Did we look at the same top 16? Cream (aka true power decks) will rise at a tournament that large.
In the end we cannot 'know' Tron is busted, but Wizards does. If it is MTGO knows and Wizards knows there is a rising concern over the card, in a group of decks that are often not enjoyed by opponents.
There's enough smoke here to look into it, if you are Wizards.
i can see that as reasoning to unban preordain, but not for banning stirrings.
you said it yourself a while back ktkenshinx (when you were defending stirrings). cards arent a problem unless the deck itself is problematic. none of the decks that play stirrings have crossed any line yet as far as i know. so whats the justification for the ban? avoiding hypocrisy? a stirrings banning entails hurting multiple decks, none of which are too good; which in itself is hypocritical.
so we can debate balance amongst various effects, but lets not forget that we are talking about seriously nerfing decks that a lot of people are invested in for reasons completely unrelated to performance. bans seriously blow. they are the extreme, and should be avoided at all costs.
I don't want Stirrings banned. I voted for a Preordain unban in the poll and stick by that. We don't need bans because Stirrings decks aren't individually a problem and the metagame seems to cycle through them. Except maybe KCI, which seems like a best deck, despite some skill cap limitations. But I don't really have issues with those decks. I have a huge issue with the justification for keeping Preordain banned when Stirrings is legal. The contradiction has become too glaring.
KCI is a lot easier to play than many people think. Now if someone who has tried to play it for a week straight still claims that it is a tough to play deck, then maybe it is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
He compares stirrings to the other consistency tools in modern and concludes that it's far more powerful. As much as I generally don't like stirrings decks, I'd rather they unban consistency tools (ie preordain/ponder) rather than ban stirrings. If they ban it, it will crush my hopes of ever getting good blue cantrips
I agree they should do one or the other though in my book. You cannot say most of the blue cantrips are too good on one hand for Modern and then let Colorless decks abuse Ancient Stirrings. Now granted I get the idea that cards that are more restrictive should compensate by being stronger then generic options.
My issue is two fold again
1) Given the Power of Artifact and Eldrazi Based Decks, Colorless is not a restrictive negative or the restriction doesn't matter compared to dig 5 cards for 1 mana. It lets you see what 8.33% of your deck at instant speed so basically you got 6 chances to find something useful counting your next draw.
2) Why is Ancient Stirrings Green anyway? Most colorless cards are artifacts which suggest it should be Blue, Red ...or White (well we know white is not allowed to have good card advantage). This is more a problem for Tron which gets to combine Land Ramp with The best Cantrip in Modern.
I also dispute the notion that amount of play is the only measure of strength. Yeah Serums sees more play but that doesn't make it a better card.
Ancient Stirrings is not an instant. I'm open to talking about a ban, but only based on what the actual card reads
There is a good discussion going on here with Aaron Forsythe HERE(LINK)
Whoever wanna join, feel free to!
@ktk, somebody mentioned this great post of yours. Hopefully, mr. Forsythe will take a look at it, as he looked at our poll.
Thanks so much for posting this. This confirms that some of the discussion we have on this site really matters at a high level, and is capable of influencing major decision makers. This needs to be cited whenever people talk about these discussions and polls not mattering. It also raises the stakes for keeping quality poll data and ensuring discussion doesn't become too ban/unban maniacal. We want to remain credible.
i can see that as reasoning to unban preordain, but not for banning stirrings.
you said it yourself a while back ktkenshinx (when you were defending stirrings). cards arent a problem unless the deck itself is problematic. none of the decks that play stirrings have crossed any line yet as far as i know. so whats the justification for the ban? avoiding hypocrisy? a stirrings banning entails hurting multiple decks, none of which are too good; which in itself is hypocritical.
so we can debate balance amongst various effects, but lets not forget that we are talking about seriously nerfing decks that a lot of people are invested in for reasons completely unrelated to performance. bans seriously blow. they are the extreme, and should be avoided at all costs.
I don't want Stirrings banned. I voted for a Preordain unban in the poll and stick by that. We don't need bans because Stirrings decks aren't individually a problem and the metagame seems to cycle through them. Except maybe KCI, which seems like a best deck, despite some skill cap limitations. But I don't really have issues with those decks. I have a huge issue with the justification for keeping Preordain banned when Stirrings is legal. The contradiction has become too glaring.
yeah i mostly agree with what you posted. my issue is framing it as some ultimatum that wizards should/needs to make a hard choice on. "unban preordain or ban stirrings". even if you arent technically advocating for a stirrings ban, you leave it on the table because not unbanning preordain and banning stirrings is still a 'correct' option.
in the past, certain cards were removed because they were doing too much for a number of decks; but in each case there was still one deck that could be considered 'problematic'. none of the colorless decks have pulled away from the pack in that manner, at least not yet, or by any metric we can see. i think probe was one such card, but there was still infect to point to.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
I'm not sure how complaining about Stirrings being green makes an argument against it. If the card was blue, well Stirrings decks would play blue... It wouldn't make the current Stirrings decks worse (Amulet, KCI, Tron, Lantern, none dislikes blue).
