I have no idea what to make of this comment, as Splinter Twin and Force of Will have approximately 0 in common other than the cardstock they're printed on. Nothing in Modern is the "Force of Will" of Modern, as Modern has no equivalent card to keep shenanigans decks in check.
If the precedent of banning things to "shake up a Pro Tour" is any indication, I wouldn't be at all shocked to eventually see a Splinter Twin ban, regardless of whether or not it is warranted.
Infect for sure, miracles is still super good isn't it? Personally I expect Reanimator to be huge while the format tries to settle itself post Dig ban.
Not to sound argumentative, but why Reanimator? It's done nothing significant in the SCG Premier IQ's / Open tournaments we've had since the DTT ban. It was a relatively minor player in the pre-Khans meta (which is essentially where we're at again) and the format doesn't appear to be particularly light on graveyard hate. On top of that, most recent Grand Prix's have leaned towards Miracles and Delver as the decks of choice. That's not exactly where Reanimator wants to be. I think it's a fine choice if you're expecting a room full of Elves, Storm, and Sneak and Show. It's even got a solid Game 1 matchup against Shardless, and a not entirely horrible post-board match. That said, the deck hasn't seen wide play or sustained success in years. It's really just another Tier 2 combo strategy at this point.
I completely with you on Infect though. It's the best "Delver" deck in the format, imo, and I would expect to see it continue to do well. It's got a good game against Miracles, it can race other combo decks, and it has enough resiliency to power through the midrange decks.
If I'm betting on the meta for the top tables on Day 2, I'd say it's a combination of Miracles, Infect, some form of Delver, Storm, Lands, Stoneforge Mystic strategies, and then everything else.
Those who think Jace deserves a ban or that the Standard metagame is oppressed by Jace (a) don't understand the criteria for banning a card in Standard and (b) have never played in a truly oppressive Standard/Type 2 environment. When Jace equates to cards like Tolarian Academy and Skullclamp, we can start having this conversation. Until then, be mad that he costs $80, but don't suggest that he's ban worthy.
Just act like a decent human being. I know that Magic players are generally stereotyped as being a socially awkward bunch, but surely you can muster basic respect no matter how a match plays out. If I'm just getting crushed, I tend to joke it off and move on. If I think someone played an awesome game, I'll tell them that. If I think they screwed up, I keep it to myself unless they ask for my advice.
If I win because my opponent got screwed, I tend to say "Sorry man. You got screwed on that one." They know it. I know it. Acknowledging it is just my way of saying "We didn't really get to play, you shouldn't take that game as indication of anything other than bad luck." If I lose because I got screwed, I tend to not say anything, as there is nothing I can say that won't sound like I'm making excuses or taking away from their victory.
Just be a good sport either way. A lot of players could take a few lesson on losing with grace and, likewise, winning with humility. If I lose a match, I'm the first one to extend the hand and smile. If I win a match, I tend to let my reaction roll with whatever my opponent is feeling. If they look seriously angry, I'm not going to try and cheer them up or say something trite. If they don't offer the handshake while scooping up their stuff, I'll always offer one before I leave the table and wish them luck with the rest of the tournament.
You're essentially describing midrange, creature-based decks. Stoneblade variants and Death and Taxes would fit your mix. Delver decks would as well, albeit they skew towards aggro.
Has anyone played Jace, Vryn's Prodigy? I'm reading reports from non-Shardless players that he's a beating. Not sure how I feel about it.
I played him this weekend in St. Louis over the 4th Ancestral Visions. He was decent, but not outstanding. There were two instances where I couldn't flip him due to conflicts with Jace the Mind Sculptor. I don't think he cost me any games. Flashing back Abrupt Decay is sweet. In 15 rounds, he never netted me more than 1 loot + 1 flashback.
I sided him out against combo, as he's too slow to be impactful, and I'd rather put down a clock or Hymn on turn 2. I really only wanted him in the fair matchups, and several of those are decks with Karakas, so he has gets sided out. Against Jund, I'd rather have the 4th Visions since you can't bolt/punishing fire a visions. That really only leaves him doing solid work in the mirror and against Delver. For me, that just wasn't enough to justify the conflicts with JtMS, so he won't be making the cut in the future.
Also, Meddling Mage wasn't worth the wasted sideboard slot for Scrubland. I'll be passing on those next time as well in favor of more countermagic, despite it's conflict with cascade triggers.
Yeaaaaaah. Time to break out my Black Vises. If I can find them!! I don't think I've used them since I broke apart my Stasis deck, probably 15 years ago LOL.
