I now remember that comment wotc made on april that they would look at modern's color balance after the other formats' pressing issues had been taken care of.
Well, since then they took care of legacy, vintage and standard. Looks like this revision, it's time for modern.
If they don't ban anything, looks like white is the worst represented color in Modern. Place your bets.
I now remember that comment wotc made on april that they would look at modern's color balance after the other formats' pressing issues had been taken care of.
Well, since then they took care of legacy, vintage and standard. Looks like this revision, it's time for modern.
If they don't ban anything, looks like white is the worst represented color in Modern. Place your bets.
Green is the worst atm. Of the top ten on goldfish White has Burn, D/T, UW Control, Jeskai Control while green has titan shift. They both share counter company of course.
I now remember that comment wotc made on april that they would look at modern's color balance after the other formats' pressing issues had been taken care of.
Well, since then they took care of legacy, vintage and standard. Looks like this revision, it's time for modern.
If they don't ban anything, looks like white is the worst represented color in Modern. Place your bets.
Green is the worst atm. Of the top ten on goldfish White has Burn, D/T, UW Control, Jeskai Control while green has titan shift. They both share counter company of course.
It's not about decks but cards played. White has lingering souls, path to exile, vizier, and little arbiter guy? What else? Boros charm? Lol.
Of course, how haven't we thought of adapting our decks to etron?! We are such noobs, guys.
We could have won eldrazi winter PT if we had known of that! Oh well.
Had Eye of Ugin not been banned, there would have been more and more decks emerge with a good Eldrazi matchup. That just never happened because Eye was banned so quickly
Oh yeah, a deck that gets to play 8 sol lands and absurdly pushed dudes is going to have bad matchups in a format with no wasteland or free counterspells.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy
Death and Taxes Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
Of course, how haven't we thought of adapting our decks to etron?! We are such noobs, guys.
We could have won eldrazi winter PT if we had known of that! Oh well.
Had Eye of Ugin not been banned, there would have been more and more decks emerge with a good Eldrazi matchup. That just never happened because Eye was banned so quickly
Oh yeah, a deck that gets to play 8 sol lands and absurdly pushed dudes is going to have bad matchups in a format with no wasteland or free counterspells.
Even if the deck is highly skewed to beating Eldrazi and only eldrazi, I'm sure it can be done. Maybe some sort of blood moon control deck with mainboard Roasts. And soon we would have gotten Ceremonious Rejection too to help out with this
Back to Eldrazi Tron/Chalice debate: this deck doesn't even play Chalice on turn 1 like its legacy counterpart. This gives the opponent at least one turn to discard/counter the chalice before it hits the board. Eldrazi Temple is a pseudo-Sol land because it cannot be used to cast everything, or even a very large group of cards like Mishra's Workshop can cast. Eldrazi are a very small subset of Magic cards, and they will likely not print very many again in the future. I think Eldrazi Temple is safe from ever being banned
Nothing needs a ban. Unban Bloodbraid Elf and Stoneforge Mystic. Both Jund and Abzan need help now, so lets give it to them
D&T is a deck because Modern is a greedy format. It preys on most 3-color decks, noncreature combo, and Tron variants, so it's putting in a lot of work against the top end of the format. To reduce its success down to the prevalence of Death's Shadow either means (1) you don't know how D&T works or (2) you don't know anything about the Modern format. Given you're here in this thread, I'm going to assume it's the former.
To your credit, Stoneforge is a safe unban, mostly because of Kolaghan's Command. Because Jitte is also banned in Modern (and it should be), unbanning Stoneforge is limited in its usefulness. It allows decks to run Batterskull, which does punish Burn and a handful of fair decks. But adding something like a Swordpackage out of the sideboard starts costing you a lot of slots in the 75; it probably takes up 5 maindeck slots (4 SFM + Batterskull) with 2 sideboard slots (2 swords of your choice).
I'm a D&T player, and I'm not convinced that our deck even wants SFM. I think it helps UW control. I think it helps Abzan. But the D&T lists are so tight that giving up 5 slots in the maindeck is a significant cost.
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
i dont know if death and taxes would play stoneforge, i mean, your main game plan is about resource denial, and one of the cornerstones of the decdk is leonin arbiter which is a nonbo with stoneforge, and if you choose to replace the arbiter, D&T is just a white weenie deck that looses to everything
My buddy is a D&T player and I have played extensively with the deck so yeah, I think I know how the deck works.
D&T was an untiered deck until DS appeared on the map. DS became prevalent, D&T won two major(SCG) events. DS is slowly becoming a Tier 2 deck again, D&T is slowly fading away also. Those aren't all coincidences. Might have to do something with the sol land also which you can just throw inside and call it a day in Eldrazi and Taxes.
D&T was, is and will always be a mediocre/bad deck in Modern(at least in comparison with how it's in Legacy). It's just that with DS, it gains an extra bye matchup in the top tiers and this matchup is making the deck winning more.
