazi are an easy target with their dicey history. Any top tier deck is doing unfair things. Eldrazi Temple, Delve creatures, Dredge, even Aether Vial cheats on mana in DnT. Jund was built on the back of having the best vanilla beater, an undercosted threat. There are other cards doing that now. It's all about how conditioned the player base is to a certain strategy.
The format is great, people are just mad that their pet decks from 2015 and 2016 aren't as good anymore. There is no rule in modern that Jund has to be good (even though DSJund is viable anyways) or draw-go control has to be good (looks at UW control as about 4% of the meta, good for 8th place on MtgGoldfish)
Yes, but they will never admit that. They will contort stats and cherry pick results and claim to be valiant fighters for colour and archetype balance, willfully ignoring any indication that blue is doing fine (it's not their kind of blue.) It's an elaborate dance to hide the fact that they just want their pet cards back or for their "pillar" decks to be more relevant once more.
This is basically correct. I've talked about this hyper-vocal, hyper minority before and it consists of players who adamantly believe that blue is bad now, those who have an absurdly narrow definition of success (e.g. deck can't have a bad matchup) and a blue control deck (e.g. deck must have a certain number of counterspells and have no proactive options), and/or openly admit to just wanting an old 2015 or 2016 deck with no regard to the rest of the format. Modern is unlikely to please this contingent until it fits their exact, unrealistic paramaters. Incidentally, many of those vocal critics, on this site at least, are the same people who staunchly believe Magic is more luck than skill in another thread. So there's probably a larger complaint they have which, again, Modern can't address and is probably not supportable with evidence. But frankly, the majority of the detractors don't consider evidence against their positions and made up their minds a long time ago.
Modern certainly has issues worth discussing, not least of which would be the recent MTGO changes, or the need for meaningful reprints or new cards. The format and its community would be better off if we focused on those issues instead of rehashing the same tired arguments we've heard since early 2016, particularly when the critics keep supporting their arguments with personal preference and anecdote.
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for an explanation on this bit from the supposedly well thought out article
"Without its removal, Jund is nothing. Etron holds this advantage, which coupled with its more stable mana allowed it to supplant the Bant version.
This trend was reinforced by the rise of Grixis Shadow. Bolt hits exactly Snapcaster Mage and Bolting a Shadow player is a dicey strategy. Inquistion is decent, but all the delve creatures hurt. This resistance is one explanation for Grixis topping Jund Shadow. The bottom line is that with two very good decks having a natural advantage over it, there was little chance for Jund to hold onto its traditional place in Tier 1. Abzan has done better but Etron is still a bad matchup. This is good for Shadow decks because Jund grinds well thanks to Terminate, Scavenging Ooze, and Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet, which gave it an edge on Shadow."
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for an explanation on this bit from the supposedly well thought out article
"Without its removal, Jund is nothing. Etron holds this advantage, which coupled with its more stable mana allowed it to supplant the Bant version.
This trend was reinforced by the rise of Grixis Shadow. Bolt hits exactly Snapcaster Mage and Bolting a Shadow player is a dicey strategy. Inquistion is decent, but all the delve creatures hurt. This resistance is one explanation for Grixis topping Jund Shadow. The bottom line is that with two very good decks having a natural advantage over it, there was little chance for Jund to hold onto its traditional place in Tier 1. Abzan has done better but Etron is still a bad matchup. This is good for Shadow decks because Jund grinds well thanks to Terminate, Scavenging Ooze, and Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet, which gave it an edge on Shadow."
I'd post on the site itself and ask what he meant by it. It's a confusing line, but I still think the article was well written and thought out
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for an explanation on this bit from the supposedly well thought out article
"Without its removal, Jund is nothing. Etron holds this advantage, which coupled with its more stable mana allowed it to supplant the Bant version.