It's been longer than that old man. They were already banned 15 years ago, and we got stuck running Chronatog + Kismet for our Stasis locks.
Just kidding on the old man thing, but the fact that most of the guys I play with will be asking "What is Black Vise?" is just another sign of how old I am.
It was the wording of the announcement on Chalice that worries me. They didn't say chalice was dominating, they said it was not fun essentially. That's a shivery concept to have running up and down my spine in an eternal format. That's the Hello Kitty warning that strategic diversity and the battle of ideas is not considered to be really important.
Here's the exact statement:
"Workshop decks have become more and more popular. However, too many games are effectively decided by the first player's first turn. A major problem is that a turn-one Chalice of the Void for 0 deprives the opponent an opportunity to put Moxen on the battlefield. While players can adapt by not playing Moxen, the point of the format is to provide a place to play those cards. Chalice of the Void is restricted."
I don't see anything about "unfun." Here's what I read:
1. "Shops decks have become more and more popular" = Shops decks are beginning to oversaturate/dominate the format (which is/was true).
2. "Too many games are decided on the 1st player's 1st turn" means that many games are not games at all, and we don't want matches to be determined by winning a dice roll.
I don't think either of those statements are controversial. Shops were becoming overrepresented and format-warping. Chalice was a big part of that. This is not new criteria for whether something should be banned or not. On point #2, yes you could interpret that to just mean "Non-games aren't fun, so Shops isn't fun," but I think that's a pretty narrow reading that's somewhat disingenuous. The most important part of that wording is "First player's first turn." This is much different than just saying "Too many games are decided on Turn 1." "First player's first turn" means that too many games are being decided on who goes first. That's not a healthy place to be for any game.
I agree with you that fun-ness should not be a factor in the banned lists for any format. That said, I don't think it was a factor in any of the decisions they made with today's announcement.
The Chalice of the Void restriction in Vintage is a bit scary since their reasoning for doing it would apply equally well to a ban of CotV in Legacy. The format is pushing very hard towards 1cc spells at this point and I expect the usage of CotV in Legacy to increase, particularly with the unbanning of Black vise.
Have you ever played a Chalice deck in Legacy? They're wildly inconsistent things. A turn 1 Chalice on the play, if resolved, is a win (most of the time). A turn 1 Chalice on the draw, if resolved, will often not amount to much of anything. A turn 1 chalice at any point beyond the first turn has very little hope of resolving or doing much of anything important if it does. The biggest problem with Chalice decks is that they can't play their own cantrips/filtering spells, and so they're at the mercy of the top of their deck 90% of the time. As much as I love MUD, it loses to itself just as much as it loses to the opponent's gameplan. It's one of the biggest reasons you don't see many Chalice decks.
If the popularity of Chalice was ever going to increase, it would've been during the Treasure Cruise - Dig Through Time era, when 1cc's were at their maximum efficiency to fuel the draw spells. As it stands now, we should see the format slow down and move closer to the Deathblade/Shardless BUG/UWR Stoneblade period we saw prior to Khans, which should bring along an uptick in 2-3cc win cons (SFM, Goyf, TNN, etc.), Wastelands, Abrupt Decays, Jace's, and Lilianas.
Chalice decks in Legacy just don't have the same oomph as in Vintage, and while your logic makes total sense on paper, it just doesn't play out that way, primarily due to the lack of Mishra's Workshops and miscellaneous artifacts laying around to abuse Tangle Wire. Without the additional tools (mainly better fast mana), I would expect Chalice to pretty much stay exactly where it is: MUD, 4-C Loam, and a few sideboards here and there.
Survival of the Fittest would be a great unban because it doesn't fit all that well into the blue cantrip suite and it would at least give us competing engines at the top level. It's possible that SotF would be outdated already by the changes in the meta. It's not a turn 3 kill mechanism and that's where the meta has gone of late.
I played 6 rounds of a 43 person Legacy IQ on Sunday (4-2, 9th place, meh). My wife also played, as did 4 other friends who traveled with us. Of the 6 of us, only 1 of us played a deck that can consistently kill on turn 3. Of the people in the room playing decks that could kill on turn 3, only 1 Infect deck and 1 Omnitell made it to the Top 8. The other 6 were fair decks, as was the majority of the room. Now, this is all anecdotal, but this is the same experience I've had at every Legacy event I've participated in during the last 3 years. It has largely been my competitive experience, and that of other Legacy players I know, that Legacy is not in fact a Turn 3 format, although many Turn 1-3 decks exist.
