1) Some variant of death & taxes in the top 8. The builds have gotten pretty tough to deal with these days and some serious power bumps esp. in the eldrazi versions.
2) Tons of big mana decks, probably more Titan than tron
3) Jeskai Control wins it and there're at least 2 in the top 8. Not because I think the deck is great but because I think pros like it and will play it in force, and it's a fairly difficult deck to prepare against.
4) No grixis death shadow anywhere.
5) There'll be some surprising combo deck, like Krark Clan Ironworks or something that does very well but peters out
6) Overall meta-wise, tons of snapcaster mages. If there're fewer than 9 snapcasters in the top 8 I would be surprised.
I dont understand whats so wrong with the article.
He repeatedly states that Modern is the best format, and is what Wizards should hope for when trying to present 'this is what Magic is'.
That said, the issue of how Pro's feel, how it presents when Pro's try and 'break it' is something I could do without.
So what REALLY is gained by having a Pro Tour? Why is that better, than GPs?
Modern has the potential to be the best format, but right now it's started to go towards legacy in terms of having elitists form often due to the cost of entry and slow evolution of the meta. The most important aspect of Magic is being able to play the game and that is pretty difficult when the decks of the format cost anywhere from 400-1500 dollars. Some cards like Noble Heirarch and Mox Opal desperately need another reprint, and Liliana of the Veil along with Karn Liberated will breach 110+ if the popularity picks up and no reprints happen in masters 25 due to the pro-tour.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
1) Some variant of death & taxes in the top 8. The builds have gotten pretty tough to deal with these days and some serious power bumps esp. in the eldrazi versions.
2) Tons of big mana decks, probably more Titan than tron
3) Jeskai Control wins it and there're at least 2 in the top 8. Not because I think the deck is great but because I think pros like it and will play it in force, and it's a fairly difficult deck to prepare against.
4) No grixis death shadow anywhere.
5) There'll be some surprising combo deck, like Krark Clan Ironworks or something that does very well but peters out
6) Overall meta-wise, tons of snapcaster mages. If there're fewer than 9 snapcasters in the top 8 I would be surprised.
-------------
Going out on some limbs there but hey
5) I really hope its UR Breach, deck is really strong and well positioned in the meta right now. There arent many bad matchups, most are much closer than you'd expect.
My guess for the PT is that the Top 8 is going to be filled with players who made the best guesses and next-next-level deck choices in this whack-a-mole meta we call Modern. Jeskai could do well if nobody brings Tron. GDS could do well if nobody is on interactive decks. Storm could do well if everyone is racing each other. Titanshift and Tron could do well if lots of people are jamming BGx and URx. Lantern or Affinity could do well if people skimp on artifact hate. Dredge could do well if people skimp on graveyard hate. Etc, etc, etc. It's all a guessing game for a meta we have no meaningful data on, and WOTC loves this. I'm genuinely curious what choices the pros inevitably make.
What I'm worried about is what the PT will do to the LGS level modern meta. Because of the lack of a pro-tour modern has been much more open and free to people who are playing at the LGS and FNM level, but when a modern PT happens it tends to shape the kind of decks people end up wanting to play at the FNM level, which then can result in a homogenizing effect.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
What I'm worried about is what the PT will do to the LGS level modern meta. Because of the lack of a pro-tour modern has been much more open and free to people who are playing at the LGS and FNM level, but when a modern PT happens it tends to shape the kind of decks people end up wanting to play at the FNM level, which then can result in a homogenizing effect.
How big is your LGS? How competitive?
Unless they are already rocking tier 1 decks, it likely doesn't matter.
Modern has the potential to be the best format, but right now it's started to go towards legacy in terms of having elitists form often due to the cost of entry and slow evolution of the meta. The most important aspect of Magic is being able to play the game and that is pretty difficult when the decks of the format cost anywhere from 400-1500 dollars. Some cards like Noble Heirarch and Mox Opal desperately need another reprint, and Liliana of the Veil along with Karn Liberated will breach 110+ if the popularity picks up and no reprints happen in masters 25 due to the pro-tour.
Modern is the best format. It really is. It's costs are not a barrier to entry, because you can literally throw together any number of decks, that cost nothing close to $400, and win. I've done this. I proved it who even knows how long ago at this point.
You do not need Noble.
You do not need Opal.
You do not need Karn.
