Eldrazi Tron is a fair deck. Fair decks don't usually have a huge weak point to target with sideboard hate that's a huge point behind them. There is no card that really super hoses Jund. There's no one card that super hoses Jeskai Control. There are cards that super hose affinity and any combo deck. That's how the decks work.
Fair decks get lands that tap for 2 and 3 mana? Sign me up!
I think you're missing the point of why the deck is considered 'fair' (which, I hate the terminology as it implies that no deck in Magic wants to attack an exploitable axis in a given metagame). 'Fair' decks should be classified as 'Attrition' or 'Interactive' decks, as opposed to 'Unfair', 'Non-interactive', or 'All-in' decks. If a land produces 2 or 3 mana in a deck that is designed to be more resilient to answers as opposed to winning the game outright given the absence of answers, it is still enabling a fair strategy.
Having said that, in regards to your latest post, I agree the likes of Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher are too resilient with the format's current card pool (well, Trickbind effects look like they could pull double duty against these two and Grapeshot, but in terms of removal, creatures, and traditional counterspells, neither looks appealing to face).
Eldrazi Tron is a fair deck. Fair decks don't usually have a huge weak point to target with sideboard hate that's a huge point behind them. There is no card that really super hoses Jund. There's no one card that super hoses Jeskai Control. There are cards that super hose affinity and any combo deck. That's how the decks work.
Fair decks get lands that tap for 2 and 3 mana? Sign me up!
I think you're missing the point of why the deck is considered 'fair' (which, I hate the terminology as it implies that no deck in Magic wants to attack an exploitable axis in a given metagame). 'Fair' decks should be classified as 'Attrition' or 'Interactive' decks, as opposed to 'Unfair', 'Non-interactive', or 'All-in' decks. If a land produces 2 or 3 mana in a deck that is designed to be more resilient to answers as opposed to winning the game outright given the absence of answers, it is still enabling a fair strategy.
Having said that, in regards to your latest post, I agree the likes of Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher are too resilient with the format's current card pool (well, Trickbind effects look like they could pull double duty against these two and Grapeshot, but in terms of removal, creatures, and traditional counterspells, neither looks appealing to face).
I dislike the terminology too just like I dislike the terminology of linear or interactive and their antynyms. Particularly in Modern/Legacy you have to be doing something 'unfair' whether it's faster Thoughtknot Seers a 12/12 for B or turning Ghost Quarter into Strip Mine so there are no true fair decks. But Eldrazi Tron is trying to get into the red zone with creature beats and provide just enough disruption that they can do so. It's just like any other midrange deck. The main difference is that with the Sol Land they are actually able to go a turn faster to keep up with Storm and what not.
You know, I think I'm a nice guy in real life; I'm not salty when I lose, I make friendly conversation to players, and I like talking about the game
But when I read some people's opinions on here and reddit, it makes me want to shake people until they get Baby Shaking Syndrome and come off really abrasive.
It sounds absolutely non-sensical that we have someone say, "a lot of people want the deck banned; it's on YOU to prove why it shouldn't be".
That's not how things work, buddy; when testing a hypothesis, you make the correlation and see what the positive or negative results are. YOU have to prove why the deck is broken. The deck has still yet to win a GP
Drevac, in all of his great hysteria, says Elrazi Tron is a tier 0 deck and should be banned before the PT and before people realize it's THAT good, or attempt to break it----the deck just got 1st and 2nd place at the Open and it's still only the 4th most played deck on MTGO with a 5.66% meta share. If we went by other people's data, I'd be willing to say it's probably around third or fourth in terms of numbers.
If we had things in the way of, "a mass group clamoring for a ban", Death's Shadow would have been banned three or four months ago. You guys have no data or tangible proof of the deck being oppressive. The argument of saying to someone, "he's not a killer, but we don't NOT know he's a killer" is what you sound like.