In Legacy though, for a whole bunch of different reasons, it's a good deck.
I want a better DnT deck for sure, because it will make for a better format. SFM will make it into the Death and Taxes for sure, or at least it will be a good headache for the DnT players to have to go or not with.
Literally the only part of this statement that's correct is that D&T is a better deck in Legacy than Modern. Everything else is just proof that you don't know what you're talking about.
My suggestion: spend some more time in the Modern D&T thread. Maybe play fewer "Snapcaster Mage.deck" decks. Watch D&T being streamed on Twitch or sleeve it up and play at your LGS.
Honestly, I'm not sure why you think you're the authority on this. I'm a D&T pilot. I post regularly in the Modern D&T thread. D&T is listed in my signature as a deck that I play. For comparison, I'm not sure I've ever seen you in that thread and your signature literally has "Snapcaster Mage.deck" written in it.
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
Had there ever been a format where a ban (splinter twin, BBE) has led to grudges being held by former pilots of those affected decks for two to three years?
i think that modern bans were a little different than other format bans (not all of them of course), i mean, you can say that, for example (let me imagine a little) mind's desire is a clear candidate for a ban, but u cannot say the same for splinter twin
I now remember that comment wotc made on april that they would look at modern's color balance after the other formats' pressing issues had been taken care of.
Well, since then they took care of legacy, vintage and standard. Looks like this revision, it's time for modern.
If they don't ban anything, looks like white is the worst represented color in Modern. Place your bets.
Green is the worst atm. Of the top ten on goldfish White has Burn, D/T, UW Control, Jeskai Control while green has titan shift. They both share counter company of course.
Jund Death's Shadow/4c Shadow may not be the best deck, but this is a deck one easily can play and expect to win a GP.
Bant Company just won the GP Sao Paolo and 2/3 last Modern Challenges. Vizier of Remedies-Devoted Druid is still a thing.
Abzan Company is a tier 1.5 deck at worst, tier 1 at best. Easily playable and great choice even if you want to win a GP.
RG Titanshift is one of the best 2-3 decks of the format.
Amulet Titan is not that bad as you would think.
Green is doing just fine.
White:
The only reason D&T is a deck, is because it wrecks Deaths Shadow. And atm, DS is not so popular, that's why D&T isn't either.
Burn is not a White deck, it's a Mono red deck with a white splash for Boros Charm and sb cards.
UW Control is fine in MODO, but it isn't even top 64-ing GP's.
Jeskai Queller saw some success in the recent events, but the deck's Eldrazi Tron matchup is literally awful. Thus why it's metagame percentage is going down and down and down. In a more interactive or/and Bolt meta, the deck isn't even that good.
I really can't find some white based decks that are truly good ones.
I guess, UW is playable.
I don't understand. You start off by saying Jund Death Shadow is so good you can can easily play it and expect to win a GP and your first argument against white being good is that Death Shadow isn't good which is why D&T isn't good despite putting up results.
Abzan Company, Bant Company and Devoted druid combo are white decks which leaves Titan shift and amulet Titan.
I don't disagree with Stoneforge Mystic being unbanned, but there are definitely a similar number of white/green decks.
So, question: Why Legacy Death and taxes always play Stoneforge Mystic, but it's not 100% maindeckable in the Modern deck? I would take the "you cant dig due to the Arbiter" argument, but your argument was that there's no Jitte and there's no space for it. I find that hard to believe though.
In Modern (and in Legacy), one of the hallmarks of a D&T deck is pressuring your opponent's manabase. In Legacy, there are efficient, standaloneoptions for that. In Modern, the options aremuchslower and require supplementalsupport.
I won't say that you can't run SFM and Arbiter in the same deck (after all, the D&T splashes often run fetchlands), but it does make your sequencing much more awkward. In order to run SFM, you'd probably have to turn some number of the Arbiters into Mindcensors (which are better against Titanshift decks anyway), but that slows down the pressure you can reasonably apply on your opponent's manabase.
Unlike Legacy, where you can just rely on Wasteland and Rishadan Port while your Vial ticks up, in Modern you can't just rely on Ghost Quarter, Tectonic Edge, and Field of Ruin. By themselves, two of those cards don't actually slow down your opponent, and the third one can't be activated until (usually) T4. Generally speaking, allowing your opponents to set up in their early turns is usually a good way to lose the game. Playing T2 SFM into T3 Batterskull isn't disrupting opponents.
A Modern mono-white (non-Eldrazi) D&T deck probably has about 8-12 flex slots, depending on whom you ask. Two years ago, there would have been approximately 17 flex slots (everything except the 20-card core and 23 lands). In those 8-12 slots, it seems like it would be easy to run 4 SFM and a Batterskull. But those slots are currently occupied by things like Blade Splicer, Restoration Angel, and Thalia, Heretic Cathar. In other words, those slots are filled with additional taxes and strategies to go wide. SFM doesn't do either of those things. SFM basically ties up your mana for 1-2 turns and gives you a 4/4 with vigilance and lifelink. It's good, but it's not winning games of Modern unless (a) your opponent is playing Burn or a fair deck and (b) your opponent isn't interacting with your germ token.