Will those cards spike if someone wins with them? Maybe. However is it even relevant? Not if your LGS already plays modern because as every article will state 'Play what you know'.
There is no 1 deck to rule them all in Modern, its too diverse.
What I'm worried about is what the PT will do to the LGS level modern meta. Because of the lack of a pro-tour modern has been much more open and free to people who are playing at the LGS and FNM level, but when a modern PT happens it tends to shape the kind of decks people end up wanting to play at the FNM level, which then can result in a homogenizing effect.
How big is your LGS? How competitive?
Unless they are already rocking tier 1 decks, it likely doesn't matter.
Modern has the potential to be the best format, but right now it's started to go towards legacy in terms of having elitists form often due to the cost of entry and slow evolution of the meta. The most important aspect of Magic is being able to play the game and that is pretty difficult when the decks of the format cost anywhere from 400-1500 dollars. Some cards like Noble Heirarch and Mox Opal desperately need another reprint, and Liliana of the Veil along with Karn Liberated will breach 110+ if the popularity picks up and no reprints happen in masters 25 due to the pro-tour.
Modern is the best format. It really is. It's costs are not a barrier to entry, because you can literally throw together any number of decks, that cost nothing close to $400, and win. I've done this. I proved it who even knows how long ago at this point.
You do not need Noble.
You do not need Opal.
You do not need Karn.
Will those cards spike if someone wins with them? Maybe. However is it even relevant? Not if your LGS already plays modern because as every article will state 'Play what you know'.
There is no 1 deck to rule them all in Modern, its too diverse.
Sometimes it's not about if there is a number one deck. All people need is the impression that it is all about the top three or four decks, which happens with big competitions like the PT. The reason Modern has it's diversity is not just because of the results, but because there isn't any force actively advertising just a few of the decks in question. Basically, escalating prices on big name cards like Noble Heirarch are a self fulfilling prophecy in a sense.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I can routinely do well at my LGS using Stompy with good draws and careful play. Modern is diverse enough that as long as your deck is trying to do something reasonably powerful and doesn't fold like a cheap suit to common answers, you should be fine. HOWEVER, when I bring my Tron deck with 4 Karns sitting at like $70 apiece, or my Burn deck with a couple hundred dollars worth of lands, my odds are much better, and those costs are prohibitive to a lot of players. I always tell people, I have been playing Modern since very shortly after it became a format. I got some staples at the very start, I predicted what a few to have price jumps would be, I bought things (including my Karns) immediately after reprints, at their absolute floors......and it's a good thing, because as i tell people now, if i were just getting into the format after abandoning a garbage fire Standard, i WOULD NOT be able to play my favorite decks. I don't play the Eldrazi version of Tron, my Eldrazi are limited to Titans, but in part because of recent sins by Wizards, I could sell my Tron deck for probably double what I have in it....which does NOT make me happy. Half my LGS would drop t3 Karn if they could afford it. as someone who owns 4 Karns, PLEASE Wizards, reprint the darn thing. if it is printed at rare and never goes above $20 again? wonderful! I have no plans to sell mine, I don't care what my collection is worth in theory, it would literallt just mean that more people could enjoy it and i could get a couple more for EDH.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
I can routinely do well at my LGS using Stompy with good draws and careful play. Modern is diverse enough that as long as your deck is trying to do something reasonably powerful and doesn't fold like a cheap suit to common answers, you should be fine. HOWEVER, when I bring my Tron deck with 4 Karns sitting at like $70 apiece, or my Burn deck with a couple hundred dollars worth of lands, my odds are much better, and those costs are prohibitive to a lot of players. I always tell people, I have been playing Modern since very shortly after it became a format. I got some staples at the very start, I predicted what a few to have price jumps would be, I bought things (including my Karns) immediately after reprints, at their absolute floors......and it's a good thing, because as i tell people now, if i were just getting into the format after abandoning a garbage fire Standard, i WOULD NOT be able to play my favorite decks. I don't play the Eldrazi version of Tron, my Eldrazi are limited to Titans, but in part because of recent sins by Wizards, I could sell my Tron deck for probably double what I have in it....which does NOT make me happy. Half my LGS would drop t3 Karn if they could afford it. as someone who owns 4 Karns, PLEASE Wizards, reprint the darn thing. if it is printed at rare and never goes above $20 again? wonderful! I have no plans to sell mine, I don't care what my collection is worth in theory, it would literallt just mean that more people could enjoy it and i could get a couple more for EDH.