Cfusion, the deck straight up folds to decks that go wide and get bigger. Affinity is an atrocious matchup, dismembers and warping wails aren't great, relics are cycling, chalice is an atrocious card if it isn't in the opener, on top of knowing your opponent is on Affinity and you're on the play game 1.
Merfolk is rough, Humans; the deck can't beat Scapeshift outside of a turn 3 Seer into a turn 4 Smasher.
The deck folds pretty hard to aggro go wide and non-GY based combo decks.
If you ask me, those are some pretty huge cracks in the archetype, enough that it cannot become an oppressive deck.
I disagree with Stubbs that the deck is weak to dredge or Storm, I actually think they're good matchups, since the average deck is running 4x relics, 2 cages and 2x surgicals; chalice on 2 is a blowout against Storm.
Cfusion, it's coming off entitled to say, "But rejection doesn't stop them, and cavern blanks my counter!"
ok, I'm sorry your deck can't outgrind it, but Jeskai just hit a top 8, it's doing well in the metashares, mtgo is doing well, and Grixis is the top deck, and blue; and guess what, it's not oppressive or sweeping tournaments!
The deck can fold to itself, it runs 24 lands, 2 mindstones, 4x voids, 2x relics/collar--but the deck can also just be gas. I wouldn't really count on the deck losing to itself unless you're a fast aggro or combo deck though.
I wish the ban hysteria in this thread would calm down, some of the people here are what's wrong with modern, not the cards or WOTC itself.
Eldrazi Tron is a fair deck. Fair decks don't usually have a huge weak point to target with sideboard hate that's a huge point behind them. There is no card that really super hoses Jund. There's no one card that super hoses Jeskai Control. There are cards that super hose affinity and any combo deck. That's how the decks work.
Fair decks get lands that tap for 2 and 3 mana? Sign me up!
I think you're missing the point of why the deck is considered 'fair' (which, I hate the terminology as it implies that no deck in Magic wants to attack an exploitable axis in a given metagame). 'Fair' decks should be classified as 'Attrition' or 'Interactive' decks, as opposed to 'Unfair', 'Non-interactive', or 'All-in' decks. If a land produces 2 or 3 mana in a deck that is designed to be more resilient to answers as opposed to winning the game outright given the absence of answers, it is still enabling a fair strategy.
Having said that, in regards to your latest post, I agree the likes of Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher are too resilient with the format's current card pool (well, Trickbind effects look like they could pull double duty against these two and Grapeshot, but in terms of removal, creatures, and traditional counterspells, neither looks appealing to face).
I dislike the terminology too just like I dislike the terminology of linear or interactive and their antynyms. Particularly in Modern/Legacy you have to be doing something 'unfair' whether it's faster Thoughtknot Seers a 12/12 for B or turning Ghost Quarter into Strip Mine so there are no true fair decks. But Eldrazi Tron is trying to get into the red zone with creature beats and provide just enough disruption that they can do so. It's just like any other midrange deck. The main difference is that with the Sol Land they are actually able to go a turn faster to keep up with Storm and what not.
The deck can't function without it, Temple and Seer are the lynchpins to the deck.
It has no impactful turn 1 play except relic, collar, and dismember. Map's not doing anything on 1.
It's only turn 2 play is Mindstone, Matter Reshaper and Chalice for 1, and the occasional turn 2 Thought-Knot.
Chalice is great against degenerate decks, but as much as it can be a blowout card, it's also often polarizing and awful.
The deck is restricted to colorless cards, so it's sideboard can often lack, it has awful removal if it isn't All is Dust or a Ballista with Tron lands activated.
The opening hands are also ugly as hell, on average.
Deck is great, but the deck has clear weaknesses to be exploited.
Cfusion, it's coming off entitled to say, "But rejection doesn't stop them, and cavern blanks my counter!"
