I think we all should agree that when a format has a thread going that is called the sate of Modern and it fills up with thousands of post the format is far from healthy and perfect.
...is that it assumes that there is only one explanation for the "thousands of posts", and that it assumes that all (or the majority) of those posts are criticisms of the format. There are other explanations that can exist. Simply because some number of vocal people complain about something doesn't mean that their complaints are justified.
On that note, I think it would likely benefit those of us who actually want to participate in a constructive analysis of the format and game if a new pinned thread were created for doing just that - Complainers can have their own thread.
Those 'free wins' are what determine are the best decks in the format however. 'Fair Magic' is not what most high end players look for in a deck. This was commonly being discussed on twitter months and months ago.
this is the core of my issue.
Modern needs to be less broken Imo. Otherwise it's a Game of who can play the more broken deck.
Is thoughtsieze broken? No
Is snappy broken? No
Is Bolt broken? No
Push? No
Is a turn 2-3 1 mana 8/8 broken? Yes
Is a turn 3 karn broken? Yes
Is dumping your entire affinity hand pretty much making it impossible for the opponent to catch up broken? Yes
Is a Turn 2 tks or reality smasher broken? Yes
Is a turn 4 grapeshot lethal broken? Hell yes
People will say: but it's a small percentage that happens.
But combined with all the decks it happens more than I feel is healthy. Not to mention highroll magic is not a test of skill but rather a test of luck in which you pretty much auto lose that game no matter how good the answers are.
Well, yeah if they could make modern less broken we would probably all be happier. The trouble is that they basically can't without invalidating everyones current multi-hundred dollar deck that is literally only propped up by the fact that they have some metric of performance.
I don't mean the weaker ones though. I mean the more powerful ones, the ones That I feel are what hurt modern Imo.
I think we all should agree that when a format has a thread going that is called the sate of Modern and it fills up with thousands of post the format is far from healthy and perfect.
I started playing Legacy because I just got sick of Modern being, for a big part, a lottery on what deck you are facing and more of a sideboard battle.
I got days when I get my good matchups and stomp everyone and other days, even when my deck is working for me, I got the bad matchups and just get completely stomped.
Of course I know that a deck should not have good matchups or 50/50 matchups against the whole field but in Modern the difference is just to big if you ask me.
Also the constant complaining about what to ban, when to ban it and waht and when to unban it has pushed me away from Modern. Don`t get me wrong Legacy is also not perfect but there is a lot less complaining going on in that format. People just play the game and they are having fun doing it.
I been playing Modern since the first year it started, wich was also the first time I started playing Magic so I been through a lot of meta`s and chanced and you name it.
But I also noticed that if Legacy was more easily accecable and cheaper Modern would not even be discussed like this.
I too feel like legacy is way better than modern(not because it's blue dominated)
But because with the top decks I can, with skill, have a game against anyone, And so can they.
Unfortunately legacy is dead in attendance in my region,and unfortunately it's also way to expensive.
I think we all should agree that when a format has a thread going that is called the sate of Modern and it fills up with thousands of post the format is far from healthy and perfect.
...is that it assumes that there is only one explanation for the "thousands of posts", and that it assumes that all (or the majority) of those posts are criticisms of the format. There are other explanations that can exist. Simply because some number of vocal people complain about something doesn't mean that their complaints are justified.
On that note, I think it would likely benefit those of us who actually want to participate in a constructive analysis of the format and game if a new pinned thread were created for doing just that - Complainers can have their own thread.
It`s just a way of speech mate nothing more nothing less. Thousand of posts looks better then a couple posts right?
I know it is a group of people who like to complain but hey even if you get your own `constructive analysis` thread you really think complainers won`t follow you there?
Anyway I also see that some people share the same thought as me. I loved Modern when I started it and I played it a lot but the last time it is like I said before starting to feel more and more like a lotery.
I play Dredge in Legacy and Modern and I know I have my bad matchups in Legacy as well but they don`t feel like an instant loss. I feel and I know that I still have a chance of winning those with some tight play and sometimes a little but of luck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Reanimator
Modern - Burn
EDH - Neheb the Eternal
I'm going to make this clear. In posting here you must agree to follow the forum rules. This means No twin talk, double posting, trolling, flaming, and you must keep it civil and about the cards. If you need a refresher on the forum and thread rules, I recommend taking a moment to do as such. Always remember to report a trolling post and do not respond to it otherwise you are just as liable for any consequences as the troll.
Alright, here is a two part question: what do y'all think the odds are of a card in rivals of Ixalan having an impact on modern, and what kind of card(s) would y'all want to see?