Yeah but Magic absolutely must have perpetually increasing secondary market prices in order to survive! I know this is true because a bunch of pundits who stand to gain financially if secondary market prices increase say so. Also, one time in 1995 cards were reprinted and it was bad.
If there are at least 2 lantern and 2 affinity in the top 8, Mox Opal bites the dust.
Why?
Those decks don't match any of the current ban creteria of wizards. I don't think that a deck deserves a ban only for being the winning (or best performer) deck of the PT unless it performes as eldrazi did.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Decks played: Modern:
0 Affinity;
URG Delver
URGW Countercats
(Here you can find some video contents about Countercats and Temur Delver decks)
I can't help but shake off the feeling one day WOTC is going to view GDS too similar to Twin, a deck that has too many 50 50s and will see a ban.
Not after this PT or anything, but if it's like this two years later?
Maybe not though, Twin actually brought home the trophy in the tournaments that mattered.
If WOTC announced a shadow ban after the PT I would probably be less shocked than the majority of the community, though. Infraction issued for Twin talk. --CavalryWolfPack
I def agree that there's a possibility of infect. The deck really is still pretty decent. The huge problem with Bogels is the abundance of Thoughtseize when Death's Shadow decks are probably going to be pretty popular.
I really don't think 4c Death's Shadow is good, and imo, Grixis is much better. The second best version is a W version with Lingering Souls since it is good in the mirror
We all need to distinguish between the overall T8 and the Modern-only T8. As I said in an earlier post, there isn't always a lot of overlap between these two, and they can paint very different metagame pictures. I expect the overall T8 to look more linear, because it will include a few players that are better at Limited than Modern who have probably audibled to a Modern strategy they don't need much preparation on. That means some Limited grinder will jump to Tron or something, write in his bio "I played this deck cuz Tron is broken; Turn 3 Karn ftw," and he only gets to the T8 because he's 5-1 or 6-0 in Limited despite an X-2 or X-3 Modern record. Meanwhile, we'll see some really tight Modern players at X-1 in Modern at the end of Day 2 but ultimately brought down by a 3-3 or similar Limited performance. Yes, we can distinguish this in the standings, but a) most people won't bother because that's a lot of extra research, and b) Wizards probably won't bother either because the overall T8 is more high-profile.
All of this is to say that the top PT metagame is not the top Modern metagame. If you are trying to predict the top PT performers, you cannot do so based on the performance of Modern decks alone. It's a factor, sure, but it's not the only one and it might not even be the biggest one. Limited experts and grinders have a better shot to shape the format than Modern experts do, because the Limited grinders are likely to do better in Limited. After that, they just need to get the right matchups to sail into the high standings on whatever deck they thought was a good choice (which is almost definitely something linear that required less practice). Meanwhile, the Modern specialists may do well in Modern, but they may not if the matchups aren't great (X-2, let's say), and they are much more likely to then go X-3 or worse in Limited.
I can routinely do well at my LGS using Stompy with good draws and careful play. Modern is diverse enough that as long as your deck is trying to do something reasonably powerful and doesn't fold like a cheap suit to common answers, you should be fine. HOWEVER, when I bring my Tron deck with 4 Karns sitting at like $70 apiece, or my Burn deck with a couple hundred dollars worth of lands, my odds are much better, and those costs are prohibitive to a lot of players. I always tell people, I have been playing Modern since very shortly after it became a format. I got some staples at the very start, I predicted what a few to have price jumps would be, I bought things (including my Karns) immediately after reprints, at their absolute floors......and it's a good thing, because as i tell people now, if i were just getting into the format after abandoning a garbage fire Standard, i WOULD NOT be able to play my favorite decks. I don't play the Eldrazi version of Tron, my Eldrazi are limited to Titans, but in part because of recent sins by Wizards, I could sell my Tron deck for probably double what I have in it....which does NOT make me happy. Half my LGS would drop t3 Karn if they could afford it. as someone who owns 4 Karns, PLEASE Wizards, reprint the darn thing. if it is printed at rare and never goes above $20 again? wonderful! I have no plans to sell mine, I don't care what my collection is worth in theory, it would literallt just mean that more people could enjoy it and i could get a couple more for EDH.