I don't mean this as a complaint or to sound entitled but it's just a reality that Rejection is not the hoser people make it out to be. Not when you have to counter literally everything before even worrying about getting shut out by Chalice. I honestly don't care that much about the deck since essentially no one plays it locally (though several stragglers still playing Bant Eldrazi, which is a headache). The ETron matchup for me is simple, if they have Chalice, I probably lose, if they don't have Chalice, I probably win. I don't find games or matchups like that particularly fun or interesting.
Arguments on both sides are pretty poor imo. Sure eldrazi tron bad matchups but every deck does. The deck also doesn't have a oppressive meta shares though. This puts us in a awkward spot as the deck does have some problematic play patterns and encourages people to play decks like titan shift and affinity to beat it but again it's not exactly dominating. Basically I'm banking on the pro tour exposing some of the flaws in modern and hopefully it's enough to get them fixed
I find it sad that people can label Etron play-patterns "problematic" while it follows all of moderns stated rules, and call for it's banning on that basis even though the collateral damage is that a lot of their peers and friends loose a deck. I don't see why one cares particularly either way if one gets stormed out of the game or TKS into Smashed out of the game. Modern is a format comprised primarily of decks doing unfair things, and a few decks trying to play enough interaction to keep up. Etron is hardly more guilty than anyone else. It's just on top or near enough to draw the attention.
Yes, woe are the times when people are playing affinity and titanshift!
I mean do we really want the best decks in modern to be affinity,titan shift, grixis death shadow, and eldrazi tron
Well, not to be belittle you, but you've pretty much admitted several times in this thread you dislike any deck that's combo or aggro, so it's really difficult to take what you say with any credibility
Cfusion, it's coming off entitled to say, "But rejection doesn't stop them, and cavern blanks my counter!"
I don't mean this as a complaint or to sound entitled but it's just a reality that Rejection is not the hoser people make it out to be. Not when you have to counter literally everything before even worrying about getting shut out by Chalice. I honestly don't care that much about the deck since essentially no one plays it locally (though several stragglers still playing Bant Eldrazi, which is a headache). The ETron matchup for me is simple, if they have Chalice, I probably lose, if they don't have Chalice, I probably win. I don't find games or matchups like that particularly fun or interesting.
But you are coming off entitled.
Your old favorite deck wasn't even answerable game 1 for quite a few decks.
You have to accept that some decks get blown way out of the water.
Even Grixis can straight up fold to lingering souls.
Yes, woe are the times when people are playing affinity and titanshift!
I mean do we really want the best decks in modern to be affinity,titan shift, grixis death shadow, and eldrazi tron
An aggro deck that goes wide, a blue based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange deck...yes I am totally fine with the top four decks being completely different.
The best 4 decks being titan shift/death's shadow/eldrazi tron/affinity feels fine to me. There're numerous ways to approach that metagame, and the decks are all legitimately different and interesting.
Unban Stoneforge and watch D&T savage that metagame. That feels pretty awesome to me
The best 4 decks being titan shift/death's shadow/eldrazi tron/affinity feels fine to me. There're numerous ways to approach that metagame, and the decks are all legitimately different and interesting.
Unban Stoneforge and watch D&T savage that metagame. That feels pretty awesome to me
We just have to keep poking Wizards and asking them to unban SFM. Eventually, they will get worn down and have to do it for the sake of their own sanity.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Yes, woe are the times when people are playing affinity and titanshift!
I mean do we really want the best decks in modern to be affinity,titan shift, grixis death shadow, and eldrazi tron
Well, not to be belittle you, but you've pretty much admitted several times in this thread you dislike any deck that's combo or aggro, so it's really difficult to take what you say with any credibility
Have I said I dislike combo or aggro? This seems to be a classic example of this thread misinterpreting what people say. As far as im concerned no one in this thread has any credibility. We are all just randoms on the internet
Yes, woe are the times when people are playing affinity and titanshift!
I mean do we really want the best decks in modern to be affinity,titan shift, grixis death shadow, and eldrazi tron
An aggro deck that goes wide, a blue based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange deck...yes I am totally fine with the top four decks being completely different.