Re: Legacy health
This always feels like a classic "grass is greener on the other side" argument. If Wizards got their hands on Legacy as a supported, competitive format, I'm positive they would treat it exactly how they treat every other supported, competitive format. See their track record with 1v1 MTGO Commander, Modern, and Standard. The primary reason something like SDT made it for so long was because Wizards has such a hands-off attitude with the format. I'm definitely not denying Legacy is skill-testing in a Magic fundamentals sort of way. I'm simply saying that a lot of what makes Legacy so beloved is the relative lack of Wizards interference. Most of the controversy around other formats doesn't surround inherent format problems but rather reckless and consistent mismanagement. It's gotten better in some areas but hasn't improved in others.
Re: matchup lottery
This argument is exhausting. Basically all the major authors have explained why it's no longer the case on any significant level and/or is manageable through deck familiarity and tight play. This was absolutely the case in 2016. It is not the case now.
Let's be honest modern is at it's best right know. I don't care about the deck that my opponents play. Yes playing vs end game one with GBx sucks and yes when my opponents is on Tron I get frustrated but that doesnt mean they should be banned by any means. Let's be honest once again there is no "such" thing as a brainless deck. Even Burn and Living End have a thought process. And for the final note combo players may frustrate us who play fair decks but salty storm players losing turn 3 to burn is my favorite thing to watch...
I have a question it is a bit biased (pls don't kill me I know Gbx would be stronger) would you ever consider a sideboard increase to 20?
One problem I see with that would be the possibility that 'transformative' sideboards become a real thing. What I mean by that is a sideboard that, instead of being stuffed with silver bullets for bad matchups, changes the deck into something else entirely. Imo that kind of deviates from the point of a sideboard to begin with, and it also might enable some broken stuff down the road.
Storm has a critical role in the meta (I mean it wouldn't HAVE to be storm, but that's the deck doing it now). First, it is keeping in check ramp. Anyone who hates Tron or Valakut decks should be happy it exists to fight those two. Second, it falls prey to the old disruption + clock thing, so if you like jeskai flash and grixis shadow being around playing fair, one big reason is they do pretty well against storm.
Perhaps complaints about it being able to win even against bad matchups is more a reminder that the "it's all luck in getting the right matchups" negativity around modern is a bit misguided. Being a 2:1 dog means you still win sometimes...
Yesssss you said it. Tron is gone from my LGS, I've never been happier. People have to actually play magic now.
I find it somewhat hypocritical to suggest Tron isn't "playing Magic" when playing a deck that wins T3 in >10% of games is somehow "playing Magic." I'm pretty sure either both of those experiences or neither of those experiences count.
Remember that many (not all) of those considering Storm bannable don't dislike the deck. I certainly don't and think it is currently filling an important role. I do, however, think Storm is a) the best linear/non-interactive deck in Modern and it's not super close, and b) its T3 win-rate puts it in the running for a possible ban (but not guaranteed). It's not about encouraging Wizards to act in a certain way, or about advancing some personal belief. It's about trying to predict what might happen.
Also, saying Storm needs 7 exact cards to win on T3 is either unintentionally wrong or deliberately disingenuous. When a deck wins on T3 in 12% of games, there is no way it's off a single 7 card combo. We can defend and appreciate Storm without these kind of gross minimizations.
Really? Hypocritical? I don't know if you're pretending to not know anything about why I play storm, but I'll repeat it for you again: I play storm because it beats Tron.
With Tron gone, I can go back to playing the style of magic I enjoy.
Storm needs 7 cards to win on T3, this is a correct statement. I'll relieve you of your ignorance:
Baral/goblin on T3:
3 Lands
1 Baral or Goblin
2 Rituals
1 Manamorphose
1 gifts
Re: Legacy health
This always feels like a classic "grass is greener on the other side" argument. If Wizards got their hands on Legacy as a supported, competitive format, I'm positive they would treat it exactly how they treat every other supported, competitive format. See their track record with 1v1 MTGO Commander, Modern, and Standard. The primary reason something like SDT made it for so long was because Wizards has such a hands-off attitude with the format. I'm definitely not denying Legacy is skill-testing in a Magic fundamentals sort of way. I'm simply saying that a lot of what makes Legacy so beloved is the relative lack of Wizards interference. Most of the controversy around other formats doesn't surround inherent format problems but rather reckless and consistent mismanagement. It's gotten better in some areas but hasn't improved in others.
Re: matchup lottery
This argument is exhausting. Basically all the major authors have explained why it's no longer the case on any significant level and/or is manageable through deck familiarity and tight play. This was absolutely the case in 2016. It is not the case now.
you know what I love? Discrimination. If I flame someone a tad I get banned. Yet people can talk ***** in here way worse about poeple are fine.
You say one negative thing about modern and people lose it on here. It's just like that article about modern players. They Can't take criticism on Thier format.
Then they flame ya and condescend to ya and get away with it.
I disagree with your argument about matchup lottery.
Tron and eldra tron affinity where In the format in 2016 so how did things magically change since then? Your argument is just as a anecdotal as mine.
Modern really hasnt changed a ton since 2016 in terms of linearity.And uwr rose which is good yes. But overall all modern is still linear dominated.
