All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
Dismiss
 
The Magic Market Index for Oct 13, 2017
 
The World of Kamigawa
 
Treasure Cruisin' - Manaless Dredge
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from spawnofhastur »
    RG Scapeshift as a deck has only really existed for two years, mainly because while Twin was around, it was incredibly terrible; once Twin disappeared, we could drop the blue from RUG Scapeshift and focus on being more all-in.

    This statement is exactly why I spent nearly two years complaining about the Twin ban. It was likely the single largest contributing factor to the exponential increase of all-in, linear strategies. So much so that even after multiple other bans (Probe, GGT), it's STILL a problem because no reactive/control/tempo deck can deal with so many different levels of linear degeneracy as efficiently as Twin (and do so without ever holding an oppressive share of the meta).

    We all assume nothing will change until after the PT. Hopefully then they will realize how much they have F'd Modern and give us Twin back at that point. Hopefully along with other cards that have no business being banned like BBE and SFM.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from 13055 »
    Modern is just less marketable for WotC. It stands to reason that the bigger cash cow (Standard) being in a better place than one driven mostly by the secondary market is desirable for WotC. Sure, saying they're sabotaging Modern is a little extreme, but I wouldn't put it past a business to take their time fixing something if it means people start to gravitate towards the sleeker, more tuned product that they make more money off of. I don't think reintroducing Modern to the PT is a conspiracy to actively shrink Modern numbers, I just think if the Modern PT ends up being solved and linear/non-interactive, and if more people start Standard for a breath of fresh air, WotC wouldn't shed many tears.

    Exactly. "Sabotage" is probably too strong of a word, but the thin lines between laziness, incompetence, and negligence become more and more blurred when there's almost no downside to inaction or letting things fail before coming in like a hero and "fixing" it after the fact. It's a risk/reward philosophy, and doing nothing right now is very low risk.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the October 17, 2017 announcement?
    61.4% of us wanted something banned and 90.4% of us wanted something unbanned.

    "No Changes."

    I guess we really know how to call it!
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from gkourou »

    PS: People, like cfusion pm, saying that they will ban/unban something right before the PT probably proven hugely wrong today. Instead, it seems like Wizards will follow a "unban a card after the Pro Tour and ban something only if it's Eldrazi winter stuff" policy from now on. This is totally correct in my eyes.

    I'll believe it when that B&R comes and goes with "no changes." It'd be easier to believe if they didn't make so many other statements, changes, and claims that were either extremely misleading or later walked back on.

    But if they actually do hold to this, I feel it's almost like they would rather let another Modern PT be a miserable dumpster fire so they can justify removing it (again). Or maybe use it as a means to swoop in and be the "hero" by giving us back cards that have no business being banned as an apology for an awful PT. I mean, that's what they did in 2016 (even thought it had no meaningful impact...). They get to sit back on a "healthy" meta, do nothing, and then be the hero. Makes sense.

    As far as them claiming Modern is "healthy," it looks like their definition of "healthy" is based solely on how many decks people are playing and nothing at all on the quality of gameplay or nuances and interplay of top decks. Doesn't matter that all the top decks are miserable, toxic, and narrow to play against, where most games result in wildly swingy, variance-driven outcomes. As long as there are a lot OF decks, it doesn't matter what they ARE. Very disappointed to have this fear confirmed.

    I'm definitely not selling out of Modern, but at least if Modern is going to continue to be so toxic and miserable, I don't have to worry about making time to fit in FNMs until after January. More of the same is a pretty terrible place to be, IMO.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Spsiegel1987 »
    MTGGOLDfish isn't the greatest place for info anymore, but it's meta distribution of decks and archetypes is fantastically diverse and spread out, no deck is encroaching dangerous numbers.

    It is artificially diverse based on the data that is available. Lists represented there are pulled from the daily 5-0 lists, which are purposely skewed by Wizards to choose lists without overlap. We have no idea what the real numbers of any deck are, and it's sad that Wizards likely loves this.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from mnesci »

    I think Wizards was willing to target a high splash damage card to hit the deck hard. I don't think that wanting to hit the deck hard drove them to cause splash damage.

    On the splash damage of Probe being banned, I'd argue that they caused that splash damage in order to not hit decks hard. Banning Probe left DS Zoo, Infect, and Kiln Fiend combo far more playable than more targeted bans would have. They could have banned Shadow, Kiln Fiend, and Blighted Agent/Glistener Elf. Those decks would have been murdered, and other Probe decks would be intact.

    However, enough correlations could lead to causation. Does anyone know how many heavy-hitting bans caused collateral damage?

