We have updated our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Dismiss
 
Magic Market Index for August 18, 2017
 
Treasure Cruisin' with Azorius Titan
 
Commander 2017 Digest
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    I would also like to kindly remind the thread that we do NOT have accurate and representative data about what is actually going in within the format. The small-value paper data and skewed online data paint somewhat of a picture, but who knows how correct it actually is. We have had massively diverse paper Top 8 results in the past, which did nothing to deter additional bans for other reasons. Without the true representation of the format, it's difficult to make any reasonable predictions on the actions they will take moving forward. For all we know, ETron and GDS could be nearly 20% each, but simply get hated out in tournaments by clever metagaming deck choices.

    Based on our lack of information and Wizards' ban-first-ask-questions-later style of management, I still don't believe whatsoever that anything is safe in our format. This is even more threatening with the return of the Modern Pro Tour. SOMETHING will happen in January, it's just a matter of what. And it's really anybody's guess.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Those cards are examples of "battle cruiser Magic," which Wizards is fine with. My sweet Mythic beats yours. Last person to draw a Mythic wins!

    I believe that TheCeaselessHunger is referring more to LAND HATE cards, prison cards, and countermagic that is too strong. These are types of cards that Wizards has deemed unlikeable, in contrast to sweet Mythics that win the game when you draw them (are super swingy).

    I know, I just figured it was a jab at the fact that Wizards has a recent history of making terrible decisions in their production of new cards.

    In the sense that they will not print a good land hate card (or good hate in general), I agree. In the sense that Wizards is smart enough to not ruin formats with their stupid decisions, I do not agree.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 4

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    WotC isn't stupid enough to introduce cards that are going to push people away from the game.

    Reality Smasher
    Thought-Knot Seer
    Drowner of Hope
    Eldrazi Displacer
    Prized Amalgam
    Cathartic Reunion
    Felidar Guardian
    Emrakul, the Promised End
    Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger
    Aetherworks Marvel
    Fetchlands with fetchable duals after a tri-color block

    Yes, I think they are stupid enough to introduce cards that push people away from the game.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Teysa_Karlov »
    I'm curious for what people would suggest to the lands problem. A 2 mana colorless "destroy target land" as a sorcery would be a strictly better Sink Hole, while a 3 mana colorless "destroy target land" as a sorcery would likely be unplayable. 3 mana instant maybe? Would that be too strong (especially with Snapcaster)?

    First, I think you mean "generic" mana (like artifacts) and not colorless mana (like Warping Wail). Either way, it would just be another tool Eldrazi and Valakut can use to fight each other while still not being super effective against either. ETron can just power out threats anyway and Valakut decks can hold the lands in their hand (or tutor them out) when needed.

    Second, I don't think Snapcaster Mage should ever be used as an excuse to purposely make a spell worse. A spell needs to stand on its own merits. Plus, spells making their way into Modern are doing so through Standard, so Snapcaster should never be a consideration in design. It has never in the past ever been a problem to cast something, snap, and cast something again. If the game has gone on long enough and you have the 5RRU needed to Stone Rain, Snap, Stone Rain, then you have earned the right to make that play.

    I don't know what would be a good solution, other than some kind of T1 Blood Moon deck to keep them in check. But red has horrible tools for dealing with the format, RB and RW deal with board states, but lack any meaningful stack interaction or draw/filtering, GR has many better things it'd rather be doing, and UR is fairly terrible. The need for a third color in these kinds of decks makes Blood Moon hard to play, so they all fall back on expensive, ineffective, or tempo loss stuff like Ghost Quarter, Fulminator Mage, Molten Rain, Crumble to Dust, or Spreading Seas.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from jwf239 »
    Curious what others feel the chances of unbans coming this time around are? Bbe and sfm being the obvious candidates for over a year at this point, I think the chances of them actually unbanning them are very slim.