Just because you disagree with my theory doesn't mean I'm wrong nor does it mean you Ban someone to silence them.
I think we all should agree that when a format has a thread going that is called the sate of Modern and it fills up with thousands of post the format is far from healthy and perfect.
...is that it assumes that there is only one explanation for the "thousands of posts", and that it assumes that all (or the majority) of those posts are criticisms of the format. There are other explanations that can exist. Simply because some number of vocal people complain about something doesn't mean that their complaints are justified.
On that note, I think it would likely benefit those of us who actually want to participate in a constructive analysis of the format and game if a new pinned thread were created for doing just that - Complainers can have their own thread.
It`s just a way of speech mate nothing more nothing less. Thousand of posts looks better then a couple posts right?
I know it is a group of people who like to complain but hey even if you get your own `constructive analysis` thread you really think complainers won`t follow you there?
Anyway I also see that some people share the same thought as me. I loved Modern when I started it and I played it a lot but the last time it is like I said before starting to feel more and more like a lotery.
I play Dredge in Legacy and Modern and I know I have my bad matchups in Legacy as well but they don`t feel like an instant loss. I feel and I know that I still have a chance of winning those with some tight play and sometimes a little but of luck.
I share your exact sentiment. How a game feels for many players cannot Be dismissed by anyone on here. Especially when thaycannot mathematically disprove this current statement on modern.
Enjoy legacy man its a great format, I wish I had the coin to join.
And thanks for being open minded and seeing both sides of the argument.
It's rare to find that in a person it seems on this inbred forum,Ruled by a few. Suspension issued for spamming the forum. -- CavalryWolfPack
xxhellfirexx3: it's not what you're saying, it's how you're saying it. As we've said, you can dislike Modern at much as you want and we can't fault you for that - if it's not what you're looking for in a format, it's not what you're looking for in a format.
Telling the rest of us who are enjoying Modern that we're wrong and implying that we're idiots does not endear you too us. Nor does accusing this thread to be a "dictatorship". You're being much more unreasonable than people like gkourou, sspiegel, or ktkenshix, who are focusing on their argument, rather than getting angry like you just did.
ALSO THERE'A EDIT BUTTON PLEASE LEARN TO USE IT. Keep the swearing out of the discussion, please. - CavalryWolfPack
xxhellfirexx3: it's not what you're saying, it's how you're saying it. As we've said, you can dislike Modern at much as you want and we can't fault you for that - if it's not what you're looking for in a format, it's not what you're looking for in a format.
Telling the rest of us who are enjoying Modern that we're wrong and implying that we're idiots does not endear you too us. Nor does accusing this thread to be a "dictatorship". You're being much more unreasonable than people like gkourou, sspiegel, or ktkenshix, who are focusing on their argument, rather than getting angry like you just did.
ALSO THERE'A EDIT BUTTON PLEASE LEARN TO USE IT. Keep the swearing out of the discussion, please. - CavalryWolfPack
I found he was actually quite civil at first. People on here are vicious.....
Not that I agree with everything he is saying.
But I don't think he was forcing his views. Simply naming problems he think exist and people where calling him foolish for it.
But man this forum has some problems with manners and condescending people. No wonder people get worked up.
Really? Hypocritical? I don't know if you're pretending to not know anything about why I play storm, but I'll repeat it for you again: I play storm because it beats Tron.
With Tron gone, I can go back to playing the style of magic I enjoy.
The reason it's hypocritical is because Storm is the kind of Magic you enjoy and Tron is the kind of Magic other people enjoy. If your goal is "I want to play the kind of Magic I enjoy" (a great goal!) and then you hate Tron because it's unfair/degenerate/not real Magic/etc., that discounts the players for whom that IS the "kind of Magic [they] enjoy."
Baral/Goblin on T2:
2 Lands
1 Baral or Goblin
2 Rituals
1 Gifts
Welp. this way you only need 6 cards. It also means your bear needs to survive a turn.
6 cards, 2 of which are lands (18 copies), 2 of which are engines (7-8 copies), 2 of which are rituals (8 copies), and the Gifts. But you actually have more options because the Rituals can include 1 Manamorphose. Or a third land and 2 Manamorphose. When you say "Storm needs 6 cards to win," it suggests Storm needs 6 unique copies of cards, each of which has 4 playsets in the deck. That would definitely be improbable by T3. But that's not really what it means, because 2 of those cards are lands and 3 of those cards have 7-8 copies (plus the Manamorphose). That doesn't even include the cantrips as factors.
Overall, I'm not sure what you're arguing here. It doesn't matter which 5-6 or 7-8 cards you need to win on T3. The point is that it's disingenuous to point to the NUMBER of cards needed to win on T3 when we have an actual T3 win rate of 12% from the Storm sample. CoCo needs fewer cards to "win" on T3 and it does so in only around 4%-5% of games. The number of cards doesn't matter, and people who point to that end up distracting us from the number that actually matters: the T3 win percentage. We have currently estimated that to be around 12% for Storm.