Now, I also see the discussion lean heavily towards "if Stirrings is legal, Preordain must be unbanned". It's short-sighted : the issue I have with this is that it completely ignores the fact Stirrings + Preordain in Modern = combo decks being dominant (both cards will happily combine with Mox Opal btw). I'm open to debate on this equation, but that's what I believe so far. I'll play Modern no matter what it looks like, but it's a huge fear for most players to see linear decks take the cake.
However, I get the point that it's easier to nerf the format rather than buff it by unbanning something strong. Making the format stronger is scary because we easily see what decks would suffer / disappear, but we don't see how good Modern could actually become. I also believe now is the most sensitive time in Modern's History to consider making it stronger, since the overall diversity and unsolved aspect of it make a lot of people happy, or at least, less complaining than usual.
That's why SFM is so likely to be unbanned before a cantrip, she doesn't make the linear strategies stronger.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pioneer - A bunch of stuff Modern - Humans Legacy - Grixis Phoenix / Death & Taxes
@mtg_ianduke @mtgaaron mtgsalvation - Modern (Link: https://bit.ly/2K4GvFy ). People massively vote for Stoneforge Mystic, Splinter Twin or Preordain regarding unbans and Ancient Stirrings (or none) regarding bans. Just wanted to share this! Thanks!
Aaron Forsythe
@mtgaaron
Thanks. The DCI will be convening this week to discuss such matters.
Edit: I think it's obvious he and Ian Duke at least saw the poll.
I will be tweeting our content out to him before every B&R, since he actually responds to us.
They should know that SFM has reached insane numbers at the unbanning poll by now, and it's either no bans or ban Ancient Stirrings regarding unbans(with some various other results as well)!
Thanks for taking the time to reach out to those who manage the modern ban list, this was an excellent way to connect our conversations here with separate conversations that may be taking place among groups of people that can actually change the format.
The only blue combo decks that really want to use (abuse?) preordain would be storm, ad naus, and breach. That said, storm seems to always be the bottleneck for what WotC is afraid of. Between damping sphere and the new amulet in c19, I'm hopeful that they feel there is sufficient hate to start setting free cantrips.
I would have loved for spoiler season to still be going on when they have the ban announcement, and for them to unban preordain, and that day they spoil a reprint in c19. Flair for the dramatic
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWR Breach, UWB Esper control
Legacy: UW RiP/Helm, UR Sneak and Show
opt and preordain both in standard would be odd, and they have already spoiled Anticipate for m19. i agree though, that would have been quite the reveal.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
It's funny how the card I said a few weeks back should be banned and everyone said wtf are you saying, is now being discussed as a very possible ban :).
I lost count on how many of those were in the top16 of the last GP.
which just goes to show how fickle the community can be, and how much bandwagoning occurs. the reasons for not banning stirrings back when you proposed the idea are just as true now as they were back then.
kci is a durdly combo deck, and tron is one of the most maligned decks in the history of the format. of course people are going to get up in arms when they see them at the forefront of a GP. as people who talk about this stuff constantly we should be more level headed than that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
i agree. i also get that opinions can change over time, and maybe some people were on the fence about it.
i thought the info that kt revealed on how much stirrings is played relative to visions (and subsequently decks that would play preordain) was quite telling. it also doesnt help that the decks that tend to play stirrings usually arent doing something 'wholesome'.
so maybe we advocate for a preordain unban. however bans should have a higher bar to pass. if anyone has ever had a ban hit them, they should know its a really crappy experience. frankly i wouldnt mind if stirrings decks went away, but i also realize that bias is driving that perspective. so i cant in good conscious get behind mangling a number of decks when none of them is breaking any of the 'rules' established with the pattern of previous ban decisions.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
The biggest problem when talking about Stirrings ban is that, imo, people are underestimating the damage it will do to the decks that play it.
Lantern has disappeared from the top tables after the unbans; Amulet is also not close to being a tier 1 deck. Both would probably not survive the ban.
I've talked to Tron players and they seem to agree that the current iteration cannot survive without Stirrings, since it not only helps getting Tron online but also finds wincon (something the deck cannot do as efficiently as it could when Eye was legal). I cannot speak much about KCI, but from what I've seen, the success is more due to low hate than resiliency.