    I don't know if it's a pattern, but all patterns have basically been thrown out the window the past two years in favor of vague and subjective justifications. Specifically for Probe, this assumes that Wizards' infinite wisdom legitimately did not think Fatal Push would be effective in curbing the decks, and all those decks STILL NEEDED their throats ripped out (in addition to lots of splash damage).

    It just seems strange for them to even bother mentioning "Hey... we COULD have minimized splash damage by banning X, but we hate this deck, so we banned Y, which has big splash damage anyway." It says a lot about their thinking...
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    ETron promotes the kind of gameplay best exhibited by stuff like Storm, Titanshift, and Affinity. It rewards people for playing miserable decks. If someone thinks ETron/Storm/Titanshift/Affinity/GDS + 25 lower tier decks is better, healthier, and more fun meta than Jund/Twin/Gx Tron/Affinity/Infect + 25 lower tier decks, then we just have objectively different opinions on what "healthy" and "fun" means.

    If Temple, Chalice, or something out of Eldrazi isn't banned, then something needs to be unbanned to help fight it and quell the swash of miserable decks it is enabling in the format.

    In my ideal world, that would be Probe, SFM, BBE, and Twin. There's no way they'll reverse Probe this quick (or probably ever, given their stance on cantrips), but the other 3 would all be totally fine in today's format. Healthy inclusions that either play or promote interaction on normal and traditional axes.

    As a side note, I don't know if anyone caught this, but Wizards is not only aware of splash damage, but actively seems to target high-splash-damage cards if they really want to hit a deck hard. This is what they said about Thorn of Amethyst in the last Vintage restriction:

    "Thorn of Amethyst is the more powerful disruptive tool in the Shops deck, as it allows the deck to continue applying creature-based threats unimpeded. The case for restricting Sphere of Resistance instead is to avoid splash damage on other archetypes—other non-Shops creature decks also use Thorn of Amethyst. However, given the strength of Shops in the current metagame and a restriction weakening the other top deck, we decided to make the more impactful change."

    Lines up perfectly with their "Splash Damage" Probe ban. Maybe predicts a Chalice ban? Who knows. They are ALL OVER THE PLACE with their reasonings.....

    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    For a field with all that Eldrazi Tron there sure are a ton of them in the top 8 am i right guys? I guess it is unbeatable after all. End sarcasm

    I don't think anyone at this point is saying any one deck is oppressive or too good (even when referring to Eldrazi). What I believe people are saying is that the toxic makeup of the top decks and the type of gameplay promoted BY decks like Eldrazi (and Storm and Titanshift and Affinity, etc) create wildly swingy games and matchups that rely more on variance and draws than it does skill.

    What is our Top 8? Storm, Storm, Affinity, Affinity, Ponza, Merfolk, GDS, StripMine Company.

    Linear combo, linear combo, linear aggro, linear aggro, linear land destruction, linear aggro, value creatures with disruption, value creatures with prison elements.

    Yes, looking strictly at deck titles, this Top 8 is "diverse." Is it really diverse on archetypes? Is it really "healthy" or "good" though? Are these the kinds of decks we want at the top?
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from h0lydiva »
    That's mostly a few SCG grinders liking Jeskai for emotional reasons more than anything. Even Harlan Firer was saying the other day he doesn't win much with it but he has fun.

    They're probably like me and playing it because no other deck looks appealing or fun. Some people just have a strong attachment to SnapBolt, whether it's a good deck or not. The Geist/Queller builds are quirky and fun, but are about as "good" as old Delver decks (mid/high Tier 2 decks at best, usually has to fight uphill battles for wins, very few (if any) slam dunk matchups). Stubborn players stick to their stubborn ways a lot of the time; especially on the SCG Tour.

    Quote from gkourou »
    Diversity wise, this top 8 is going to be great.

    Outside of Eldrazi Winter, diversity of Top 8s in just about every paper event in Modern's history have been robust and varied.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Spsiegel1987 »

    Eldrazi Temple ban kills three decks entirely from existence from modern, and makes every eldrazi creature unplayable in the format

    Boo hoo? I'm sorry, but having been on the receiving end of this multiple times now, it's hard to have sympathy anymore. Nothing is safe in this format; and even less so now that the PT is back. WOTC does not care about splash damage and will ban whatever they want for whatever reason they want.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from mnesci »
    when I saw Twin was banned, I was terrified. If they banned that, they could ban anything. I seriously considered the possibility that they would ban Delver. DELVER.

    They effectively did with the banning of Probe. And the choice to ban Probe was extremely strange, subjective, and showed a large bias against cantrips rather than an objective way to hit the targeted decks without killing them entirely or hitting multiple innocent splash damage decks.