I'll also say this again in case it isn't clear: I do not dislike Storm or have anything against it. I am simply trying to predict what Wizards may or may not do after the PT. This involves a rational and transparent discussion of its win rate as calculated in a publicly available sample of matches (n=176). I merely want to have a conversation about those numbers and see if they suggest a possible ban after the PT.
you know what I love? Discrimination. If I flame someone a tad I get banned. Yet people can talk ***** in here way worse about poeple are fine.
You say one negative thing about modern and people lose it on here. It's just like that article about modern players. They Can't take criticism on Thier format.
Then they flame ya and condescend to ya and get away with it.
Not sure what this refers to. I haven't flamed anyone. I definitely disagreed with an argument but didn't make a personal attack (i.e. flaming).
I disagree with your argument about matchup lottery.
Tron and eldra tron affinity where In the format in 2016 so how did things magically change since then? Your argument is just as a anecdotal as mine.
My argument is not anecdotal. I analyzed this in an analysis I have posted here numerous times. When I looked at GWP for top Legacy vs. top Modern players, there was only a 3%-5% difference between those top players in the different formats. Assuming 15 round tournaments, this amounts to 1-2 games, not even matches, per tournament. So if you are saying the matchup lottery means you are affected in 1-2 games in a 15 round tournament, then I guess I agree but I would hardly call that a "matchup lottery," at least not to the negative extent people talk about here.
Just because you disagree with my theory doesn't mean I'm wrong nor does it mean you Ban someone to silence them.
Gotta love a dictatorship..
I have not been a mod since April or May and have not tried to silence or ban you. I have disagreed with your argument in a public post for you and others to respond to.
Let's be honest modern is at it's best right know. I don't care about the deck that my opponents play. Yes playing vs end game one with GBx sucks and yes when my opponents is on Tron I get frustrated but that doesnt mean they should be banned by any means. Let's be honest once again there is no "such" thing as a brainless deck. Even Burn and Living End have a thought process. And for the final note combo players may frustrate us who play fair decks but salty storm players losing turn 3 to burn is my favorite thing to watch...
I have a question it is a bit biased (pls don't kill me I know Gbx would be stronger) would you ever consider a sideboard increase to 20?
I actually think that Modern right now is possibly the best its ever been.
I also would love if we can stop arguing about Storm since its meta share isnt anything special for a tier 1 deck
Let's be honest modern is at it's best right know. I don't care about the deck that my opponents play. Yes playing vs end game one with GBx sucks and yes when my opponents is on Tron I get frustrated but that doesnt mean they should be banned by any means. Let's be honest once again there is no "such" thing as a brainless deck. Even Burn and Living End have a thought process. And for the final note combo players may frustrate us who play fair decks but salty storm players losing turn 3 to burn is my favorite thing to watch...
I have a question it is a bit biased (pls don't kill me I know Gbx would be stronger) would you ever consider a sideboard increase to 20?
I actually think that Modern right now is possibly the best its ever been.
I also would love if we can stop arguing about Storm since its meta share isnt anything special for a tier 1 deck
If it's a T4 violator (unknown: still gathering data), the meta share doens't matter as long as it's Tier 1. See Amulet Bloom which probably had a meta share half as much as Storm's and got banned. The real question is, does Storm win too frequently on T3? I'm not sure if 12% is too frequent for Wizards, but that's where it averages now.
Is TK Broken? No.
Is Goyf Broken? No.
Is Lily Broken? No.
Is Seize, into Goyf, into Lily against many decks a 'free win'?
Yeah, it kind of was.
Thats the issue with 'fair' or 'unfair'. Competitive Magic has never been about 100% fair decks. The most fair deck I can think of was something like Zoo, and that hasnt been competitive in a long time, not top tier anyway.
The problem with Modern as it currently stands is the lack of non-creature interaction during turns 1-3 outside of Thoughtseize and Inquisition of Kozilek.
Now we have seen this pattern in Legacy, where it's just simply dominated by Force of Will and Brainstorm. We are at this same point in transition with Modern for our discard suite. I would prefer that we have more police cards enter the format. So that a variety of issues could be prevented. In that same vein those types of cards barring they see print, would probably break standard in half. This coincides with my line of logic that banning Fast Mana, such as Mox Opal and Simian Spirit Guide is only a case of when, and not if. So why don't we just get those cards over with?
Just for clarification, I believe the metagame is healthy, but that some decks just as individuals are not.
The problem with Modern as it currently stands is the lack of non-creature interaction during turns 1-3 outside of Thoughtseize and Inquisition of Kozilek.