These decks aren't threatening the format in any way. Also, they are different decks with different styles. Lantern is prison, KCI combo, Tron and Amulet big mana. I don't think banning it would increase diversity or help the format in any way besides taking out the public enemies.
Bans are obviously going to hurt decks that is kinda the point.
The wincons are what Creatures and Walkers? Mono G Tron can play Oath of Nissa just fine sure it only digs 3 but it will find their Win Cons and Lands, just not artifacts.
As for Lantern Control, yeah I really don't think WOTC in their current love for Creatures and not going to time wants Lantern to be a success.
Amulet cannot really comment on it. Haven't read up on it.
It's funny how the card I said a few weeks back should be banned and everyone said wtf are you saying, is now being discussed as a very possible ban :).
I lost count on how many of those were in the top16 of the last GP.
Just because a ban discussion becomes legitimate with new evidence, that does not make it legitimate before the evidence is available. If we treated all suggestions this way, we would still be discussing CoCo and DS bans.
which just goes to show how fickle the community can be, and how much bandwagoning occurs. the reasons for not banning stirrings back when you proposed the idea are just as true now as they were back then.
kci is a durdly combo deck, and tron is one of the most maligned decks in the history of the format. of course people are going to get up in arms when they see them at the forefront of a GP. as people who talk about this stuff constantly we should be more level headed than that.
I still maintain that tron is only maligned by players who want 50/50 decks, which by design are soft to tron.
i dont think that is true at all. the deck gets hated on by all sorts, even those that play combo or aggro. natural tron into karn is one of the most simplistic yet powerful sequences in the format, so much so that its basically a meme at this point. that and historically few main deckable ways to interact with lands, and people are just going to roll their eyes when they are beat in that way no matter what they are playing.
similarly some people hate on kci, not because they want modern to become 'midrange: the format', but because it includes a lot of masturbatory play patterns where one guy is just fiddling with his cards for minutes and minutes.
so ill agree that some amount of the hate is from players wanting their preferred type of deck to be better, but i dont agree with them being the only source.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
well but that argument can be applied to any combo deck, so i think that it doesnt really fit
At the same time, i think that the format needs more powerful (or maybe more flexible) answers and tools to find those answers
For example, is wasteland too good for modern? at this point, i think that the power level of the card is not so far from the rest of the format. The same for ponder, preordain, GSZ, stoneforge and things like brainstorm and fow too
It is time to get new modern cards that are not std legal
well but that argument can be applied to any combo deck, so i think that it doesnt really fit
At the same time, i think that the format needs more powerful (or maybe more flexible) answers and tools to find those answers
For example, is wasteland too good for modern? at this point, i think that the power level of the card is not so far from the rest of the format. The same for ponder, preordain, GSZ, stoneforge and things like brainstorm and fow too
It is time to get new modern cards that are not std legal
Wasteland would be a bit too powerful for Modern. So would Brainstorm. I think a "fixed" FoW beyond Disrupting Shoal is probably good idea to have kicking around as a safety valve on Fast combo, though. Maybe a Lapse of Certainty with an alternate cost if you control no untapped lands or something.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In the end we cannot 'know' Tron is busted, but Wizards does. If it is MTGO knows and Wizards knows there is a rising concern over the card, in a group of decks that are often not enjoyed by opponents.
There's enough smoke here to look into it, if you are Wizards.
Spirits
I don't want Stirrings banned. I voted for a Preordain unban in the poll and stick by that. We don't need bans because Stirrings decks aren't individually a problem and the metagame seems to cycle through them. Except maybe KCI, which seems like a best deck, despite some skill cap limitations. But I don't really have issues with those decks. I have a huge issue with the justification for keeping Preordain banned when Stirrings is legal. The contradiction has become too glaring.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Which problem?
I think we can agree that none of the colorless deck is a problem by itself since no one violates any existent ban criterium (yet).