Just thinking about it now, it's rare that the games I lose could have been won if I had access to a Batterskull. I would be better positioned against Affinity, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Elves (maybe), but I would be worse positioned against most control and combo decks.
To be clear, I didn't say that SFM was unplayable in D&T. I'm just not convinced that it's an auto-include. If the metagame ever returns to a spot where Burn and Affinity are ubiquitous, then SFM would make D&T much better. For right now though, I'm not sure that D&T wants SFM.
Finally, if D&T is becoming better and better, that's good news for Modern. We need a deck that's keeping greedy decks like Eldra Tron, Titanshift, and 3 colour decks in check. That's one of the main things Modern needs tbh.
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
Of course, new cards could alter the balance and I hope that happens, but seeing the hilariously low power level of the cards they're releasing I wouldn't hold my breath...
It's just a matter that the format is not fun or interesting at all.
I dunno, how many new high-powered cards should we expect? Seems like there's been more than a few in the past several sets... Push, Brutality, LtLH, Gideon Ally, Gideon Trials, now we're getting more Merfolk, and I'm sure I'm overlooking stuff... I think Wizards could be designing a lot worse.
I've been playing Modern since the Pod and Treasure Cruise ban, not so long I know. But I'm still having fun.
But those ruminations aside, my larger point was that the desire for a better mulligan rule really comes from a desire for a better mana system, and that's not really fixable at this point.
I disagree. I think the desire for a better mulligan rule stems from players not understanding how to properly deck build or mulligan. If players understood both of those then "mana screw" would happen MUCH less frequently than it does. So infrequently that it would become a moot point. Therefore the issue simply cannot lie with the mana system.
Many players bring "netdecks" to tournaments, so the point of deck building is likely lost on most people. But what net-deckers (and I'm one of them) often don't understand is that the deck that Person Y brought and showed up as #1 on mtgtop8 was likely tailored to that person. Perhaps that person knows they make riskier keeps than the majority and therefore shaved a land off what most players should actually run. Knowing your playstyle well and being able to identify someone else's playstyle based on their 75 are keys to bringing the correct 75 for you (i.e. deckbuilding).
And the playerbase in general makes abysmal mulligan decisions.
You make the claim "so infrequently it would become a moot point" but neglect to provide any definite data for that statement, which would seem required, rather than what amounts to little more than speculation. If you don't get enough lands, you don't get enough lands. And unlike the Pokemon TCG, you don't have free, super-efficient draw/tutor effects that increase the chance of you being able to get the stuff you need.
Sure, some cases of feel-bad mulligans come from bad decisions. But a lot--too many--are simply not getting lands (or ending up going down to a low number when you finally get lands) and no different sequence would have changed that.
I've done the numbers for various standard, modern, and legacy decks in the past, which is why I'm confident making the assertions I did. But pick a deck, run the numbers, show us the math, and let's discuss the results.
Just be careful since adding mulligans into the mix makes the calculation a bit more complicated.
Disclaimer: I'm pretty well-versed with probability.
I don't think your post is inherently wrong, but I do think you've missed the point. From a deck construction standpoint, even if you build your deck optimally for a certain number of lands on a certain turn, you'll be flooded or screwed relative to your optimization in a fair number of games. Of course it varies by deck and what you're trying to optimize for, but just as an example: if you wanted a deck with the maximum likelihood of having 3 lands in your starting 7, you would put 26 lands in your 60 card deck. But even that only gives you a 31.22% chance of having exactly 3 lands in your starting hand. And there is a 22.20% chance of having fewer than 2 or more than 4 lands.
If you consider having fewer than 2 or more than 4 lands in your opening hand a "failure" (which would be reasonable), then you're having to mulligan in 1 out of every 5 games no matter what. Of course, mulligans make your failure rate go down. They're independent events, so having to mulligan to 5 should only happen in roughly 1 out of every 25 games (in this case, the odds that you draw fewer than 2 lands or more than 4 lands doesn't actually change very much when you go to 6, it goes from 22.20% to 22.06%).
To be fair, this would happen less often if people were better at math. But to be fair to the people you're arguing with, I think the complaint is that even if you build your deck optimally, the current system results in a certain number of non-games. People don't like variance; that's why the fetchlands are as popular as they are. Variance is a requirement for almost all card games. One possible way of reducing variance is separating the spells from the lands.
I'm not really taking a position on this topic. I just don't think you can stipulate that people are bad at math, point to the hypergeometric distribution, and claim that non-games wouldn't be a problem if people knew what they were doing. Yes, there would be fewer non-games. But hypothetically, why wouldn't you want a system with the fewest number of non-games possible?