Having said that, I don't believe Survival would be too slow for the format these days, but it is certainly slow enough that speed is not the issue with why the deck remains banned. Like others, I believe the format now has the tools to manage Survival, and it would also add some needed dynamics to the format. I don't think it has been outclassed by any stretch. The card is busted. At the same time, I don't think it would be as omnipresent as in the past due to the overall higher power level of Legacy and the new tools we have to combat Survival strategies.
It would also be a breath of fresh air to have a creature-based archetype return to the format, one that doesn't necessarily involve blue creatures, Stoneforge Mystic, or Elves.
This will be in standard easily. Fuels the U/B Eldrazi or R/U/B drazi deck that's gonna be made.
Turn 3 Herald of Kozilek.
Turn 4 Probe your mind a couple times to get rid of Into the Roil, Languish, etc.
Sit back as your opponent has nothing.
How many discard spells with 2+ converted casting cost that only hit one card have ever been played in any format? This card is on par with Addle and Distress, and while those saw a reasonable amount of play, it's not like they were great. Perhaps the exile will matter enough to make this a thing, but short of that, 2cc for discard 1 card has never been a very playable rate. If the format is slow enough, I suppose this will end up getting played though.
Local stores were crap. My buddy and I would drive an hour every Saturday morning to play in a 10-12 person single elimination event (with buybacks if you lost and wanted to jump back in). We'd finish that by 3-4 p.m., then drive another 1 1/2 hours to play at a second identical event later that night.
No promos. Minimal prize support. The stores looked more like flea markets than actual card shops. At one point before the Saturday back-to-backs, the only place we could play was a Nascar memorabilia store. The owner's son loved Magic, so she bought some booster boxes to sell and would let us play in the back of her shop on Sundays. It smelled like a pet store because it used to be a pet store. The air conditioner never worked.
The only card I feel might need a ban in modern is Mox Opal. Not sure what WoTC was thinking by giving artifact based decks access to a type of card with no real drawbacks that otherwise is excluded from every other format except Vintage. Mox Diamond has a drawback which is the only reason it's legal in legacy. Affinity would still be viable without Mox but it would be much more balanced. I've heard other people calling for Glistener Elf being banned but I haven't had enough exposure to Infect to make an opinion on that.
Mox Opal is hardly comparable to the actual Moxen. The drawback is metalcraft, which is why you only see it in Affinity. A more apt comparison would be to Mox Diamond or Chrome Mox, neither of which is banned in Legacy. Diamond and Chrome are much more broadly playable, given that almost every deck already plays lands and/or colored spells, and yet the drawbacks are significant enough that only decks specifically designed to take advantage of it bother to play it (Lands, Aggro Loam, Storm, etc).
Comparing Mox Opal to the original Moxen is like comparing Nykthos Shrine to Gaea's Cradle. They're in the same family, but the power level is daylight and dark. The first copy is wonderful on the first 1-3 turns. After that, it's a garbage draw, at best a Lotus Petal, in a deck that runs low curve. And as Valanarch said, Affinity is nowhere near dominating the format or fitting any other applicable criteria.
The only card I feel might need a ban in modern is Mox Opal. Not sure what WoTC was thinking by giving artifact based decks access to a type of card with no real drawbacks that otherwise is excluded from every other format except Vintage. Mox Diamond has a drawback which is the only reason it's legal in legacy. Affinity would still be viable without Mox but it would be much more balanced. I've heard other people calling for Glistener Elf being banned but I haven't had enough exposure to Infect to make an opinion on that.
Affinity isn't dominating the format, causing logistical problems at tournaments, or breaking the turn 4 rule. Therefore, you can't make a serious argument for banning it using the criteria Wizards uses for its bans.
Golgari Grave-Troll didn't do any of these things either, and it still spent three years on the ban list.
It was also widely considered a mistake to keep it on the list. I'm not sure whether you're citing that as reference for banning Mox Opal or for leaving it alone.
Just like any other group of human beings, there's going to be jerks and there's going to be nice people. I've had a chance to play with Adrian Sullivan and Craig Wescoe. They were both just regular dudes. Sullivan in particular was very friendly. Craig was polite, but we mostly just played the game and didn't say a whole lot. LSV was also a nice guy when I met him earlier this year. Playing the SCG circuit, I've run into many of the regulars (almost all of them) at those events too. Most of them are very nice as well. I've met a few other pro tour regulars in passing, but nothing that stands out. I've had some rude interactions with pro players as well, but they were no worse than the ocassional unknown rude player you get paired with at an event.
In general, players' attitudes are greatly improved from what they were 20~ years ago when I first started playing.