Yeah but Magic absolutely must have perpetually increasing secondary market prices in order to survive! I know this is true because a bunch of pundits who stand to gain financially if secondary market prices increase say so. Also, one time in 1995 cards were reprinted and it was bad.
I disagree with the notion that the prices must be perpetually increasing. The cards must retain value, sure, but WOTC is under no obligation to maintain prices. Cards need to be able to hold value through basics of supply and demand, HOWEVER, outside of the reserved list any card you purchase is done with the risk (of which you should be well aware) that reprints, meta shifts, or power creep can lead to changes in supply and demand. I say this all the time. I am not opposed to looking at cards as investments. I am opposed to people demanding these investments be as safe as bank CDs.
We all need to distinguish between the overall T8 and the Modern-only T8. As I said in an earlier post, there isn't always a lot of overlap between these two, and they can paint very different metagame pictures. I expect the overall T8 to look more linear, because it will include a few players that are better at Limited than Modern who have probably audibled to a Modern strategy they don't need much preparation on. That means some Limited grinder will jump to Tron or something, write in his bio "I played this deck cuz Tron is broken; Turn 3 Karn ftw," and he only gets to the T8 because he's 5-1 or 6-0 in Limited despite an X-2 or X-3 Modern record. Meanwhile, we'll see some really tight Modern players at X-1 in Modern at the end of Day 2 but ultimately brought down by a 3-3 or similar Limited performance. Yes, we can distinguish this in the standings, but a) most people won't bother because that's a lot of extra research, and b) Wizards probably won't bother either because the overall T8 is more high-profile.
All of this is to say that the top PT metagame is not the top Modern metagame. If you are trying to predict the top PT performers, you cannot do so based on the performance of Modern decks alone. It's a factor, sure, but it's not the only one and it might not even be the biggest one. Limited experts and grinders have a better shot to shape the format than Modern experts do, because the Limited grinders are likely to do better in Limited. After that, they just need to get the right matchups to sail into the high standings on whatever deck they thought was a good choice (which is almost definitely something linear that required less practice). Meanwhile, the Modern specialists may do well in Modern, but they may not if the matchups aren't great (X-2, let's say), and they are much more likely to then go X-3 or worse in Limited.
exactly. I really deeply hate the current setup. when they call it a Modern PT, and the Modern format will be helped or harmed by the results, Limited should not be a factor in the results. Modern the whole way through. I really enjoy Modern. I put in the practice, I do the research....but I could never do well in events like that because in a choice between drafting Ixalan and not playing, I will sit out until I can play Constructed. coincidentally, I suck at Limited. it's inferior, it's not fun (for me and most of the Modern players at my LGS) and the fate of Modern should not be determined by a mediocre Modern player who got lucky and then is god-level in Limited.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
Do more people actually care about who wins, or the decks that win and the matches we see?
I honestly couldnt care less about the individual players, I follow decks, I want decks or styles, to archetypes, to win. The players dont matter to me in the least.
Definitely deck types and styles. I just want Modern to be a nice meta statistically, though of course "nice" is defnied quite differently by different people. Honestly I don't understand people who use Pros as some sort of measuring stick for a meta. "Oh Reid Duke didn't top8, format bad" "Oh LSV didn't top8, this sealed sucks". Legit no pro has a 70% winrate. To top8 a PT/GP/Whatever you need to go like 12-0. thats like 1 in 64.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern UWUW ControlUW UGWSpiritsUGW GHardened ScalesG WGRUKiki PodWGRU [RIP]
Lots of burn about these days. Almost every third round I played at GP London was burn. One entire tournament was burn opponents for me which has never happened.
Thankfully I didn't drop a match against burn so I wasn't upset but it's definitely a different landscape than I'm used to.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
Do more people actually care about who wins, or the decks that win and the matches we see?
I honestly couldnt care less about the individual players, I follow decks, I want decks or styles, to archetypes, to win. The players dont matter to me in the least.
Definitely deck types and styles. I just want Modern to be a nice meta statistically, though of course "nice" is defnied quite differently by different people. Honestly I don't understand people who use Pros as some sort of measuring stick for a meta. "Oh Reid Duke didn't top8, format bad" "Oh LSV didn't top8, this sealed sucks". Legit no pro has a 70% winrate. To top8 a PT/GP/Whatever you need to go like 12-0. thats like 1 in 64.
This type of thinking can lead to the devaluation of player skill and the misunderstanding of data presented when it comes to win percentage of certain decks.