This trend was reinforced by the rise of Grixis Shadow. Bolt hits exactly Snapcaster Mage and Bolting a Shadow player is a dicey strategy. Inquistion is decent, but all the delve creatures hurt. This resistance is one explanation for Grixis topping Jund Shadow. The bottom line is that with two very good decks having a natural advantage over it, there was little chance for Jund to hold onto its traditional place in Tier 1. Abzan has done better but Etron is still a bad matchup. This is good for Shadow decks because Jund grinds well thanks to Terminate, Scavenging Ooze, and Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet, which gave it an edge on Shadow."
I have posted on the site asking what he meant. But what I took was that in the first sentence he is discussing Jund Shadow. In the 2nd traditional Jund.
Won't put words in the authors mouth though and will post his reply if I get one. Cos you're right that bit is a little confusing.
Sheridan, almost no one thinks blue is doing poorly, on this thread, Facebook or in my real life interactions.
Blue is well poised in this meta.
I agree with this. UW control is fine. Although it would be nice if we could get a faster/better threat in SFM. But when bgx with some of the best fair cards printed in magic history is tier 2, you know something is wrong/suppressing it in modern imo
I love how TKS has it's ability "stapled" to it's body, conjuring images of unnatural and haphazard design, while cards like Clique are all good. But hey, Clique is cool, it's blue. If you ask me that card breaks the colour pie a lot more.
Sheridan, almost no one thinks blue is doing poorly, on this thread, Facebook or in my real life interactions.
Blue is well poised in this meta.
I agree with this. UW control is fine. Although it would be nice if we could get a faster/better threat in SFM. But when bgx with some of the best fair cards printed in magic history is tier 2, you know something is wrong/suppressing it in modern imo
I love how TKS has it's ability "stapled" to it's body, conjuring images of unnatural and haphazard design, while cards like Clique are all good. But hey, Clique is cool, it's blue. If you ask me that card breaks the colour pie a lot more.
Tucking a card (I dont know if there is a term for that?) and having them draw a Card isnt Black, its Blue.
You are plainly wrong.
It feels red or black to me, kinda like chaos warp mixed with discard. I'm sure someone can think of better cards as examples, I'm willing to be flat out wrong as I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of the game and I was more operating on gut feeling as far as Clique. Clique proactively attacks the opponent's hand, neither of the cards you linked do that, it doesn't seem like a blue thing to do. I agree that looking at the hand is blue. Either way I don't really want to dive down this rabbit hole. I was more pointing out the cognitive dissonance when it comes to how people view TKS as a creature with an ability of which there are many
I love how TKS has it's ability "stapled" to it's body, conjuring images of unnatural and haphazard design, while cards like Clique are all good. But hey, Clique is cool, it's blue. If you ask me that card breaks the colour pie a lot more.
Tucking a card (I dont know if there is a term for that?) and having them draw a Card isnt Black, its Blue.
You are plainly wrong.
It feels red or black to me, kinda like chaos warp mixed with discard. I'm sure someone can think of better cards as examples, I'm willing to be flat out wrong as I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of the game and I was more operating on gut feeling as far as Clique. Clique proactively attacks the opponent's hand, neither of the cards you linked do that, it doesn't seem like a blue thing to do. I agree that looking at the hand is blue. Either way I don't really want to dive down this rabbit hole. I was more pointing out the cognitive dissonance when it comes to how people view TKS as a creature with an ability of which there are many
I get what you mean, it doesn't feel like modern blue cards. But it's definitely a blue and white thing. http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Tuck
My point is less based around the tuck aspect and more proactively attacking an opponent's hand in which Clique seems unique (and outside of blue's colour pie imo.) And idSurge I know you know that you're being disingenuous when you describe 3 card plays as being 1. They are huge swings of efficiency because the deck was built around those kinds of 3+ card plays.
TKS and Smasher are above curve by far, and are in card advantage, though TKS is parity if you can remove it with non-path removal, Smasher has built in 2 for 1 for some ungodly reason on top of an amazing body.
TKS and Smasher are above curve by far, and are in card advantage, though TKS is parity if you can remove it with non-path removal, Smasher has built in 2 for 1 for some ungodly reason on top of an amazing body.
Like I'm not wrong here those cards are insane.
Doesn't a card have to be really good at 4 or 5 mana to be playable in Modern? I'm constantly reading about people calling various new cards junk because at the mana cost they just don't do enough. Conventional Modern wisdom is that at 4+ mana a card has to be really strong to be playable, especially creatures. So these are examples of actually playable creatures in Modern. So they are not above curve; they are strong enough to be playable. They are not garbage.
TKS and Smasher are above curve by far, and are in card advantage, though TKS is parity if you can remove it with non-path removal, Smasher has built in 2 for 1 for some ungodly reason on top of an amazing body.
Like I'm not wrong here those cards are insane.
Just imagine how much a colourless painless thoughtseize would cost. 2 or 3 mana
Thought gorger is the closest comparison. It's a 4 mana 2/2 later in the game.
Thought knot seer should cost 5 to be a fairly costed card, that's ignoring the sol land.
Actually thinking on it. Would banning thought knot seer nerf eldrazi. It certainly ruins the curve and removes their free interaction.
Thanks for sharing. He absolutely nails it in a succinct way.
My point is this, and simply this: every tier 1 deck, whether it's doing things on curve or not, whether the creatures its casting are vanilla beaters or Eldrazi things, warps the meta around it by changing what other decks need to do to deal with it.
And, frankly, while Thought Knot Seer is much more efficient than TS into Goyf into Lily, I find EldraziTron to be a less warping deck than Jund is due to the limitations on the deck - EldraziTron's nut draws are very good, but also reasonably rare. It's not that common that they're going to be able to TKS you on turn 2.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
The big mana players can keep their clunker tron decks which still are good.
And us blue and white players can get SFM, everyone wins. Except for eldrazi...
decks playing:
none
Come on, man, I know you're trolling
Are you really comparing a birds of paradise to Temple? I can bolt the bird, as most decks can, that's not so accessible to the poor land destruction in modern. The fact that WOTC decided to go overboard with breaking the color piechart in Return to Zendikar barely justifies the, "but temple is so constricting!"
Temple should absolutely be monitored.
I agree that fair decks can be broken
Pretty spot on, and I agree. Jund/Junk don't always need to be a tier 1 deck.
I do think E-Tron and decks similar to it is why we saw a midrange deck trying to cheat out huge threats for 1 mana, it's the only way to keep up with decks trying to do unfair things (even if they're fair by nature).
Fatal push was also a huge detriment to Goyf, dodging bolt was always one of his hugest strengths.
Chalice can be an oppressive card, the thoughtseize stapled to a 4/4 body is rough, one sided wipes. The tron lands are just a bonus, they don't need it to truly function.
If for some odd reason shadow ate a ban, I think it'd be wise to dual ban it with temple.
I do think it's interesting that Shadow decks are the scapegoats when I really think the author completely nailed it, it's secretly E-Tron warping the meta.
I said it before and I'll say it again, Return to Zendikar was a massive mistake of a set by WOTC, they need to stop printing so many powerful colorless cards, it always damages multiple formats when they do.
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
Yes, but they will never admit that. They will contort stats and cherry pick results and claim to be valiant fighters for colour and archetype balance, willfully ignoring any indication that blue is doing fine (it's not their kind of blue.) It's an elaborate dance to hide the fact that they just want their pet cards back or for their "pillar" decks to be more relevant once more.
As far as the jund side of things, it's more reasonable, but there is a palpable resentment of the Eldatron that pushed them out of the meta. For them, it doesn't feel natural having jund slide from tiers and Eldrazi are an easy target with their dicey history. Any top tier deck is doing unfair things. Eldrazi Temple, Delve creatures, Dredge, even Aether Vial cheats on mana in DnT. Jund was built on the back of having the best vanilla beater, an undercosted threat. There are other cards doing that now. It's all about how conditioned the player base is to a certain strategy.
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
This is basically correct. I've talked about this hyper-vocal, hyper minority before and it consists of players who adamantly believe that blue is bad now, those who have an absurdly narrow definition of success (e.g. deck can't have a bad matchup) and a blue control deck (e.g. deck must have a certain number of counterspells and have no proactive options), and/or openly admit to just wanting an old 2015 or 2016 deck with no regard to the rest of the format. Modern is unlikely to please this contingent until it fits their exact, unrealistic paramaters. Incidentally, many of those vocal critics, on this site at least, are the same people who staunchly believe Magic is more luck than skill in another thread. So there's probably a larger complaint they have which, again, Modern can't address and is probably not supportable with evidence. But frankly, the majority of the detractors don't consider evidence against their positions and made up their minds a long time ago.
Modern certainly has issues worth discussing, not least of which would be the recent MTGO changes, or the need for meaningful reprints or new cards. The format and its community would be better off if we focused on those issues instead of rehashing the same tired arguments we've heard since early 2016, particularly when the critics keep supporting their arguments with personal preference and anecdote.
"Without its removal, Jund is nothing. Etron holds this advantage, which coupled with its more stable mana allowed it to supplant the Bant version.
This trend was reinforced by the rise of Grixis Shadow. Bolt hits exactly Snapcaster Mage and Bolting a Shadow player is a dicey strategy. Inquistion is decent, but all the delve creatures hurt. This resistance is one explanation for Grixis topping Jund Shadow. The bottom line is that with two very good decks having a natural advantage over it, there was little chance for Jund to hold onto its traditional place in Tier 1. Abzan has done better but Etron is still a bad matchup. This is good for Shadow decks because Jund grinds well thanks to Terminate, Scavenging Ooze, and Kalitas, Traitor of Ghet, which gave it an edge on Shadow."
I'd post on the site itself and ask what he meant by it. It's a confusing line, but I still think the article was well written and thought out
Blue is well poised in this meta.
I have posted on the site asking what he meant. But what I took was that in the first sentence he is discussing Jund Shadow. In the 2nd traditional Jund.
Won't put words in the authors mouth though and will post his reply if I get one. Cos you're right that bit is a little confusing.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
That card is temple.
decks playing:
none
Peek
Nimble Obstructionist
Tucking a card (I dont know if there is a term for that?) and having them draw a Card isnt Black, its Blue.
You are plainly wrong.
Spirits
Maybe BGx is outdated.
It feels red or black to me, kinda like chaos warp mixed with discard. I'm sure someone can think of better cards as examples, I'm willing to be flat out wrong as I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of the game and I was more operating on gut feeling as far as Clique. Clique proactively attacks the opponent's hand, neither of the cards you linked do that, it doesn't seem like a blue thing to do. I agree that looking at the hand is blue. Either way I don't really want to dive down this rabbit hole. I was more pointing out the cognitive dissonance when it comes to how people view TKS as a creature with an ability of which there are many
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
I get what you mean, it doesn't feel like modern blue cards. But it's definitely a blue and white thing.
http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Tuck
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
Thats the issue here. Creatures have abilities, but TKS and Reality Smasher are huge swings in efficiency.
Spirits
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
TKS and Smasher are above curve by far, and are in card advantage, though TKS is parity if you can remove it with non-path removal, Smasher has built in 2 for 1 for some ungodly reason on top of an amazing body.
Like I'm not wrong here those cards are insane.
Spirits
Doesn't a card have to be really good at 4 or 5 mana to be playable in Modern? I'm constantly reading about people calling various new cards junk because at the mana cost they just don't do enough. Conventional Modern wisdom is that at 4+ mana a card has to be really strong to be playable, especially creatures. So these are examples of actually playable creatures in Modern. So they are not above curve; they are strong enough to be playable. They are not garbage.
Just imagine how much a colourless painless thoughtseize would cost. 2 or 3 mana
Thought gorger is the closest comparison. It's a 4 mana 2/2 later in the game.
Thought knot seer should cost 5 to be a fairly costed card, that's ignoring the sol land.
Actually thinking on it. Would banning thought knot seer nerf eldrazi. It certainly ruins the curve and removes their free interaction.
Legacy - LED Dredge, ANT & WDnT
Then you should go read the pages a week ago and see blue players crying about how blue is bad and useless.