Now we have seen this pattern in Legacy, where it's just simply dominated by Force of Will and Brainstorm. We are at this same point in transition with Modern for our discard suite. I would prefer that we have more police cards enter the format. So that a variety of issues could be prevented. In that same vein those types of cards barring they see print, would probably break standard in half. This coincides with my line of logic that banning Fast Mana, such as Mox Opal and Simian Spirit Guide is only a case of when, and not if. So why don't we just get those cards over with?
Just for clarification, I believe the metagame is healthy, but that some decks just as individuals are not.
I've noticed you targeting mox opal a lot---I mean, you kill affinity and lantern (and I HATE lantern); that seems unfair.
I'm not sure a ban on affinity would do much, and even though I have no proof of why, I feel like dredge would actually hurt as a result of an affinity ban.
What WOTC needs to do is unban BBE already so we can actually get a gauge on how much SFM and Jace could effect the format.
Because people like playing with those cards and like playing those decks that aren't dominating the format at all. Affinity is not a problem, Ad Nauseam is not a problem, Grishoalbrand is not a problem, RW Prison is not a problem, Living End is not a problem Lantern Prison is not a problem although it's a unwanted deck amongst Modern players is not a problem.
If you kill those cards, you kill certain strategies, you kill certain decks, heavily nerf others for no apparent reason, destroy player base confidence since those decks are not breaking any rule now.
What you don't understand, is that they will be problems. Look at Golgari Grave-Troll, it was legal for over a year. Then in one block we got Cathartic Reunion, Insolent Neonate, and Prized Amalgam, then poof, GGT is now overpowered. By the way, just randomly losing turn 2 to Grishoalbrand is still just as stupid as turn 3 storm. They may not happen often, but these high variance decks can make 8-12 round tournaments completely frustrating, by simple luck of the draw. In Legacy, we have aggressive methods to find reactive tools. in Modern you simply just pray. It's not fun specifically against some decks.
It's not the majority of cases, but the fact remains that some people are still out there saying they will play decks exactly like Grishoalbrand until Wizards just bans them.
Thank god for the return of the Modern PT, where lots of complaints which cannot be quantified with selective MTGO Data, will actually be put on the spotlight and be abused for everyone to see. I want another episode where Brian Kibler just simply walks away from his match and gets food while his combo player just plays a whole round. Modern is still in that exact bullcrap state, it's just that we have a balanced metagame of it.
I want to see pro's tilt on turn 3 tron, turn 3 storm, turn 5 Scapeshift, and turn 4 burn. We need way better cards than Fatal Push to make this format somewhat navigable for competitive play.
Because people like playing with those cards and like playing those decks that aren't dominating the format at all. Affinity is not a problem, Ad Nauseam is not a problem, Grishoalbrand is not a problem, RW Prison is not a problem, Living End is not a problem Lantern Prison is not a problem although it's a unwanted deck amongst Modern players is not a problem.
If you kill those cards, you kill certain strategies, you kill certain decks, heavily nerf others for no apparent reason, destroy player base confidence since those decks are not breaking any rule now.
What you don't understand, is that they will be problems. Look at Golgari Grave-Troll, it was legal for over a year. Then in one block we got Cathartic Reunion, Insolent Neonate, and Prized Amalgam, then poof, GGT is now overpowered. By the way, just randomly losing turn 2 to Grishoalbrand is still just as stupid as turn 3 storm. They may not happen often, but these high variance decks can make 8-12 round tournaments completely frustrating, by simple luck of the draw. In Legacy, we have aggressive methods to find reactive tools. in Modern you simply just pray. It's not fun specifically against some decks.
It's not the majority of cases, but the fact remains that some people are still out there saying they will play decks exactly like Grishoalbrand until Wizards just bans them.
Thank god for the return of the Modern PT, where lots of complaints which cannot be quantified with selective MTGO Data, will actually be put on the spotlight and be abused for everyone to see. I want another episode where Brian Kibler just simply walks away from his match and gets food while his combo player just plays a whole round. Modern is still in that exact bullcrap state, it's just that we have a balanced metagame of it.
I want to see pro's tilt on turn 3 tron, turn 3 storm, turn 5 Scapeshift, and turn 4 burn. We need way better cards than Fatal Push to make this format somewhat navigable for competitive play.
very will said mate. I actually kinda agree with you here on alot of points.
Enough Articles like this and wizards may look into it who knows.
If a control deck with the most interaction struggles vs storm, I think it's a warning sign as to how resilient it is to a supposed easy win for a bolt Deck.
Because people like playing with those cards and like playing those decks that aren't dominating the format at all. Affinity is not a problem, Ad Nauseam is not a problem, Grishoalbrand is not a problem, RW Prison is not a problem, Living End is not a problem Lantern Prison is not a problem although it's a unwanted deck amongst Modern players is not a problem.
If you kill those cards, you kill certain strategies, you kill certain decks, heavily nerf others for no apparent reason, destroy player base confidence since those decks are not breaking any rule now.