To be clear: I'm not advocating for Magic becoming chess. I just think it's a tough sell to advocate for more variance in a game where the players generally like that skill matters.
EDIT: Also, I'm already aware that separating lands from spells simply results in having to manage two different hypergeometric distributions. It doesn't actually eliminate the need for understanding probability. It just changes the problem from "I had too few/many lands" to "I had a suboptimal mixture of spells throughout the game".
First: Thanks for saying what would have essentially been my counterpoint, except you wrote it a whole lot better than I would have.
I do wish to critique one point, though, when you say "people don't like variance." I don't agree with that; if people didn't like some degree of variance, they'd be off playing some other game. What people don't like is a particular kind of variance, namely the kind of variance that decides the game independent of any skill, with mana screw basically being the pinnacle of that in how it can all but decide the winner just based on the opening hands. The kind of variance people like is the kind that makes each game different from the previous one, where you get different cards and have to formulate different strategies based on what cards you have.
Had there ever been a format where a ban (splinter twin, BBE) has led to grudges being held by former pilots of those affected decks for two to three years?
I know some people were really annoyed by the banning of Mystical Tutor in Legacy, though after the Miracle cards came out (almost exactly 2 years later), no one really advocates for it coming back anymore because of how insane it makes those cards. Still, a number of Legacy players in the present, while conceding the card is too good now, think that Wizards of the Coast was incorrect to ban it when they did. Of course, WOTC's atrociously written banning rationale at the time probably didn't help to win anyone over.
I agree with h0lydiva, the etron/GDS/storm/affinity/burn/valakut meta kinda sucks for many players.
If you analyze those decks, you find out that you either go super fast combo or aggro, or you go wide and play etron or valakut, with GDS being good because how fast it is and good against combo, since your life total doesn't matter that much against combo. And Etron keeps up at tier1 thanks to chalice to invalidate all the 1cmc spells of the fast decks.
I'm not even sure of how to balance this thing. Not sure if banning something from tron would balance the whole metagame. Maybe unbanning SFM & BBE would give enough power to jund and jeskai decks to change the meta. It's not an easy decision.
I agree with h0lydiva, the etron/GDS/storm/affinity/burn/valakut meta kinda sucks for many players.
If you analyze those decks, you find out that you either go super fast combo or aggro, or you go wide and play etron or valakut, with GDS being good because how fast it is and good against combo, since your life total doesn't matter that much against combo. And Etron keeps up at tier1 thanks to chalice to invalidate all the 1cmc spells of the fast decks.
I'm not even sure of how to balance this thing. Not sure if banning something from tron would balance the whole metagame. Maybe unbanning SFM & BBE would give enough power to jund and jeskai decks to change the meta. It's not an easy decision.
As I see it, neither of those cards fit into the top five decks in Modern, so both are terrific unbans at this point. For context, IMO it hasn't been safe (until Push) to unban BBE since it first hit the list, but SFM could have come off a couple formats ago. Right now I would like to see both return. I think it bears repeating that giving non-meta decks additional tools to help them roll with the gauntlet of Tier 1 strategies has always proven the most successful strategy for maintaining a diverse format in Modern.
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.
I agree with h0lydiva, the etron/GDS/storm/affinity/burn/valakut meta kinda sucks for many players.
If you analyze those decks, you find out that you either go super fast combo or aggro, or you go wide and play etron or valakut, with GDS being good because how fast it is and good against combo, since your life total doesn't matter that much against combo. And Etron keeps up at tier1 thanks to chalice to invalidate all the 1cmc spells of the fast decks.
I'm not even sure of how to balance this thing. Not sure if banning something from tron would balance the whole metagame. Maybe unbanning SFM & BBE would give enough power to jund and jeskai decks to change the meta. It's not an easy decision.
As I see it, neither of those cards fit into the top five decks in Modern, so both are terrific unbans at this point. For context, IMO it hasn't been safe (until Push) to unban BBE since it first hit the list, but SFM could have come off a couple formats ago. Right now I would like to see both return. I think it bears repeating that giving non-meta decks additional tools to help them roll with the gauntlet of Tier 1 strategies has always proven the most successful strategy for maintaining a diverse format in Modern.
I didn't mention it because I believe WotC are overly scared of unbans. But yes, at this point, unless they did something extremely silly, and looking at the current state of things, I can't see how unbanning things like SFM and/or BBE wouldn't make things more interesting. And as Jordan said, those are powerful cards that slot into non-tier 1 decks, and also in the type of deck that many people find desirable to have at the top.
I laugh at the idea of making jund and abzan midrange better causing anything "interesting." That battlecruiser magic I'll keep to standard.
Yeah, i feel that unbanning cards makes the format more powerful and goes directly against their goals for it.
I always say, that Modern problems come from Combo being too good. The rest are just symptoms of this. I'm not saying Combo shouldn't exist, but it should be a little less good so less games resolve around trash cards like Chalice of the Void and first 8 cards, SB roulette, etc.