    I have made my opinions known before, but I think there are at least 3-4 safe cards to unban, but I don't think anything will be done until the announcement immediately before the PT. Unless there is something egregious that needs to be banned (like Edlrazi was), I firmly believe "no changes" until January, at which point Wizards will toss us a bone with a Shake Up Unban right before the PT.

    Bonus prediction: whatever is unbanned definitely won't break the format.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Opponent playing with Foreign cards
    It's not against the rules but it is definitely annoying. As the rules currently stand, you can at any time call a judge to get the oracle text of any card at any time. It slows down the match and could cause a long game to go to turns, but it's probably the only solution other than memorizing card art or trusting the opponent.

    I personally prefer not to use foreign cards (and other than super obvious staples like Lightning Bolt, stay away from textless cards like Cryptic Command). There's nothing more frustrating for both sides than to have a misunderstanding of what a card actually does and have to call a judge multiple times to rectify a simple text-reading problem.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from spike4972 »
    Then call those decks out by name or call them 'lands' decks or 'land matters' decks. But big mana is a bad name that is not descriptive. Especially when all three of those decks are doing such radically different things.

    It's easy to lump them together because they all want to either have a lot of lands or produce a lot of mana. Valakut needs 6+ lands to do anything and Tron/ETron has lands that tap for 2-3 mana. Both create mana and use lands in a way that is very difficult to effectively interact with. Add to that the fact they are casting huge and powerful spells consistently 2-3 turns ahead of curve, and you have a recipe for why people lump them together.

    We group semi-unlike things together all the time. Words like "midrange" and "control" are not really descriptive either, but we use them to put together somewhat similar strategies that rely on individual card value or attempted disruption. If you actually look at some of the lists labeled "control" for example, you see what is essentially a midrange burn deck running Geists and Quellers that wants to tap out on turn 3 for a threat. Names aren't perfect, but they exist because someone somewhere decided to group all of X or Y type of decks together for the sake of making conversation easier.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Honestly, the past year of Modern has caused more stress and headaches than it's worth, to me. It's becoming less and less fun as more and more narrow "gotcha" decks keep topping the charts and make us play the sideboard roulette game (or force goldfish racing). It's probably why I spent most of the past year moving towards Commander, other board games/card games, and PC sim racing. More fun, more reward, less needless feelbads. I keep an eye on Modern because I want it to be fun again, but it's just not fun to me as the format is now. With a few rare exceptions, whether I win or lose, the majority of games and matches themselves have been so deeply unsatisfying to actually play.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Spsiegel1987 »
    Quote from cfusionpm »
    Quote from Spsiegel1987 »
    Meanwhile, Cfusion is still unhappy unless it's 2015. If you don't like the format now you never will, the meta is wide open; it doesn't matter if Jeskai did poorly on camera. I'm not trolling you, I just really think maybe modern isn't for you if only one deck (I guess two, counting delver before the probe ban) was keeping you in the format.

    I just dislike that all the top decks of the format are based around attacking on a narrow or unconventional axis, forcing opponents to either race them or hope to draw extremely specific, narrow hate cards (or hope to have an excellent matchup). The nature of games and matches is just so much more toxic and polarizing than what I would like. In the meantime, I'm playing a UR Faerie/Delver build (modified from this list). It's not good, but at least it's fun and I don't pull my hair out in games like the miserable on-camera match of GDS vs Martyr of Sands.dec. School is starting soon though, and I will probably stop playing in paper entirely until I get settled into my new classroom. So I guess it's a win-win?


    Cfusion, dude, Sheridan is right on the mark, cfusion, you just want a deck that doesn't have too many weaknesses. GBX has some atrocious matchups, with a ton of barely favorable matchups in the 5 to 10 percent favorable zones, along with a bunch of Grindy, hard earned wins. You honestly need to suck it up, don't play a fair deck if you're worried about not having free wins but some really bad blowout matches.