What you don't understand, is that they will be problems. Look at Golgari Grave-Troll.
Yeah but that is a speculation. GGT is the exception among the unbanned cards, and that only happened when they printed not 1 but 3 new cards for dredge.
People made similar claims for: Bitterblossom, Ancestral Visions, Sword of the Meek, Wild Nacatl. If one would dig up arguments from a long time ago, they would see that thought that BB would be waaaay too strong. People (and wizards) also claimed that Sword of the Meek would break Lantern Control, but it didn't. Faeries got 2 of their old core cards (AV and BB) but they are nowhere to be seen. Zoo decks have fallen almost completely out of favor.
On the Storm topic, I agree with KTK. And I highly disagree with Marc_Wizards.
First of all, when you are running 12 good cantrips and you are almost guaranteed to have one on Turn 1, you fix your draws sooo good.
Secondly, 2 Rituals is what you need, but there is a total of 8 of them. You seem to be forgetting that particular "detail". Also, you need one Baral or One Goblin on Turn 2 or Turn 3. That is, again, out of 8 creatures. Again, there are too many of them.
Thirdly, you can go off by two different ways you posted. And
Also, needing 3 lands is not that hard. You really need 3 cards out of the 17 cards the Storm deck plays?
Finally, 1 Ritual may do the trick, because it's so likely you will find another one in the process. If you go T3 Ritual (3 lands in bfield) and you have 2 lands untapped and 3 mana floating, then gifts for 2U with a U land, so you have 1 untapped land and 1 mana floating and you search for two different rituals, a morphose and a pif and the opp gives you the last two, you can morphose again, gain 1 more mana, so now you have 2 mana. If then you hit another ritual and cast it you go up to 5 usable mana. You can play the pif now, leave some mana floating, then start rituals and morphoses and cantrips again and all you need is find a grapeshot. I mean, you totally can fizzle here, but the deck cantrips a lot and plays 3 grapeshots those days.
So, you either want to have one of the two rituals in hand from the starts, or find it through a cantrip or via two morphoses you will probably play. So, you get a lot of chances for it.
It's not that hard really. I have watched Caleb killing on Turn 3 a lot of times. As I told Sheridan before he calculates those stats, those turn 3 kills were happening somewhat(could not say exactly how much though) less than 1 out of 5 games(which goes well with the ~13% Sheridan calculated).
PS: I have no problem with the deck. I Actually like it a lot, because it's like Amulet Bloom in the sense you are trying to solve a riddle or a puzzle.
I don't even know why this is arguable. That storm needs 8 or 6 exact cards is a given. The rituals and bears have some redundancy, sure. It doesn't make my statement wrong. Making 3 land drops on time in a 17 land deck, its not a given. Thats why the deck runs 10-12 cantrips.
So let's say the storm player finds the 6 or 8 cards he needs. Is the T3 a given? If he's goldfishing, absolutely. I think the latest SCG Classic pretty much shows how easily the deck can be crushed as soon as a meta adapts (as opposed to the Eldrazi winter).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
...is that it assumes that there is only one explanation for the "thousands of posts", and that it assumes that all (or the majority) of those posts are criticisms of the format. There are other explanations that can exist. Simply because some number of vocal people complain about something doesn't mean that their complaints are justified.
On that note, I think it would likely benefit those of us who actually want to participate in a constructive analysis of the format and game if a new pinned thread were created for doing just that - Complainers can have their own thread.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
I too feel like legacy is way better than modern(not because it's blue dominated)
But because with the top decks I can, with skill, have a game against anyone, And so can they.
Unfortunately legacy is dead in attendance in my region,and unfortunately it's also way to expensive.
decks playing:
none
decks playing:
none
decks playing:
none
It`s just a way of speech mate nothing more nothing less. Thousand of posts looks better then a couple posts right?
I know it is a group of people who like to complain but hey even if you get your own `constructive analysis` thread you really think complainers won`t follow you there?
Anyway I also see that some people share the same thought as me. I loved Modern when I started it and I played it a lot but the last time it is like I said before starting to feel more and more like a lotery.
I play Dredge in Legacy and Modern and I know I have my bad matchups in Legacy as well but they don`t feel like an instant loss. I feel and I know that I still have a chance of winning those with some tight play and sometimes a little but of luck.
Modern - Burn
EDH - Neheb the Eternal
Ulka
This always feels like a classic "grass is greener on the other side" argument. If Wizards got their hands on Legacy as a supported, competitive format, I'm positive they would treat it exactly how they treat every other supported, competitive format. See their track record with 1v1 MTGO Commander, Modern, and Standard. The primary reason something like SDT made it for so long was because Wizards has such a hands-off attitude with the format. I'm definitely not denying Legacy is skill-testing in a Magic fundamentals sort of way. I'm simply saying that a lot of what makes Legacy so beloved is the relative lack of Wizards interference. Most of the controversy around other formats doesn't surround inherent format problems but rather reckless and consistent mismanagement. It's gotten better in some areas but hasn't improved in others.