Sadly, i think the only direct way of fixing this is by banning combo decks(instead of consitency tools). i.e: Banning Grapeshot,Valakut,Mox Opal, etc.
Either way goes against format goals(Shorter banlist and be different form Standrad and Legacy respectively).
GDS is still the good guy in my eyes. I wouldn't be opposed to opening the floodgates(SFM,BBE,Jace,etc). I would rather this than banning all combo decks.
The best option of course is better answers for fair decks against combo decks. If Legacy is and example of anything, you see how difficult is to regulate combo decks without warping the whole format(Fair=Blue). And even then, combo decks are super good in Legacy.
I'm baffled that I think it is equally possible that either WotC could unban/ban cards just to shake up the meta going to the PT or they would unban/ban nothing because they think Modern has a healthy meta.
However, I agree on terms that there are 5 "best decks" in the format. I think Death's Shadow, Scapeshift and Eldrazi Tron are all great decks, but I think Affinity and Storm are just not as good as them. I also think Burn is as strong as Affinity or Storm in the current meta.
Maybe PT Rivals of Ixalan will show us which are the "true" best decks in the format.
Yeah, i feel that unbanning cards makes the format more powerful and goes directly against their goals for it.
I always say, that Modern problems come from Combo being too good. The rest are just symptoms of this. I'm not saying Combo shouldn't exist, but it should be a little less good so less games resolve around trash cards like Chalice of the Void and first 8 cards, SB roulette, etc.
Sadly, i think the only direct way of fixing this is by banning combo decks(instead of consitency tools). i.e: Banning Grapeshot,Valakut,Mox Opal, etc.
Either way goes against format goals(Shorter banlist and be different form Standrad and Legacy respectively).
GDS is still the good guy in my eyes. I wouldn't be opposed to opening the floodgates(SFM,BBE,Jace,etc). I would rather this than banning all combo decks.
The best option of course is better answers for fair decks against combo decks. If Legacy is and example of anything, you see how difficult is to regulate combo decks without warping the whole format(Fair=Blue). And even then, combo decks are super good in Legacy.
Combo shouldn't exist, but all existing combos should be banned...
Look I play Storm, and storm has some awful matchups. Burn and Shadow are really rough goes, and I maintain that if the deck weren't so cheap we wouldn't see it being played in large enough numbers that it would appear as good as it is. Considering that data on goldfish has the top two decks being midrange variants in eldrazi tron and grixis shadow, I find the idea of a combo centered meta to be...well its false. It circles back to the same point I keep making and some others as well - too many people are looking at modern through the lens of their pet deck to decide whether the format is healthy.
My only concern is a possible scenario where Wizards unbans BBE, bans nothing and unbans nothing else for a whole year. It's what I am afraid the most.
Also the most likely scenario, next to the age ole "No Changes".
Also, i want to say that i prefer to live in a world where the best combo decks are the ones that the combo is a backdoor to nonsense like Pod and Twin.
Jeff Hoogland, a person who hasn't made a lot of friends in the Modern community, wrote an article a few months ago talking about which cards he would unban. http://www.gatheringmagic.com/jeffhoogland-09082017-modern-musings/
I know some are a stretch, like TC and DTT. But I'll be honest, i prefer to have those in the format and people fighting long fights and T3 combos being inherently worse than live in a combo-less Modern or maybe even this Modern format of GDS,Valakut,ETron,etc.
I really hope the guys who where hired recently test a bit and come to a conclusion about which direction is better. My gut tells me it's being closer to no-banlist than huge-banlist.
I don't think unbanning BBE&SFM is rising the power level of the format. It's just that if you can cast TKS on turn2, storm combo on t3, etc (you know the gig, the broken things the tier1 decks can do), why can't you play those 2 cards in this kind of format? Maybe it's better if you ban cards instead. Who knows. But do something, don't go "NO CHANGES", because the format sucks right now.
It's funny when people say SFM is broken but then I hear that if I don't kill electromancer on turn2, I deserve to lose to storm on turn3.
I laugh at the idea of making jund and abzan midrange better causing anything "interesting." That battlecruiser magic I'll keep to standard.
Firstly, I think the argument that unbanning cards to power up Midrange (BBE, SFM, etc) will push Modern's power level past what Standard can contribute has some merit. A lot of Standard's staples are often midrangey, and that could be a real concern Wizards has.
I've seen the term "Battlecruiser Magic" a few times here now, and didn't know exactly what it meant, so I did some googling.
This article from Wizards about ROE explains (Ctrl f for Battlecruiser):
So, as I understand it, Battlecruiser Magic involves ignoring the early game (or just chumping to survive it) and ramping until you can cast massive threats (hence, why they mention it in their first Eldrazi set).
I agree that this is definitely more of a standard thing, but why do you associate it with Modern Midrange decks? When I think of Jund and Abzan, I imagine being ground into dust, or being beaten down with their sheer efficiency of threats (after they discard my relevant interaction). That doesn't sound like Battlecruiser to me. I could see it being sort of Battlecruiser if you consider them interacting with all of your threats and closing the game with a massive Goyf, but that is basically what Control decks aim to do as well. Are they Battlecruiser?