It makes me sad that we don't want something better
You clearly complained about UR Storm and a number of unfair decks and then said the format hasn't felt fun, I'm not misrepresenting your words.
You then listed that you wished the format looked like XYZ, which was a bunch of fair, midrange/control decks.
I'm a midrange player at heart, but you can't just snub all these unfair decks.
This thread is incredibly frustrating, half the posters are calm, reasonable posters, and the other half are people who clamor for bans the moment a deck does well. If we had it everyone's way Shadow would have been banned in the last announcement and the format would probably be super combo/aggro based.
Modern is 2017 has been just as fun to me as 2015. 2016 was crap, but being better than 2016 is not why I feel the format is "passably good".
There's no deck currently that feels too good to me. Out of the top 15 decks right, all but 2 of them are doing busted things, UW Control and Jeskai are the only decks I can think of not doing anything broken.
You clearly complained about UR Storm and a number of unfair decks and then said the format hasn't felt fun, I'm not misrepresenting your words.
You then listed that you wished the format looked like XYZ, which was a bunch of fair, midrange/control decks.
I'm a midrange player at heart, but you can't just snub all these unfair decks.
This thread is incredibly frustrating, half the posters are calm, reasonable posters, and the other half are people who clamor for bans the moment a deck does well. If we had it everyone's way Shadow would have been banned in the last announcement and the format would probably be super combo/aggro based.
Modern is 2017 has been just as fun to me as 2015. 2016 was crap, but being better than 2016 is not why I feel the format is "passably good".
There's no deck currently that feels too good to me. Out of the top 15 decks right, all but 2 of them are doing busted things, UW Control and Jeskai are the only decks I can think of not doing anything broken.
Present me some quotes with context. I have said the I wish the format was mostly aggro, midrange and control. I have also said that modern hasn't been fun for me. People posting here have already made up their minds, you aren't going to convince anybody, so I just state what I would like modern to be. Hell I have even made a "normal" and 'selfish" list for what I want banned and unbanned. I'm all about increasing the quality of the average game of modern. Everyone focuses in on diversity being this holy trail for what makes a format good. You need deck diversity but there is soo much more that goes into making a good format. At the end of the day magic is a game and the gameplay needs to be enjoyable.
You clearly complained about UR Storm and a number of unfair decks and then said the format hasn't felt fun, I'm not misrepresenting your words.
You then listed that you wished the format looked like XYZ, which was a bunch of fair, midrange/control decks.
I'm a midrange player at heart, but you can't just snub all these unfair decks.
This thread is incredibly frustrating, half the posters are calm, reasonable posters, and the other half are people who clamor for bans the moment a deck does well. If we had it everyone's way Shadow would have been banned in the last announcement and the format would probably be super combo/aggro based.
Modern is 2017 has been just as fun to me as 2015. 2016 was crap, but being better than 2016 is not why I feel the format is "passably good".
There's no deck currently that feels too good to me. Out of the top 15 decks right, all but 2 of them are doing busted things, UW Control and Jeskai are the only decks I can think of not doing anything broken.
Present me some quotes with context. I have said the I wish the format was mostly aggro, midrange and control. I have also said that modern hasn't been fun for me. People posting here have already made up their minds, you aren't going to convince anybody, so I just state what I would like modern to be. Hell I have even made a "normal" and 'selfish" list for what I want banned and unbanned. I'm all about increasing the quality of the average game of modern. Everyone focuses in on diversity being this holy trail for what makes a format good. You need deck diversity but there is soo much more that goes into making a good format. At the end of the day magic is a game and the gameplay needs to be enjoyable.
Perhaps start by ending the empty platitudes and saying something of substance. Why is it bad that the top four decks are a go wide aggro deck, a blue/black based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange ramp deck? What is supposedly so much better? Battlecruiser magic like what had been happening in standard? Nah, screw that noise.