I have no idea what to make of this comment, as Splinter Twin and Force of Will have approximately 0 in common other than the cardstock they're printed on. Nothing in Modern is the "Force of Will" of Modern, as Modern has no equivalent card to keep shenanigans decks in check.
If the precedent of banning things to "shake up a Pro Tour" is any indication, I wouldn't be at all shocked to eventually see a Splinter Twin ban, regardless of whether or not it is warranted.
Not to sound argumentative, but why Reanimator? It's done nothing significant in the SCG Premier IQ's / Open tournaments we've had since the DTT ban. It was a relatively minor player in the pre-Khans meta (which is essentially where we're at again) and the format doesn't appear to be particularly light on graveyard hate. On top of that, most recent Grand Prix's have leaned towards Miracles and Delver as the decks of choice. That's not exactly where Reanimator wants to be. I think it's a fine choice if you're expecting a room full of Elves, Storm, and Sneak and Show. It's even got a solid Game 1 matchup against Shardless, and a not entirely horrible post-board match. That said, the deck hasn't seen wide play or sustained success in years. It's really just another Tier 2 combo strategy at this point.
I completely with you on Infect though. It's the best "Delver" deck in the format, imo, and I would expect to see it continue to do well. It's got a good game against Miracles, it can race other combo decks, and it has enough resiliency to power through the midrange decks.
If I'm betting on the meta for the top tables on Day 2, I'd say it's a combination of Miracles, Infect, some form of Delver, Storm, Lands, Stoneforge Mystic strategies, and then everything else.
If I win because my opponent got screwed, I tend to say "Sorry man. You got screwed on that one." They know it. I know it. Acknowledging it is just my way of saying "We didn't really get to play, you shouldn't take that game as indication of anything other than bad luck." If I lose because I got screwed, I tend to not say anything, as there is nothing I can say that won't sound like I'm making excuses or taking away from their victory.
Just be a good sport either way. A lot of players could take a few lesson on losing with grace and, likewise, winning with humility. If I lose a match, I'm the first one to extend the hand and smile. If I win a match, I tend to let my reaction roll with whatever my opponent is feeling. If they look seriously angry, I'm not going to try and cheer them up or say something trite. If they don't offer the handshake while scooping up their stuff, I'll always offer one before I leave the table and wish them luck with the rest of the tournament.
I played him this weekend in St. Louis over the 4th Ancestral Visions. He was decent, but not outstanding. There were two instances where I couldn't flip him due to conflicts with Jace the Mind Sculptor. I don't think he cost me any games. Flashing back Abrupt Decay is sweet. In 15 rounds, he never netted me more than 1 loot + 1 flashback.
I sided him out against combo, as he's too slow to be impactful, and I'd rather put down a clock or Hymn on turn 2. I really only wanted him in the fair matchups, and several of those are decks with Karakas, so he has gets sided out. Against Jund, I'd rather have the 4th Visions since you can't bolt/punishing fire a visions. That really only leaves him doing solid work in the mirror and against Delver. For me, that just wasn't enough to justify the conflicts with JtMS, so he won't be making the cut in the future.
Also, Meddling Mage wasn't worth the wasted sideboard slot for Scrubland. I'll be passing on those next time as well in favor of more countermagic, despite it's conflict with cascade triggers.
It's been longer than that old man.
Just kidding on the old man thing, but the fact that most of the guys I play with will be asking "What is Black Vise?" is just another sign of how old I am.
Here's the exact statement:
"Workshop decks have become more and more popular. However, too many games are effectively decided by the first player's first turn. A major problem is that a turn-one Chalice of the Void for 0 deprives the opponent an opportunity to put Moxen on the battlefield. While players can adapt by not playing Moxen, the point of the format is to provide a place to play those cards. Chalice of the Void is restricted."
I don't see anything about "unfun." Here's what I read:
1. "Shops decks have become more and more popular" = Shops decks are beginning to oversaturate/dominate the format (which is/was true).
2. "Too many games are decided on the 1st player's 1st turn" means that many games are not games at all, and we don't want matches to be determined by winning a dice roll.
I don't think either of those statements are controversial. Shops were becoming overrepresented and format-warping. Chalice was a big part of that. This is not new criteria for whether something should be banned or not. On point #2, yes you could interpret that to just mean "Non-games aren't fun, so Shops isn't fun," but I think that's a pretty narrow reading that's somewhat disingenuous. The most important part of that wording is "First player's first turn." This is much different than just saying "Too many games are decided on Turn 1." "First player's first turn" means that too many games are being decided on who goes first. That's not a healthy place to be for any game.
I agree with you that fun-ness should not be a factor in the banned lists for any format. That said, I don't think it was a factor in any of the decisions they made with today's announcement.