    They can ban anything they want at any time for any reason. This has already been the case in Modern for a while, but the recent bannings/restrictions in other formats (with vague or subjective reasoning) does nothing to increase player confidence in Wizards' ability to manage formats.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the October 17, 2017 announcement?
    Every time someone says anything about a Bloom ban, I just link to this video interview of Bobby Fortanely: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBPVuiI2jgE

    Deck was all kinds of broken; winning on multiple weird and non-traditional axes that are difficult to interact with, too quickly, and through several layers of hate. There are very few redeeming features and had multiple really gross showings on camera at multiple large paper events at the end of the year. It's ban came as a surprise to nobody.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from ed06288 »
    I miss the 2015 meta.

    The two largest dominos that fell to move us away from the 2015-style meta and produce the kinds of things we are seeing today are: the printing of broken, low-cost Eldrazi and the banning of Splinter Twin.

    Eldrazi were so unbelievably pushed and broken it created the most unhealthy and warped metagame in the history of Modern. Even after a ban, they remain the best and strongest creature deck in the format. They have almost single-handedly pushed out all other midrange strategies and invalidated many other strategies. They get a combination of good colorless hate cards, pain-free, accelerated mana sources, and more efficient/powerful/value creatures than any other "midrange" deck. These creatures have been a cancer on the format for a long time, and serve as a large contributing factor to the current state by promoting decks like Titanshift and Storm.

    Ignoring the "hiccup" of Eldrazi Winter, removing Twin paved the way for linear nightmares to take over the format. With the complete removal of any meaningful control/reactive deck from the format (combined with several new printings, Insolent Neonate, Prized Amalgam, Cathartic Reunion), fast aggro decks and Dredge became dominant forces. Dredge received a ban (probably didn't NEED to be GGT, as GGT itself wasn't a problem until Neonate/Amalgam/Reunion came along...), but it seemed to work out fine. Fast aggro decks were targeted with a ban of Gitaxian Probe, which was probably totally unecessary. Discussed this a million times before, but they could have selected something with less splash damage to other fair/interactive decks OR just waited to see how Fatal Push helped deal with it. Between Push and the ban, these decks were completely nuked from existence, and the removal of these decks allowed powerful goldfish/minimally-interactive decks to be extremely good again (Storm/Titanshift/ETron), and that's where we sit today.

    Remove best reactive deck -> linear aggro nightmare.
    Remove linear aggro -> powerful, minimal interaction decks reign supreme.

    How do you fix it? Bring a good reactive/control deck back to Tier 1. If they aren't going to print better answers or good, reliable, and timely win conditions, then we all know what I would recommend come off the list. Slow, vanilla beaters and Manlands aren't going to get the job done when your opponents are casting Eldrazi, or killing you with Valakuts, or killing you with Storm triggers, or killing you with 1 mana 10/10s, etc.

    As a side note, BBE and SFM also have no business being on the list and specifically both power up fair/interactive decks. They are also not even remotely as powerful as the kinds of degenerate garbage possible today, so it's kind of laughable that they remain banned.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from headminerve »
    Just play the best decks, and accept some MUs are still terrible. It's always been part of Modern Magic. No sacrifice has been done. Fun and skill are still there, you just can't experience it right now, and it's a shame.

    No sacrifice has been done? The discussion over the last several pages by several members is exactly about the quality of these "best decks." Instead of having a collections of highly interactive decks or decks easy to interact with using multiple types of main deck answers or decks open to a glaring weakness (such as Jund/Twin/Affinity/Burn/Infect/Tron), we have instead enormously toxic and narrow decks that heighten and exaggerate the lopsided nature of variance and produce more non-games and feelsbad moments (Eldrazi/Storm/Titanshift/GDS). "Fun ans skill" are not anywhere near where they used to be, especially at the top of the format. And that's exactly what a lot of us have been complaining about.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from h0lydiva »
    Well I don't think we've said Modern is dying. But a good part of the community seems to believe it's not very fun to play, in general.

    And some attendance numbers might not be down because lower-skilled players playing janky brews are doing well because so much of Modern is so swingy in terms of matchup-dependence and variance-dependence. Get a good matchup with good draws and you will beat a better player nearly every time (regardless of what you're playing). Combine this exaggerated element with the fact that nearly every top deck is toxic and miserable to play against and you have certain types of players totally dissatisfied with the format and others happy for the chaos and randomness. I personally have zero motivation to play anything in Modern until something changes.
    Posted in: Modern
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.