You clearly complained about UR Storm and a number of unfair decks and then said the format hasn't felt fun, I'm not misrepresenting your words.
You then listed that you wished the format looked like XYZ, which was a bunch of fair, midrange/control decks.
I'm a midrange player at heart, but you can't just snub all these unfair decks.
This thread is incredibly frustrating, half the posters are calm, reasonable posters, and the other half are people who clamor for bans the moment a deck does well. If we had it everyone's way Shadow would have been banned in the last announcement and the format would probably be super combo/aggro based.
Modern is 2017 has been just as fun to me as 2015. 2016 was crap, but being better than 2016 is not why I feel the format is "passably good".
There's no deck currently that feels too good to me. Out of the top 15 decks right, all but 2 of them are doing busted things, UW Control and Jeskai are the only decks I can think of not doing anything broken.
Present me some quotes with context. I have said the I wish the format was mostly aggro, midrange and control. I have also said that modern hasn't been fun for me. People posting here have already made up their minds, you aren't going to convince anybody, so I just state what I would like modern to be. Hell I have even made a "normal" and 'selfish" list for what I want banned and unbanned. I'm all about increasing the quality of the average game of modern. Everyone focuses in on diversity being this holy trail for what makes a format good. You need deck diversity but there is soo much more that goes into making a good format. At the end of the day magic is a game and the gameplay needs to be enjoyable.
Perhaps start by ending the empty platitudes and saying something of substance. Why is it bad that the top four decks are a go wide aggro deck, a blue/black based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange ramp deck? What is supposedly so much better? Battlecruiser magic like what had been happening in standard? Nah, screw that noise.
Love these borderline insults from the "reasonable" posters. I wouldn't categorize those decks the way you did. I would say it would be a aggro deck that can use a mox , a ramp combo deck. A delverish midrange deck and a big mana midrange deck that can use a sol land. When did I say i wanted battlecruiser magic? The issue with having these be the best decks is they all produce non games at a higher than normal rate. Having the best decks be something like jund, grixis control, affinity or burn, and storm or ad nauseam. This to me would be much more enjoyable.
Burn, Ad Nauseam and Storm don't produce non games?
Storm was literally solitaire all throughout this weekend.
All I see is personal agendas that want to be fulfilled.
Burn and Affinity haven't left tier 1 in over 2 years, AD Naus has never been tier 1 except for a short duration
UR Storm is bordering on tier 1, if not already
No one cares what you find more enjoyable, you're not stating arguments, you're just stating your biases and preference because Eldrazi Tron, Titanshift and Grixis Shadow seem to offend you.
You clearly complained about UR Storm and a number of unfair decks and then said the format hasn't felt fun, I'm not misrepresenting your words.
You then listed that you wished the format looked like XYZ, which was a bunch of fair, midrange/control decks.
I'm a midrange player at heart, but you can't just snub all these unfair decks.
This thread is incredibly frustrating, half the posters are calm, reasonable posters, and the other half are people who clamor for bans the moment a deck does well. If we had it everyone's way Shadow would have been banned in the last announcement and the format would probably be super combo/aggro based.
Modern is 2017 has been just as fun to me as 2015. 2016 was crap, but being better than 2016 is not why I feel the format is "passably good".
There's no deck currently that feels too good to me. Out of the top 15 decks right, all but 2 of them are doing busted things, UW Control and Jeskai are the only decks I can think of not doing anything broken.
Present me some quotes with context. I have said the I wish the format was mostly aggro, midrange and control. I have also said that modern hasn't been fun for me. People posting here have already made up their minds, you aren't going to convince anybody, so I just state what I would like modern to be. Hell I have even made a "normal" and 'selfish" list for what I want banned and unbanned. I'm all about increasing the quality of the average game of modern. Everyone focuses in on diversity being this holy trail for what makes a format good. You need deck diversity but there is soo much more that goes into making a good format. At the end of the day magic is a game and the gameplay needs to be enjoyable.