    If you're worried about chalice and caverns shutting down your deck, make a meta call and don't play your control deck

    That's not what I'm saying at all and I already replied to this multiple times, including specifically to the post you quoted. Regardless, I'm not even playing in paper anymore, as I also mentioned, so what difference does it make what I think of the format?
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from ktkenshinx »
    Quote from cfusionpm »
    Quote from Spsiegel1987 »
    Meanwhile, Cfusion is still unhappy unless it's 2015. If you don't like the format now you never will, the meta is wide open; it doesn't matter if Jeskai did poorly on camera. I'm not trolling you, I just really think maybe modern isn't for you if only one deck (I guess two, counting delver before the probe ban) was keeping you in the format.

    I just dislike that all the top decks of the format are based around attacking on a narrow or unconventional axis, forcing opponents to either race them or hope to draw extremely specific, narrow hate cards (or hope to have an excellent matchup). The nature of games and matches is just so much more toxic and polarizing than what I would like. In the meantime, I'm playing a UR Faerie/Delver build (modified from this list). It's not good, but at least it's fun and I don't pull my hair out in games like the miserable on-camera match of GDS vs Martyr of Sands.dec. School is starting soon though, and I will probably stop playing in paper entirely until I get settled into my new classroom. So I guess it's a win-win?

    Honestly, this just reads like someone who wants to abolish all their bad matchups. Jeskai Control has an excellent record in the recent big events. That deck seems to fit all your metrics, except it admittedly has some bad matchups (which I know you don't want). GDS is another option that seems to check all the interactive and skill-testing boxes.

    The funny thing is that I can't think of ANY Modern deck from any period of time that meets all your criteria. It's like some players got even more restrictive about their Modern preferences the more they identified perceived format issues.

    Having bad matchups is not a problem whatsoever. I've repeated myself on this a number of times. The problem comes when the bad matchups are very, very bad, and the good matchups are barely in your favor. Bad matchups should be offset with great matchups, not coin flips. There's a reason every single top deck is where it is, and it's the ability to offset bad matchups with free wins.

    The other topic entirely is the "battle of sideboards" which originally was cited for why GGT was banned. Because our top decks most attack from odd and unique angles (and dodge or are irrelevant to many traditional forms of interaction), many games play out based on who has a faster start and who draws their hate card. Not exactly engaging or exciting.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Spsiegel1987 »
    Meanwhile, Cfusion is still unhappy unless it's 2015. If you don't like the format now you never will, the meta is wide open; it doesn't matter if Jeskai did poorly on camera. I'm not trolling you, I just really think maybe modern isn't for you if only one deck (I guess two, counting delver before the probe ban) was keeping you in the format.

    I just dislike that all the top decks of the format are based around attacking on a narrow or unconventional axis, forcing opponents to either race them or hope to draw extremely specific, narrow hate cards (or hope to have an excellent matchup). The nature of games and matches is just so much more toxic and polarizing than what I would like. In the meantime, I'm playing a UR Faerie/Delver build (modified from this list). It's not good, but at least it's fun and I don't pull my hair out in games like the miserable on-camera match of GDS vs Martyr of Sands.dec. School is starting soon though, and I will probably stop playing in paper entirely until I get settled into my new classroom. So I guess it's a win-win?
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    Quote from cfusionpm »
    I was originally replying to another thread, but I think the crux of the point belongs more here:
    Quote from purklefluff »
    Modern feels like it's in a great place right now but it's definitely different from before. Grixis DS and eldrazi have sculpted a new modern from the old jund/twin sculpted meta. It's slower, different cards are good, some previously good cards have become worse.

    I definitely agree that Modern is vastly different, but I don't think it's for the better. If we look at what used to be the top decks (Jund, *redacted*, Tron, Burn, Affinity, Infect, CoCo, etc.), it seems that pretty much all of them could be attacked with fairly traditional means. Basic, main deck interaction like discard, counters, and removal were able to handle just about every T1 deck (and even old Gx Tron was much more susceptible to land hate than new E-Tron). It wasn't until we got into the more fringe T2 and T3 strategies that we had these extremely narrow "battle of sideboards" style of decks; things like Dredge, Storm, Valakut, etc. These decks require very specific and precise means of attack, and usually cause matches to devolve into "two ships passing in the night" race while if players don't aggressively dig to their hate cards. Those decks are now the face of the format with essentially the entirety of old T1 decks now gone. Without any meaningful control presence in the format (combo/control or otherwise), the clear and best option since the great shift of 2016 has been to attack through a narrow and specific axis and simply hope your opponent can't deal with it. That's what our best decks currently represent and why I don't feel this actually makes Modern "better."