I'm not saying you are doing this, but it happens a lot when discussing Modern (especially on reddit lately with the Bloodbraid Elf discussion), but when a certain deck does good, no one usually accounts for player skill and massively jumps to conclusions. For example, a few months ago when Big Mana decks like Tron and Valukut decks did really good, everyone jumped to the conclusion that these decks were too powerful and that Modern needed Wasteland. There was no discussion on how the players played, or how it was an amazing meta game read by these highly skilled and intelligent players. This is another reason that a single tournament result should hardly go into consideration when it comes to bannings and unbanings.
Like I said, this is not an attack on you, but I just wanted to bring this topic up, especially with the PT coming up and the recent talks of Tron, Modern Nexus' Discussion of Bloodbraid Elf, etc
I still think modern needs better answers to land ramp
I'm actually jamming BG Tron right now as an alternative to my usual Junding.
Nothing right now is yelling at me that it needs a ban.
I could care less if a pro is in the top of not, although it's nice to have players on archetypes you identify with.
Sam Black said it simple, winning huge, long tournaments is just really difficult, period.
Calling modern skilless is ridiculous, players don't keep making top 8 on a regular basis because they stumbled upon the lottery pairings.
I mean the answer is going wide/underneath. I get what you're saying, but I like that control and midrange aren't given an answer to EVERYTHING.
I like to joke that the average MTG player believes all wins are skill and all losses are variance. That's just how the human mind is. People rarely notice or remember when they were outclassed, but the variance aspect of losses sticks out since you couldn't control it.
There's a reason the "hall of fame" includes people with like two major event wins. Every single GP and PT winner, every worlds winner, hell everyone who wins their local 1K+ event, had to get lucky. Whether that's avoiding an awful matchup, drawing a sideboard silver bullet, or just drawing a card you need to seal a win or come back into a game, there's always going to be luck. Deck selection, deck expertise, and deck construction are all ways to reduce that variance.
I think I need about two more months away from modern to see if this PT does lead to a ban or unban, then I will consider buying back in. I kept very few cards after SJW WOTC bothered me enough to stop giving them money.
I still think modern needs better answers to land ramp
I'm actually jamming BG Tron right now as an alternative to my usual Junding.
Nothing right now is yelling at me that it needs a ban.
I could care less if a pro is in the top of not, although it's nice to have players on archetypes you identify with.
Sam Black said it simple, winning huge, long tournaments is just really difficult, period.
Calling modern skilless is ridiculous, players don't keep making top 8 on a regular basis because they stumbled upon the lottery pairings.
I mean the answer is going wide/underneath. I get what you're saying, but I like that control and midrange aren't given an answer to EVERYTHING.
I like to joke that the average MTG player believes all wins are skill and all losses are variance. That's just how the human mind is. People rarely notice or remember when they were outclassed, but the variance aspect of losses sticks out since you couldn't control it.
There's a reason the "hall of fame" includes people with like two major event wins. Every single GP and PT winner, every worlds winner, hell everyone who wins their local 1K+ event, had to get lucky. Whether that's avoiding an awful matchup, drawing a sideboard silver bullet, or just drawing a card you need to seal a win or come back into a game, there's always going to be luck. Deck selection, deck expertise, and deck construction are all ways to reduce that variance.
I think I need about two more months away from modern to see if this PT does lead to a ban or unban, then I will consider buying back in. I kept very few cards after SJW WOTC bothered me enough to stop giving them money.
Oh, I can't wait to hear the reason WotC are a bunch of dem darn evil SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR cucks. This should be interesting.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I still think modern needs better answers to land ramp
I'm actually jamming BG Tron right now as an alternative to my usual Junding.
Nothing right now is yelling at me that it needs a ban.
I could care less if a pro is in the top of not, although it's nice to have players on archetypes you identify with.
Sam Black said it simple, winning huge, long tournaments is just really difficult, period.
Calling modern skilless is ridiculous, players don't keep making top 8 on a regular basis because they stumbled upon the lottery pairings.
I mean the answer is going wide/underneath. I get what you're saying, but I like that control and midrange aren't given an answer to EVERYTHING.
I like to joke that the average MTG player believes all wins are skill and all losses are variance. That's just how the human mind is. People rarely notice or remember when they were outclassed, but the variance aspect of losses sticks out since you couldn't control it.