Perhaps start by ending the empty platitudes and saying something of substance. Why is it bad that the top four decks are a go wide aggro deck, a blue/black based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange ramp deck? What is supposedly so much better? Battlecruiser magic like what had been happening in standard? Nah, screw that noise.
Love these borderline insults from the "reasonable" posters. I wouldn't categorize those decks the way you did. I would say it would be a aggro deck that can use a mox , a ramp combo deck. A delverish midrange deck and a big mana midrange deck that can use a sol land. When did I say i wanted battlecruiser magic? The issue with having these be the best decks is they all produce non games at a higher than normal rate. Having the best decks be something like jund, grixis control, affinity or burn, and storm or ad nauseam. This to me would be much more enjoyable.
Looking at decks that way will always leave you wanting a deck gone. If it's not the sol land it'll be the delve fatty for super cheap, if not that it'll be the mana reduction creature for every storm spell, if not that it'll be the 8 can't gainlife 3 damage spells that you can't sb against unless you have leyline, coco, dredge... it happens every time. Sure drazi tron is hard to hate outright now but then affinity gets really popular and if a couple people mis bad matchups and crush affinity to take the top 2 spots we call for that deck to get axed. It's a terrible cycle that leads to people losing decks that aren't t0 when something might come down the road to help. Something like but not limited to scuttle the wreckage.
Burn, Ad Nauseam and Storm don't produce non games?
Storm was literally solitaire all throughout this weekend.
All I see is personal agendas that want to be fulfilled.
Burn and Affinity haven't left tier 1 in over 2 years, AD Naus has never been tier 1 except for a short duration
UR Storm is bordering on tier 1, if not already
No one cares what you find more enjoyable, you're not stating arguments, you're just stating your biases and preference because Eldrazi Tron, Titanshift and Grixis Shadow seem to offend you.
Looks like the "reasonable" posters true colors are showing with the mud slinging. I have never complained about GDS offending me. You are always going to have non games and I can't leave combo decks of the list so that's why you see storm and ad nauseam , the same reasoning would apply to aggro decks with burn. I don't want a format of just midrange and control. We are all pushing an agenda
I think you're missing the point of why the deck is considered 'fair' (which, I hate the terminology as it implies that no deck in Magic wants to attack an exploitable axis in a given metagame). 'Fair' decks should be classified as 'Attrition' or 'Interactive' decks, as opposed to 'Unfair', 'Non-interactive', or 'All-in' decks. If a land produces 2 or 3 mana in a deck that is designed to be more resilient to answers as opposed to winning the game outright given the absence of answers, it is still enabling a fair strategy.
Having said that, in regards to your latest post, I agree the likes of Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher are too resilient with the format's current card pool (well, Trickbind effects look like they could pull double duty against these two and Grapeshot, but in terms of removal, creatures, and traditional counterspells, neither looks appealing to face).
Avatar and Signature by XenoNinja via Heroes of the Plane Studios
I dislike the terminology too just like I dislike the terminology of linear or interactive and their antynyms. Particularly in Modern/Legacy you have to be doing something 'unfair' whether it's faster Thoughtknot Seers a 12/12 for B or turning Ghost Quarter into Strip Mine so there are no true fair decks. But Eldrazi Tron is trying to get into the red zone with creature beats and provide just enough disruption that they can do so. It's just like any other midrange deck. The main difference is that with the Sol Land they are actually able to go a turn faster to keep up with Storm and what not.
But when I read some people's opinions on here and reddit, it makes me want to shake people until they get Baby Shaking Syndrome and come off really abrasive.
It sounds absolutely non-sensical that we have someone say, "a lot of people want the deck banned; it's on YOU to prove why it shouldn't be".