    Jeskai control was the third most popular archetype over the weekend in top 32s! And Death's shadow decks running interaction were second most popular! So this statement is disproven on the same page with data.

    A couple placements over one weekend doesn't change the trends of nearly two years. We saw Uxx "control" decks get torn to pieces on camera several times and just showcases the increased polarity of matchups and coin-flip nature of dealing with the top decks. Rather than succeed on the backs of great answers on a traditional axis, it's a matter of dodging matchups and drawing hate cards. Let's see if this weekend is a fluke or the beginning of a new trend. Based on the top decks and the variety of narrow axes they attack from, I think it's going to be difficult to repeat, but I hope I'm wrong.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    I was originally replying to another thread, but I think the crux of the point belongs more here:
    Quote from purklefluff »
    Modern feels like it's in a great place right now but it's definitely different from before. Grixis DS and eldrazi have sculpted a new modern from the old jund/twin sculpted meta. It's slower, different cards are good, some previously good cards have become worse.

    I definitely agree that Modern is vastly different, but I don't think it's for the better. If we look at what used to be the top decks (Jund, *redacted*, Tron, Burn, Affinity, Infect, CoCo, etc.), it seems that pretty much all of them could be attacked with fairly traditional means. Basic, main deck interaction like discard, counters, and removal were able to handle just about every T1 deck (and even old Gx Tron was much more susceptible to land hate than new E-Tron). It wasn't until we got into the more fringe T2 and T3 strategies that we had these extremely narrow "battle of sideboards" style of decks; things like Dredge, Storm, Valakut, etc. These decks require very specific and precise means of attack, and usually cause matches to devolve into "two ships passing in the night" race while if players don't aggressively dig to their hate cards. Those decks are now the face of the format with essentially the entirety of old T1 decks now gone. Without any meaningful control presence in the format (combo/control or otherwise), the clear and best option since the great shift of 2016 has been to attack through a narrow and specific axis and simply hope your opponent can't deal with it. That's what our best decks currently represent and why I don't feel this actually makes Modern "better."
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from KTROJAN »
    Idk format seems fairly wide open so when else would you want an unban?

    Unbans have historically ONLY coincided with massive and predictable bans. Wizards has showed no deviation from this pattern other than their very first unban: Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle, which was unbanned just before a Modern PT, likely to "shake up" the meta.


    I predict they will do nothing until the PT, at which point they will follow suit with their unspoken policy of "PT Shake Ups" and unban something (and probably ban something too).

    They have shown literally nothing that would lead anyone to believe they will unban anything under any other circumstances.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the August 28, 2017 announcement?
    Quote from thnkr »
    The same can be said about every bit of "he is not only not broken, but not even very good", being pure speculation :p I could maybe see BBE being unbanned, and maybe Stoneforge as well.

    The kind of role Jace plays already exists in Nahiri, the Harbinger. Played in a blue-based deck, it protects itself, draws cards, and wins with the ultimate. That deck is not very good at all (and really, never was), because tapping out for a 4-cmc walker that still takes multiple additional turns to win is just not where you want to be in Modern. I played this deck for a few months when it first was a thing and was nothing but disappointed with it. You need a walker that either immediately stabilizes and snowballs out of control (like Elspeth), or has massive impact for a relatively low cost (like Liliana). Perhaps a UB shell with Lili + Jace could be a thing, perhaps it's played as a 1 or 2-of in existing Uxx decks, but honestly, I would love to see that introduce new archetype(s) or bolster existing weak ones.
    Posted in: Modern
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.