There's a reason the "hall of fame" includes people with like two major event wins. Every single GP and PT winner, every worlds winner, hell everyone who wins their local 1K+ event, had to get lucky. Whether that's avoiding an awful matchup, drawing a sideboard silver bullet, or just drawing a card you need to seal a win or come back into a game, there's always going to be luck. Deck selection, deck expertise, and deck construction are all ways to reduce that variance.
I think I need about two more months away from modern to see if this PT does lead to a ban or unban, then I will consider buying back in. I kept very few cards after SJW WOTC bothered me enough to stop giving them money.
Oh, I can't wait to hear the reason WotC are a bunch of dem darn evil SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR cucks. This should be interesting.
We call them soyboys now. And this isn't the thread for that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1) Some variant of death & taxes in the top 8. The builds have gotten pretty tough to deal with these days and some serious power bumps esp. in the eldrazi versions.
2) Tons of big mana decks, probably more Titan than tron
3) Jeskai Control wins it and there're at least 2 in the top 8. Not because I think the deck is great but because I think pros like it and will play it in force, and it's a fairly difficult deck to prepare against.
4) No grixis death shadow anywhere.
5) There'll be some surprising combo deck, like Krark Clan Ironworks or something that does very well but peters out
6) Overall meta-wise, tons of snapcaster mages. If there're fewer than 9 snapcasters in the top 8 I would be surprised.
-------------
Going out on some limbs there but hey
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Modern has the potential to be the best format, but right now it's started to go towards legacy in terms of having elitists form often due to the cost of entry and slow evolution of the meta. The most important aspect of Magic is being able to play the game and that is pretty difficult when the decks of the format cost anywhere from 400-1500 dollars. Some cards like Noble Heirarch and Mox Opal desperately need another reprint, and Liliana of the Veil along with Karn Liberated will breach 110+ if the popularity picks up and no reprints happen in masters 25 due to the pro-tour.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
5) I really hope its UR Breach, deck is really strong and well positioned in the meta right now. There arent many bad matchups, most are much closer than you'd expect.
RG BBE Ponza
UX Eldrazi Tron
UR Jace Breach
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
How big is your LGS? How competitive?
Unless they are already rocking tier 1 decks, it likely doesn't matter.
Modern is the best format. It really is. It's costs are not a barrier to entry, because you can literally throw together any number of decks, that cost nothing close to $400, and win. I've done this. I proved it who even knows how long ago at this point.
You do not need Noble.
You do not need Opal.
You do not need Karn.
Will those cards spike if someone wins with them? Maybe. However is it even relevant? Not if your LGS already plays modern because as every article will state 'Play what you know'.
There is no 1 deck to rule them all in Modern, its too diverse.
Spirits
Sometimes it's not about if there is a number one deck. All people need is the impression that it is all about the top three or four decks, which happens with big competitions like the PT. The reason Modern has it's diversity is not just because of the results, but because there isn't any force actively advertising just a few of the decks in question. Basically, escalating prices on big name cards like Noble Heirarch are a self fulfilling prophecy in a sense.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Yeah but Magic absolutely must have perpetually increasing secondary market prices in order to survive! I know this is true because a bunch of pundits who stand to gain financially if secondary market prices increase say so. Also, one time in 1995 cards were reprinted and it was bad.
A BOLD predction:
Why?
Those decks don't match any of the current ban creteria of wizards. I don't think that a deck deserves a ban only for being the winning (or best performer) deck of the PT unless it performes as eldrazi did.
Modern:
Not after this PT or anything, but if it's like this two years later?
Maybe not though, Twin actually brought home the trophy in the tournaments that mattered.
If WOTC announced a shadow ban after the PT I would probably be less shocked than the majority of the community, though.
Infraction issued for Twin talk. --CavalryWolfPack
I also think we'll see a bit more infect than normal, with some spicy additions like Nissa in the sideboard and disrupting shoal in the main.
I really don't think 4c Death's Shadow is good, and imo, Grixis is much better. The second best version is a W version with Lingering Souls since it is good in the mirror
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
All of this is to say that the top PT metagame is not the top Modern metagame. If you are trying to predict the top PT performers, you cannot do so based on the performance of Modern decks alone. It's a factor, sure, but it's not the only one and it might not even be the biggest one. Limited experts and grinders have a better shot to shape the format than Modern experts do, because the Limited grinders are likely to do better in Limited. After that, they just need to get the right matchups to sail into the high standings on whatever deck they thought was a good choice (which is almost definitely something linear that required less practice). Meanwhile, the Modern specialists may do well in Modern, but they may not if the matchups aren't great (X-2, let's say), and they are much more likely to then go X-3 or worse in Limited.