That's not how things work, buddy; when testing a hypothesis, you make the correlation and see what the positive or negative results are. YOU have to prove why the deck is broken. The deck has still yet to win a GP
Drevac, in all of his great hysteria, says Elrazi Tron is a tier 0 deck and should be banned before the PT and before people realize it's THAT good, or attempt to break it----the deck just got 1st and 2nd place at the Open and it's still only the 4th most played deck on MTGO with a 5.66% meta share. If we went by other people's data, I'd be willing to say it's probably around third or fourth in terms of numbers.
If we had things in the way of, "a mass group clamoring for a ban", Death's Shadow would have been banned three or four months ago. You guys have no data or tangible proof of the deck being oppressive. The argument of saying to someone, "he's not a killer, but we don't NOT know he's a killer" is what you sound like.
Cfusion, the deck straight up folds to decks that go wide and get bigger. Affinity is an atrocious matchup, dismembers and warping wails aren't great, relics are cycling, chalice is an atrocious card if it isn't in the opener, on top of knowing your opponent is on Affinity and you're on the play game 1.
Merfolk is rough, Humans; the deck can't beat Scapeshift outside of a turn 3 Seer into a turn 4 Smasher.
The deck folds pretty hard to aggro go wide and non-GY based combo decks.
If you ask me, those are some pretty huge cracks in the archetype, enough that it cannot become an oppressive deck.
I disagree with Stubbs that the deck is weak to dredge or Storm, I actually think they're good matchups, since the average deck is running 4x relics, 2 cages and 2x surgicals; chalice on 2 is a blowout against Storm.
Cfusion, it's coming off entitled to say, "But rejection doesn't stop them, and cavern blanks my counter!"
ok, I'm sorry your deck can't outgrind it, but Jeskai just hit a top 8, it's doing well in the metashares, mtgo is doing well, and Grixis is the top deck, and blue; and guess what, it's not oppressive or sweeping tournaments!
The deck can fold to itself, it runs 24 lands, 2 mindstones, 4x voids, 2x relics/collar--but the deck can also just be gas. I wouldn't really count on the deck losing to itself unless you're a fast aggro or combo deck though.
I wish the ban hysteria in this thread would calm down, some of the people here are what's wrong with modern, not the cards or WOTC itself.
The deck can't function without it, Temple and Seer are the lynchpins to the deck.
It has no impactful turn 1 play except relic, collar, and dismember. Map's not doing anything on 1.
It's only turn 2 play is Mindstone, Matter Reshaper and Chalice for 1, and the occasional turn 2 Thought-Knot.
Chalice is great against degenerate decks, but as much as it can be a blowout card, it's also often polarizing and awful.
The deck is restricted to colorless cards, so it's sideboard can often lack, it has awful removal if it isn't All is Dust or a Ballista with Tron lands activated.
The opening hands are also ugly as hell, on average.
Deck is great, but the deck has clear weaknesses to be exploited.
I don't mean this as a complaint or to sound entitled but it's just a reality that Rejection is not the hoser people make it out to be. Not when you have to counter literally everything before even worrying about getting shut out by Chalice. I honestly don't care that much about the deck since essentially no one plays it locally (though several stragglers still playing Bant Eldrazi, which is a headache). The ETron matchup for me is simple, if they have Chalice, I probably lose, if they don't have Chalice, I probably win. I don't find games or matchups like that particularly fun or interesting.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
U Merfolk
UB Tezzerator
UB Mill
Don't ban peoples' decks. It's not cool. IMHO.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I mean do we really want the best decks in modern to be affinity,titan shift, grixis death shadow, and eldrazi tron
Well, not to be belittle you, but you've pretty much admitted several times in this thread you dislike any deck that's combo or aggro, so it's really difficult to take what you say with any credibility
But you are coming off entitled.
Your old favorite deck wasn't even answerable game 1 for quite a few decks.
You have to accept that some decks get blown way out of the water.
Even Grixis can straight up fold to lingering souls.
An aggro deck that goes wide, a blue based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange deck...yes I am totally fine with the top four decks being completely different.