Modern:
Ancient Stirrings is not an instant. I'm open to talking about a ban, but only based on what the actual card reads
Thanks so much for posting this. This confirms that some of the discussion we have on this site really matters at a high level, and is capable of influencing major decision makers. This needs to be cited whenever people talk about these discussions and polls not mattering. It also raises the stakes for keeping quality poll data and ensuring discussion doesn't become too ban/unban maniacal. We want to remain credible.
yeah i mostly agree with what you posted. my issue is framing it as some ultimatum that wizards should/needs to make a hard choice on. "unban preordain or ban stirrings". even if you arent technically advocating for a stirrings ban, you leave it on the table because not unbanning preordain and banning stirrings is still a 'correct' option.
in the past, certain cards were removed because they were doing too much for a number of decks; but in each case there was still one deck that could be considered 'problematic'. none of the colorless decks have pulled away from the pack in that manner, at least not yet, or by any metric we can see. i think probe was one such card, but there was still infect to point to.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Now, I also see the discussion lean heavily towards "if Stirrings is legal, Preordain must be unbanned". It's short-sighted : the issue I have with this is that it completely ignores the fact Stirrings + Preordain in Modern = combo decks being dominant (both cards will happily combine with Mox Opal btw). I'm open to debate on this equation, but that's what I believe so far. I'll play Modern no matter what it looks like, but it's a huge fear for most players to see linear decks take the cake.
However, I get the point that it's easier to nerf the format rather than buff it by unbanning something strong. Making the format stronger is scary because we easily see what decks would suffer / disappear, but we don't see how good Modern could actually become. I also believe now is the most sensitive time in Modern's History to consider making it stronger, since the overall diversity and unsolved aspect of it make a lot of people happy, or at least, less complaining than usual.
That's why SFM is so likely to be unbanned before a cantrip, she doesn't make the linear strategies stronger.
Thanks for taking the time to reach out to those who manage the modern ban list, this was an excellent way to connect our conversations here with separate conversations that may be taking place among groups of people that can actually change the format.
I would have loved for spoiler season to still be going on when they have the ban announcement, and for them to unban preordain, and that day they spoil a reprint in c19. Flair for the dramatic
Legacy: UW RiP/Helm, UR Sneak and Show
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Legacy: UW RiP/Helm, UR Sneak and Show
I lost count on how many of those were in the top16 of the last GP.
kci is a durdly combo deck, and tron is one of the most maligned decks in the history of the format. of course people are going to get up in arms when they see them at the forefront of a GP. as people who talk about this stuff constantly we should be more level headed than that.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)i thought the info that kt revealed on how much stirrings is played relative to visions (and subsequently decks that would play preordain) was quite telling. it also doesnt help that the decks that tend to play stirrings usually arent doing something 'wholesome'.
so maybe we advocate for a preordain unban. however bans should have a higher bar to pass. if anyone has ever had a ban hit them, they should know its a really crappy experience. frankly i wouldnt mind if stirrings decks went away, but i also realize that bias is driving that perspective. so i cant in good conscious get behind mangling a number of decks when none of them is breaking any of the 'rules' established with the pattern of previous ban decisions.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Lantern has disappeared from the top tables after the unbans; Amulet is also not close to being a tier 1 deck. Both would probably not survive the ban.
I've talked to Tron players and they seem to agree that the current iteration cannot survive without Stirrings, since it not only helps getting Tron online but also finds wincon (something the deck cannot do as efficiently as it could when Eye was legal). I cannot speak much about KCI, but from what I've seen, the success is more due to low hate than resiliency.
These decks aren't threatening the format in any way. Also, they are different decks with different styles. Lantern is prison, KCI combo, Tron and Amulet big mana. I don't think banning it would increase diversity or help the format in any way besides taking out the public enemies.
The wincons are what Creatures and Walkers? Mono G Tron can play Oath of Nissa just fine sure it only digs 3 but it will find their Win Cons and Lands, just not artifacts.
As for Lantern Control, yeah I really don't think WOTC in their current love for Creatures and not going to time wants Lantern to be a success.
Amulet cannot really comment on it. Haven't read up on it.
Just because a ban discussion becomes legitimate with new evidence, that does not make it legitimate before the evidence is available. If we treated all suggestions this way, we would still be discussing CoCo and DS bans.
I still maintain that tron is only maligned by players who want 50/50 decks, which by design are soft to tron.
similarly some people hate on kci, not because they want modern to become 'midrange: the format', but because it includes a lot of masturbatory play patterns where one guy is just fiddling with his cards for minutes and minutes.
so ill agree that some amount of the hate is from players wanting their preferred type of deck to be better, but i dont agree with them being the only source.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)At the same time, i think that the format needs more powerful (or maybe more flexible) answers and tools to find those answers
For example, is wasteland too good for modern? at this point, i think that the power level of the card is not so far from the rest of the format. The same for ponder, preordain, GSZ, stoneforge and things like brainstorm and fow too
It is time to get new modern cards that are not std legal
Wasteland would be a bit too powerful for Modern. So would Brainstorm. I think a "fixed" FoW beyond Disrupting Shoal is probably good idea to have kicking around as a safety valve on Fast combo, though. Maybe a Lapse of Certainty with an alternate cost if you control no untapped lands or something.