Have you ever played a Chalice deck in Legacy? They're wildly inconsistent things. A turn 1 Chalice on the play, if resolved, is a win (most of the time). A turn 1 Chalice on the draw, if resolved, will often not amount to much of anything. A turn 1 chalice at any point beyond the first turn has very little hope of resolving or doing much of anything important if it does. The biggest problem with Chalice decks is that they can't play their own cantrips/filtering spells, and so they're at the mercy of the top of their deck 90% of the time. As much as I love MUD, it loses to itself just as much as it loses to the opponent's gameplan. It's one of the biggest reasons you don't see many Chalice decks.
If the popularity of Chalice was ever going to increase, it would've been during the Treasure Cruise - Dig Through Time era, when 1cc's were at their maximum efficiency to fuel the draw spells. As it stands now, we should see the format slow down and move closer to the Deathblade/Shardless BUG/UWR Stoneblade period we saw prior to Khans, which should bring along an uptick in 2-3cc win cons (SFM, Goyf, TNN, etc.), Wastelands, Abrupt Decays, Jace's, and Lilianas.
Chalice decks in Legacy just don't have the same oomph as in Vintage, and while your logic makes total sense on paper, it just doesn't play out that way, primarily due to the lack of Mishra's Workshops and miscellaneous artifacts laying around to abuse Tangle Wire. Without the additional tools (mainly better fast mana), I would expect Chalice to pretty much stay exactly where it is: MUD, 4-C Loam, and a few sideboards here and there.
I played 6 rounds of a 43 person Legacy IQ on Sunday (4-2, 9th place, meh). My wife also played, as did 4 other friends who traveled with us. Of the 6 of us, only 1 of us played a deck that can consistently kill on turn 3. Of the people in the room playing decks that could kill on turn 3, only 1 Infect deck and 1 Omnitell made it to the Top 8. The other 6 were fair decks, as was the majority of the room. Now, this is all anecdotal, but this is the same experience I've had at every Legacy event I've participated in during the last 3 years. It has largely been my competitive experience, and that of other Legacy players I know, that Legacy is not in fact a Turn 3 format, although many Turn 1-3 decks exist.
Having said that, I don't believe Survival would be too slow for the format these days, but it is certainly slow enough that speed is not the issue with why the deck remains banned. Like others, I believe the format now has the tools to manage Survival, and it would also add some needed dynamics to the format. I don't think it has been outclassed by any stretch. The card is busted. At the same time, I don't think it would be as omnipresent as in the past due to the overall higher power level of Legacy and the new tools we have to combat Survival strategies.
It would also be a breath of fresh air to have a creature-based archetype return to the format, one that doesn't necessarily involve blue creatures, Stoneforge Mystic, or Elves.
How many discard spells with 2+ converted casting cost that only hit one card have ever been played in any format? This card is on par with Addle and Distress, and while those saw a reasonable amount of play, it's not like they were great. Perhaps the exile will matter enough to make this a thing, but short of that, 2cc for discard 1 card has never been a very playable rate. If the format is slow enough, I suppose this will end up getting played though.
And it's shaping up to be pretty slow thus far.
No promos. Minimal prize support. The stores looked more like flea markets than actual card shops. At one point before the Saturday back-to-backs, the only place we could play was a Nascar memorabilia store. The owner's son loved Magic, so she bought some booster boxes to sell and would let us play in the back of her shop on Sundays. It smelled like a pet store because it used to be a pet store. The air conditioner never worked.
Good times.
Mox Opal is hardly comparable to the actual Moxen. The drawback is metalcraft, which is why you only see it in Affinity. A more apt comparison would be to Mox Diamond or Chrome Mox, neither of which is banned in Legacy. Diamond and Chrome are much more broadly playable, given that almost every deck already plays lands and/or colored spells, and yet the drawbacks are significant enough that only decks specifically designed to take advantage of it bother to play it (Lands, Aggro Loam, Storm, etc).
Comparing Mox Opal to the original Moxen is like comparing Nykthos Shrine to Gaea's Cradle. They're in the same family, but the power level is daylight and dark. The first copy is wonderful on the first 1-3 turns. After that, it's a garbage draw, at best a Lotus Petal, in a deck that runs low curve. And as Valanarch said, Affinity is nowhere near dominating the format or fitting any other applicable criteria.
It was also widely considered a mistake to keep it on the list. I'm not sure whether you're citing that as reference for banning Mox Opal or for leaving it alone.
In general, players' attitudes are greatly improved from what they were 20~ years ago when I first started playing.