If anything, I'd consider Valakut and Eldrazi to be Battlecruiser decks, ramping into massive threats while stabilizing with Reshaper or Tribe-Elder chumping. Even Gx Tron sounds about right. Jund and Abzan being better give these decks more good matchups. Is that what you meant? I really don't know because I just learned of the term.
On a less jargon related note, I'm curious, do you not like playing against Midrange and Control? Maybe more so Midrange? I legitimately enjoy these matchups because there is a lot of interacting, back-and-forth, and counterplay. I never really considered that someone could not enjoy them, so I'm really interested in your opinion.
Oh I enjoy control decks, but I also realize modern is not the place for blue-based control right now. I play storm and find the games against UW control generally enjoyable, because there is a palpable tension. The UW player has to disrupt me enough to win, while knowing that a good draw step or two can lead to me winning in a single turn. It's a ticking time bomb against a technician, and happily I can say both sides have enjoyed these matches in my past experience.
I don't find thoughtseize fun. I don't find GBx mirrors fun. I don't find it entertaining on either end to just fill a deck with the best kill spells, sit around until your opponent has no cards in hand, then swing with a raging ravine while using discard and removal TO PREVENT your opponent from doing anything. It is every bit as aggravating as playing dredge and facing a leyline of the void. What some players here are calling interaction are really ways to stop your opponent from doing things - counters, discard, removal. So when someone complains about chalice of the void making a non-game...well the goal of thoughtseize into goyf into LOTV is to do the exact same thing - stop your opponent from playing. It's all the same, just a matter of what sort of non-game you want to be on the end of, repeated discard and kill spells, a silver bullet sb card, or a deck that's just way faster than you.
So when people say they want jund to be great again...I honestly chalk it up mostly to players who spent $1,800 on a deck thinking they had a right to tier 1 forever. They want me to play non-games too, just ones that last seven turns instead of four. "interaction" vs "non games" is a myth, closer to someone complaining about wavedashing in SSBM.
I will also fully admit that I entered this format on a budget, and the meta shifting away from three color goodstuff decks has played a role in the cost of modern dropping significantly to where you can buy a storm deck for $300 or a burn deck for $500 and have a real chance of taking down a local event.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, since then they took care of legacy, vintage and standard. Looks like this revision, it's time for modern.
If they don't ban anything, looks like white is the worst represented color in Modern. Place your bets.
Green is the worst atm. Of the top ten on goldfish White has Burn, D/T, UW Control, Jeskai Control while green has titan shift. They both share counter company of course.
It's not about decks but cards played. White has lingering souls, path to exile, vizier, and little arbiter guy? What else? Boros charm? Lol.
Oh yeah, a deck that gets to play 8 sol lands and absurdly pushed dudes is going to have bad matchups in a format with no wasteland or free counterspells.
Death and Taxes
Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron
Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
Even if the deck is highly skewed to beating Eldrazi and only eldrazi, I'm sure it can be done. Maybe some sort of blood moon control deck with mainboard Roasts. And soon we would have gotten Ceremonious Rejection too to help out with this
Back to Eldrazi Tron/Chalice debate: this deck doesn't even play Chalice on turn 1 like its legacy counterpart. This gives the opponent at least one turn to discard/counter the chalice before it hits the board. Eldrazi Temple is a pseudo-Sol land because it cannot be used to cast everything, or even a very large group of cards like Mishra's Workshop can cast. Eldrazi are a very small subset of Magic cards, and they will likely not print very many again in the future. I think Eldrazi Temple is safe from ever being banned
Nothing needs a ban. Unban Bloodbraid Elf and Stoneforge Mystic. Both Jund and Abzan need help now, so lets give it to them
To your credit, Stoneforge is a safe unban, mostly because of Kolaghan's Command. Because Jitte is also banned in Modern (and it should be), unbanning Stoneforge is limited in its usefulness. It allows decks to run Batterskull, which does punish Burn and a handful of fair decks. But adding something like a Sword package out of the sideboard starts costing you a lot of slots in the 75; it probably takes up 5 maindeck slots (4 SFM + Batterskull) with 2 sideboard slots (2 swords of your choice).
I'm a D&T player, and I'm not convinced that our deck even wants SFM. I think it helps UW control. I think it helps Abzan. But the D&T lists are so tight that giving up 5 slots in the maindeck is a significant cost.
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
My suggestion: spend some more time in the Modern D&T thread. Maybe play fewer "Snapcaster Mage.deck" decks. Watch D&T being streamed on Twitch or sleeve it up and play at your LGS.
D&T is a viable option in the metagame and it's only getting better. In the last eighteen months, Smuggler's Copter, Thraben Inspector, Field of Ruin, and Gideon of the Trials have all been printed. The lists are getting tighter with fewer flex slots.
Honestly, I'm not sure why you think you're the authority on this. I'm a D&T pilot. I post regularly in the Modern D&T thread. D&T is listed in my signature as a deck that I play. For comparison, I'm not sure I've ever seen you in that thread and your signature literally has "Snapcaster Mage.deck" written in it.
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
I don't understand. You start off by saying Jund Death Shadow is so good you can can easily play it and expect to win a GP and your first argument against white being good is that Death Shadow isn't good which is why D&T isn't good despite putting up results.
Abzan Company, Bant Company and Devoted druid combo are white decks which leaves Titan shift and amulet Titan.
I don't disagree with Stoneforge Mystic being unbanned, but there are definitely a similar number of white/green decks.
I won't say that you can't run SFM and Arbiter in the same deck (after all, the D&T splashes often run fetchlands), but it does make your sequencing much more awkward. In order to run SFM, you'd probably have to turn some number of the Arbiters into Mindcensors (which are better against Titanshift decks anyway), but that slows down the pressure you can reasonably apply on your opponent's manabase.
Unlike Legacy, where you can just rely on Wasteland and Rishadan Port while your Vial ticks up, in Modern you can't just rely on Ghost Quarter, Tectonic Edge, and Field of Ruin. By themselves, two of those cards don't actually slow down your opponent, and the third one can't be activated until (usually) T4. Generally speaking, allowing your opponents to set up in their early turns is usually a good way to lose the game. Playing T2 SFM into T3 Batterskull isn't disrupting opponents.
A Modern mono-white (non-Eldrazi) D&T deck probably has about 8-12 flex slots, depending on whom you ask. Two years ago, there would have been approximately 17 flex slots (everything except the 20-card core and 23 lands). In those 8-12 slots, it seems like it would be easy to run 4 SFM and a Batterskull. But those slots are currently occupied by things like Blade Splicer, Restoration Angel, and Thalia, Heretic Cathar. In other words, those slots are filled with additional taxes and strategies to go wide. SFM doesn't do either of those things. SFM basically ties up your mana for 1-2 turns and gives you a 4/4 with vigilance and lifelink. It's good, but it's not winning games of Modern unless (a) your opponent is playing Burn or a fair deck and (b) your opponent isn't interacting with your germ token.
Just thinking about it now, it's rare that the games I lose could have been won if I had access to a Batterskull. I would be better positioned against Affinity, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Elves (maybe), but I would be worse positioned against most control and combo decks.
To be clear, I didn't say that SFM was unplayable in D&T. I'm just not convinced that it's an auto-include. If the metagame ever returns to a spot where Burn and Affinity are ubiquitous, then SFM would make D&T much better. For right now though, I'm not sure that D&T wants SFM.
We're working on it!
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
I've been playing Modern since the Pod and Treasure Cruise ban, not so long I know. But I'm still having fun.
I do wish to critique one point, though, when you say "people don't like variance." I don't agree with that; if people didn't like some degree of variance, they'd be off playing some other game. What people don't like is a particular kind of variance, namely the kind of variance that decides the game independent of any skill, with mana screw basically being the pinnacle of that in how it can all but decide the winner just based on the opening hands. The kind of variance people like is the kind that makes each game different from the previous one, where you get different cards and have to formulate different strategies based on what cards you have.
I know some people were really annoyed by the banning of Mystical Tutor in Legacy, though after the Miracle cards came out (almost exactly 2 years later), no one really advocates for it coming back anymore because of how insane it makes those cards. Still, a number of Legacy players in the present, while conceding the card is too good now, think that Wizards of the Coast was incorrect to ban it when they did. Of course, WOTC's atrociously written banning rationale at the time probably didn't help to win anyone over.
If you analyze those decks, you find out that you either go super fast combo or aggro, or you go wide and play etron or valakut, with GDS being good because how fast it is and good against combo, since your life total doesn't matter that much against combo. And Etron keeps up at tier1 thanks to chalice to invalidate all the 1cmc spells of the fast decks.
I'm not even sure of how to balance this thing. Not sure if banning something from tron would balance the whole metagame. Maybe unbanning SFM & BBE would give enough power to jund and jeskai decks to change the meta. It's not an easy decision.
Counter-Cat
Colorless Eldrazi Stompy
I laugh at the idea of making jund and abzan midrange better causing anything "interesting." That battlecruiser magic I'll keep to standard.
I always say, that Modern problems come from Combo being too good. The rest are just symptoms of this. I'm not saying Combo shouldn't exist, but it should be a little less good so less games resolve around trash cards like Chalice of the Void and first 8 cards, SB roulette, etc.
Sadly, i think the only direct way of fixing this is by banning combo decks(instead of consitency tools). i.e: Banning Grapeshot,Valakut,Mox Opal, etc.
Either way goes against format goals(Shorter banlist and be different form Standrad and Legacy respectively).
GDS is still the good guy in my eyes. I wouldn't be opposed to opening the floodgates(SFM,BBE,Jace,etc). I would rather this than banning all combo decks.
The best option of course is better answers for fair decks against combo decks. If Legacy is and example of anything, you see how difficult is to regulate combo decks without warping the whole format(Fair=Blue). And even then, combo decks are super good in Legacy.
However, I agree on terms that there are 5 "best decks" in the format. I think Death's Shadow, Scapeshift and Eldrazi Tron are all great decks, but I think Affinity and Storm are just not as good as them. I also think Burn is as strong as Affinity or Storm in the current meta.
Maybe PT Rivals of Ixalan will show us which are the "true" best decks in the format.
Combo shouldn't exist, but all existing combos should be banned...
Look I play Storm, and storm has some awful matchups. Burn and Shadow are really rough goes, and I maintain that if the deck weren't so cheap we wouldn't see it being played in large enough numbers that it would appear as good as it is. Considering that data on goldfish has the top two decks being midrange variants in eldrazi tron and grixis shadow, I find the idea of a combo centered meta to be...well its false. It circles back to the same point I keep making and some others as well - too many people are looking at modern through the lens of their pet deck to decide whether the format is healthy.
Also the most likely scenario, next to the age ole "No Changes".
Jeff Hoogland, a person who hasn't made a lot of friends in the Modern community, wrote an article a few months ago talking about which cards he would unban.
http://www.gatheringmagic.com/jeffhoogland-09082017-modern-musings/
I know some are a stretch, like TC and DTT. But I'll be honest, i prefer to have those in the format and people fighting long fights and T3 combos being inherently worse than live in a combo-less Modern or maybe even this Modern format of GDS,Valakut,ETron,etc.
I really hope the guys who where hired recently test a bit and come to a conclusion about which direction is better. My gut tells me it's being closer to no-banlist than huge-banlist.
It's funny when people say SFM is broken but then I hear that if I don't kill electromancer on turn2, I deserve to lose to storm on turn3.
Firstly, I think the argument that unbanning cards to power up Midrange (BBE, SFM, etc) will push Modern's power level past what Standard can contribute has some merit. A lot of Standard's staples are often midrangey, and that could be a real concern Wizards has.
I've seen the term "Battlecruiser Magic" a few times here now, and didn't know exactly what it meant, so I did some googling.
This article from Wizards about ROE explains (Ctrl f for Battlecruiser):
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/feature/designing-rise-2010-04-26
So, as I understand it, Battlecruiser Magic involves ignoring the early game (or just chumping to survive it) and ramping until you can cast massive threats (hence, why they mention it in their first Eldrazi set).
I agree that this is definitely more of a standard thing, but why do you associate it with Modern Midrange decks? When I think of Jund and Abzan, I imagine being ground into dust, or being beaten down with their sheer efficiency of threats (after they discard my relevant interaction). That doesn't sound like Battlecruiser to me. I could see it being sort of Battlecruiser if you consider them interacting with all of your threats and closing the game with a massive Goyf, but that is basically what Control decks aim to do as well. Are they Battlecruiser?
If anything, I'd consider Valakut and Eldrazi to be Battlecruiser decks, ramping into massive threats while stabilizing with Reshaper or Tribe-Elder chumping. Even Gx Tron sounds about right. Jund and Abzan being better give these decks more good matchups. Is that what you meant? I really don't know because I just learned of the term.
On a less jargon related note, I'm curious, do you not like playing against Midrange and Control? Maybe more so Midrange? I legitimately enjoy these matchups because there is a lot of interacting, back-and-forth, and counterplay. I never really considered that someone could not enjoy them, so I'm really interested in your opinion.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
I don't find thoughtseize fun. I don't find GBx mirrors fun. I don't find it entertaining on either end to just fill a deck with the best kill spells, sit around until your opponent has no cards in hand, then swing with a raging ravine while using discard and removal TO PREVENT your opponent from doing anything. It is every bit as aggravating as playing dredge and facing a leyline of the void. What some players here are calling interaction are really ways to stop your opponent from doing things - counters, discard, removal. So when someone complains about chalice of the void making a non-game...well the goal of thoughtseize into goyf into LOTV is to do the exact same thing - stop your opponent from playing. It's all the same, just a matter of what sort of non-game you want to be on the end of, repeated discard and kill spells, a silver bullet sb card, or a deck that's just way faster than you.
So when people say they want jund to be great again...I honestly chalk it up mostly to players who spent $1,800 on a deck thinking they had a right to tier 1 forever. They want me to play non-games too, just ones that last seven turns instead of four. "interaction" vs "non games" is a myth, closer to someone complaining about wavedashing in SSBM.
I will also fully admit that I entered this format on a budget, and the meta shifting away from three color goodstuff decks has played a role in the cost of modern dropping significantly to where you can buy a storm deck for $300 or a burn deck for $500 and have a real chance of taking down a local event.