I disagree with the notion that the prices must be perpetually increasing. The cards must retain value, sure, but WOTC is under no obligation to maintain prices. Cards need to be able to hold value through basics of supply and demand, HOWEVER, outside of the reserved list any card you purchase is done with the risk (of which you should be well aware) that reprints, meta shifts, or power creep can lead to changes in supply and demand. I say this all the time. I am not opposed to looking at cards as investments. I am opposed to people demanding these investments be as safe as bank CDs.
exactly. I really deeply hate the current setup. when they call it a Modern PT, and the Modern format will be helped or harmed by the results, Limited should not be a factor in the results. Modern the whole way through. I really enjoy Modern. I put in the practice, I do the research....but I could never do well in events like that because in a choice between drafting Ixalan and not playing, I will sit out until I can play Constructed. coincidentally, I suck at Limited. it's inferior, it's not fun (for me and most of the Modern players at my LGS) and the fate of Modern should not be determined by a mediocre Modern player who got lucky and then is god-level in Limited.
Definitely deck types and styles. I just want Modern to be a nice meta statistically, though of course "nice" is defnied quite differently by different people. Honestly I don't understand people who use Pros as some sort of measuring stick for a meta. "Oh Reid Duke didn't top8, format bad" "Oh LSV didn't top8, this sealed sucks". Legit no pro has a 70% winrate. To top8 a PT/GP/Whatever you need to go like 12-0. thats like 1 in 64.
UWUW ControlUW
UGWSpiritsUGW
GHardened ScalesG
WGRUKiki PodWGRU [RIP]
Thankfully I didn't drop a match against burn so I wasn't upset but it's definitely a different landscape than I'm used to.
This type of thinking can lead to the devaluation of player skill and the misunderstanding of data presented when it comes to win percentage of certain decks.
I'm not saying you are doing this, but it happens a lot when discussing Modern (especially on reddit lately with the Bloodbraid Elf discussion), but when a certain deck does good, no one usually accounts for player skill and massively jumps to conclusions. For example, a few months ago when Big Mana decks like Tron and Valukut decks did really good, everyone jumped to the conclusion that these decks were too powerful and that Modern needed Wasteland. There was no discussion on how the players played, or how it was an amazing meta game read by these highly skilled and intelligent players. This is another reason that a single tournament result should hardly go into consideration when it comes to bannings and unbanings.
Like I said, this is not an attack on you, but I just wanted to bring this topic up, especially with the PT coming up and the recent talks of Tron, Modern Nexus' Discussion of Bloodbraid Elf, etc
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
I'm actually jamming BG Tron right now as an alternative to my usual Junding.
Nothing right now is yelling at me that it needs a ban.
I could care less if a pro is in the top of not, although it's nice to have players on archetypes you identify with.
Sam Black said it simple, winning huge, long tournaments is just really difficult, period.
Calling modern skilless is ridiculous, players don't keep making top 8 on a regular basis because they stumbled upon the lottery pairings.
I mean the answer is going wide/underneath. I get what you're saying, but I like that control and midrange aren't given an answer to EVERYTHING.
I like to joke that the average MTG player believes all wins are skill and all losses are variance. That's just how the human mind is. People rarely notice or remember when they were outclassed, but the variance aspect of losses sticks out since you couldn't control it.
There's a reason the "hall of fame" includes people with like two major event wins. Every single GP and PT winner, every worlds winner, hell everyone who wins their local 1K+ event, had to get lucky. Whether that's avoiding an awful matchup, drawing a sideboard silver bullet, or just drawing a card you need to seal a win or come back into a game, there's always going to be luck. Deck selection, deck expertise, and deck construction are all ways to reduce that variance.
I think I need about two more months away from modern to see if this PT does lead to a ban or unban, then I will consider buying back in. I kept very few cards after SJW WOTC bothered me enough to stop giving them money.
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
Oh, I can't wait to hear the reason WotC are a bunch of dem darn evil SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR cucks. This should be interesting.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
We call them soyboys now. And this isn't the thread for that.