Re: matchup lottery
This argument is exhausting. Basically all the major authors have explained why it's no longer the case on any significant level and/or is manageable through deck familiarity and tight play. This was absolutely the case in 2016. It is not the case now.
One problem I see with that would be the possibility that 'transformative' sideboards become a real thing. What I mean by that is a sideboard that, instead of being stuffed with silver bullets for bad matchups, changes the deck into something else entirely. Imo that kind of deviates from the point of a sideboard to begin with, and it also might enable some broken stuff down the road.
Really? Hypocritical? I don't know if you're pretending to not know anything about why I play storm, but I'll repeat it for you again: I play storm because it beats Tron.
With Tron gone, I can go back to playing the style of magic I enjoy.
Storm needs 7 cards to win on T3, this is a correct statement. I'll relieve you of your ignorance:
Baral/goblin on T3:
3 Lands
1 Baral or Goblin
2 Rituals
1 Manamorphose
1 gifts
Oh look, that's actually 8 cards you need. Guess I'm wrong.
Baral/Goblin on T2:
2 Lands
1 Baral or Goblin
2 Rituals
1 Gifts
Welp. this way you only need 6 cards. It also means your bear needs to survive a turn.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
You say one negative thing about modern and people lose it on here. It's just like that article about modern players. They Can't take criticism on Thier format.
Then they flame ya and condescend to ya and get away with it.
I disagree with your argument about matchup lottery.
Tron and eldra tron affinity where In the format in 2016 so how did things magically change since then? Your argument is just as a anecdotal as mine.
Modern really hasnt changed a ton since 2016 in terms of linearity.And uwr rose which is good yes. But overall all modern is still linear dominated.
Just because you disagree with my theory doesn't mean I'm wrong nor does it mean you Ban someone to silence them.
Gotta love a dictatorship..
decks playing:
none
Enjoy legacy man its a great format, I wish I had the coin to join.
And thanks for being open minded and seeing both sides of the argument.
It's rare to find that in a person it seems on this inbred forum,Ruled by a few.
Suspension issued for spamming the forum. -- CavalryWolfPack
decks playing:
none
Telling the rest of us who are enjoying Modern that we're wrong and implying that we're idiots does not endear you too us. Nor does accusing this thread to be a "dictatorship". You're being much more unreasonable than people like gkourou, sspiegel, or ktkenshix, who are focusing on their argument, rather than getting angry like you just did.
ALSO THERE'A EDIT BUTTON PLEASE LEARN TO USE IT.
Keep the swearing out of the discussion, please. - CavalryWolfPack
Not that I agree with everything he is saying.
But I don't think he was forcing his views. Simply naming problems he think exist and people where calling him foolish for it.
But man this forum has some problems with manners and condescending people. No wonder people get worked up.
The reason it's hypocritical is because Storm is the kind of Magic you enjoy and Tron is the kind of Magic other people enjoy. If your goal is "I want to play the kind of Magic I enjoy" (a great goal!) and then you hate Tron because it's unfair/degenerate/not real Magic/etc., that discounts the players for whom that IS the "kind of Magic [they] enjoy."
6 cards, 2 of which are lands (18 copies), 2 of which are engines (7-8 copies), 2 of which are rituals (8 copies), and the Gifts. But you actually have more options because the Rituals can include 1 Manamorphose. Or a third land and 2 Manamorphose. When you say "Storm needs 6 cards to win," it suggests Storm needs 6 unique copies of cards, each of which has 4 playsets in the deck. That would definitely be improbable by T3. But that's not really what it means, because 2 of those cards are lands and 3 of those cards have 7-8 copies (plus the Manamorphose). That doesn't even include the cantrips as factors.
Overall, I'm not sure what you're arguing here. It doesn't matter which 5-6 or 7-8 cards you need to win on T3. The point is that it's disingenuous to point to the NUMBER of cards needed to win on T3 when we have an actual T3 win rate of 12% from the Storm sample. CoCo needs fewer cards to "win" on T3 and it does so in only around 4%-5% of games. The number of cards doesn't matter, and people who point to that end up distracting us from the number that actually matters: the T3 win percentage. We have currently estimated that to be around 12% for Storm.
I'll also say this again in case it isn't clear: I do not dislike Storm or have anything against it. I am simply trying to predict what Wizards may or may not do after the PT. This involves a rational and transparent discussion of its win rate as calculated in a publicly available sample of matches (n=176). I merely want to have a conversation about those numbers and see if they suggest a possible ban after the PT.
Not sure what this refers to. I haven't flamed anyone. I definitely disagreed with an argument but didn't make a personal attack (i.e. flaming).