Unban Stoneforge and watch D&T savage that metagame. That feels pretty awesome to me
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I think Jund continues to be a garbage deck without BBE, and I'm not sure BBE can really catapult the deck back to the top.
I think BBE really needs to come off now, the card is severely not dangerous anymore.
I'd like to see DNT wreck those decks, too.
We just have to keep poking Wizards and asking them to unban SFM. Eventually, they will get worn down and have to do it for the sake of their own sanity.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Have I said I dislike combo or aggro? This seems to be a classic example of this thread misinterpreting what people say. As far as im concerned no one in this thread has any credibility. We are all just randoms on the internet
It makes me sad that we don't want something better
You then listed that you wished the format looked like XYZ, which was a bunch of fair, midrange/control decks.
I'm a midrange player at heart, but you can't just snub all these unfair decks.
This thread is incredibly frustrating, half the posters are calm, reasonable posters, and the other half are people who clamor for bans the moment a deck does well. If we had it everyone's way Shadow would have been banned in the last announcement and the format would probably be super combo/aggro based.
Modern is 2017 has been just as fun to me as 2015. 2016 was crap, but being better than 2016 is not why I feel the format is "passably good".
There's no deck currently that feels too good to me. Out of the top 15 decks right, all but 2 of them are doing busted things, UW Control and Jeskai are the only decks I can think of not doing anything broken.
Present me some quotes with context. I have said the I wish the format was mostly aggro, midrange and control. I have also said that modern hasn't been fun for me. People posting here have already made up their minds, you aren't going to convince anybody, so I just state what I would like modern to be. Hell I have even made a "normal" and 'selfish" list for what I want banned and unbanned. I'm all about increasing the quality of the average game of modern. Everyone focuses in on diversity being this holy trail for what makes a format good. You need deck diversity but there is soo much more that goes into making a good format. At the end of the day magic is a game and the gameplay needs to be enjoyable.
Perhaps start by ending the empty platitudes and saying something of substance. Why is it bad that the top four decks are a go wide aggro deck, a blue/black based tempo deck, a linear combo, and a grindy midrange ramp deck? What is supposedly so much better? Battlecruiser magic like what had been happening in standard? Nah, screw that noise.
Love these borderline insults from the "reasonable" posters. I wouldn't categorize those decks the way you did. I would say it would be a aggro deck that can use a mox , a ramp combo deck. A delverish midrange deck and a big mana midrange deck that can use a sol land. When did I say i wanted battlecruiser magic? The issue with having these be the best decks is they all produce non games at a higher than normal rate. Having the best decks be something like jund, grixis control, affinity or burn, and storm or ad nauseam. This to me would be much more enjoyable.
Storm was literally solitaire all throughout this weekend.
All I see is personal agendas that want to be fulfilled.
Burn and Affinity haven't left tier 1 in over 2 years, AD Naus has never been tier 1 except for a short duration
UR Storm is bordering on tier 1, if not already
No one cares what you find more enjoyable, you're not stating arguments, you're just stating your biases and preference because Eldrazi Tron, Titanshift and Grixis Shadow seem to offend you.
Looking at decks that way will always leave you wanting a deck gone. If it's not the sol land it'll be the delve fatty for super cheap, if not that it'll be the mana reduction creature for every storm spell, if not that it'll be the 8 can't gainlife 3 damage spells that you can't sb against unless you have leyline, coco, dredge... it happens every time. Sure drazi tron is hard to hate outright now but then affinity gets really popular and if a couple people mis bad matchups and crush affinity to take the top 2 spots we call for that deck to get axed. It's a terrible cycle that leads to people losing decks that aren't t0 when something might come down the road to help. Something like but not limited to scuttle the wreckage.
Looks like the "reasonable" posters true colors are showing with the mud slinging. I have never complained about GDS offending me. You are always going to have non games and I can't leave combo decks of the list so that's why you see storm and ad nauseam , the same reasoning would apply to aggro decks with burn. I don't want a format of just midrange and control. We are all pushing an agenda