My argument is not anecdotal. I analyzed this in an analysis I have posted here numerous times. When I looked at GWP for top Legacy vs. top Modern players, there was only a 3%-5% difference between those top players in the different formats. Assuming 15 round tournaments, this amounts to 1-2 games, not even matches, per tournament. So if you are saying the matchup lottery means you are affected in 1-2 games in a 15 round tournament, then I guess I agree but I would hardly call that a "matchup lottery," at least not to the negative extent people talk about here.
I have not been a mod since April or May and have not tried to silence or ban you. I have disagreed with your argument in a public post for you and others to respond to.
I actually think that Modern right now is possibly the best its ever been.
I also would love if we can stop arguing about Storm since its meta share isnt anything special for a tier 1 deck
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
If it's a T4 violator (unknown: still gathering data), the meta share doens't matter as long as it's Tier 1. See Amulet Bloom which probably had a meta share half as much as Storm's and got banned. The real question is, does Storm win too frequently on T3? I'm not sure if 12% is too frequent for Wizards, but that's where it averages now.
Is TK Broken? No.
Is Goyf Broken? No.
Is Lily Broken? No.
Is Seize, into Goyf, into Lily against many decks a 'free win'?
Yeah, it kind of was.
Thats the issue with 'fair' or 'unfair'. Competitive Magic has never been about 100% fair decks. The most fair deck I can think of was something like Zoo, and that hasnt been competitive in a long time, not top tier anyway.
Spirits
Modern STILL has tons of undiscovered decks that can compete with the best. Its up to YOU to find them and break the format.
Now we have seen this pattern in Legacy, where it's just simply dominated by Force of Will and Brainstorm. We are at this same point in transition with Modern for our discard suite. I would prefer that we have more police cards enter the format. So that a variety of issues could be prevented. In that same vein those types of cards barring they see print, would probably break standard in half. This coincides with my line of logic that banning Fast Mana, such as Mox Opal and Simian Spirit Guide is only a case of when, and not if. So why don't we just get those cards over with?
Just for clarification, I believe the metagame is healthy, but that some decks just as individuals are not.
I've noticed you targeting mox opal a lot---I mean, you kill affinity and lantern (and I HATE lantern); that seems unfair.
I'm not sure a ban on affinity would do much, and even though I have no proof of why, I feel like dredge would actually hurt as a result of an affinity ban.
What WOTC needs to do is unban BBE already so we can actually get a gauge on how much SFM and Jace could effect the format.
What you don't understand, is that they will be problems. Look at Golgari Grave-Troll, it was legal for over a year. Then in one block we got Cathartic Reunion, Insolent Neonate, and Prized Amalgam, then poof, GGT is now overpowered. By the way, just randomly losing turn 2 to Grishoalbrand is still just as stupid as turn 3 storm. They may not happen often, but these high variance decks can make 8-12 round tournaments completely frustrating, by simple luck of the draw. In Legacy, we have aggressive methods to find reactive tools. in Modern you simply just pray. It's not fun specifically against some decks.
It's not the majority of cases, but the fact remains that some people are still out there saying they will play decks exactly like Grishoalbrand until Wizards just bans them.
Thank god for the return of the Modern PT, where lots of complaints which cannot be quantified with selective MTGO Data, will actually be put on the spotlight and be abused for everyone to see. I want another episode where Brian Kibler just simply walks away from his match and gets food while his combo player just plays a whole round. Modern is still in that exact bullcrap state, it's just that we have a balanced metagame of it.
I want to see pro's tilt on turn 3 tron, turn 3 storm, turn 5 Scapeshift, and turn 4 burn. We need way better cards than Fatal Push to make this format somewhat navigable for competitive play.
Enough Articles like this and wizards may look into it who knows.
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/36284_Modern-For-Grand-Prix-Oklahoma-City.html
And as for storm
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/36278_Control-In-Modern-Why-Its-Getting-Better-And-What-It-Needs-To-Last.html
If a control deck with the most interaction struggles vs storm, I think it's a warning sign as to how resilient it is to a supposed easy win for a bolt Deck.
People made similar claims for: Bitterblossom, Ancestral Visions, Sword of the Meek, Wild Nacatl. If one would dig up arguments from a long time ago, they would see that thought that BB would be waaaay too strong. People (and wizards) also claimed that Sword of the Meek would break Lantern Control, but it didn't. Faeries got 2 of their old core cards (AV and BB) but they are nowhere to be seen. Zoo decks have fallen almost completely out of favor.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
I don't even know why this is arguable. That storm needs 8 or 6 exact cards is a given. The rituals and bears have some redundancy, sure. It doesn't make my statement wrong. Making 3 land drops on time in a 17 land deck, its not a given. Thats why the deck runs 10-12 cantrips.
So let's say the storm player finds the 6 or 8 cards he needs. Is the T3 a given? If he's goldfishing, absolutely. I think the latest SCG Classic pretty much shows how easily the deck can be crushed as soon as a meta adapts (as opposed to the Eldrazi winter).
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR