I was trying to mirror my paper deck. I don't actually own a 2nd Thragtusk in paper so I just replaced it with the Wurmcoil. It can sometimes be relevant, but overall I think Thragtusk is better as pointed out by Weakatchu. My biggest gripe is the no ETB effect.
It could happen, right? And it would suck. So this a scenario in which things would go badly because we would be creating a lot of chaos to achieve essentially nothing. I doubt it would happen though because decks like Jund and Jeskai can do a number on Cheeri0s, which is a bad deck for starters. And if we wanted to really nuke Eldrazi Tron we would be more or less forced to make choices that would either kill Bant Eldrazi or Tron with it.
But yes, there's always a chance that we end up with a tier 1 that also sucks badly.
So what do you think it would take to topple the current tier 1 stagnation without replacing it with the exact same thing? Obviously new printings help, but do you see any specific unbans that could achieve the same goal?
Like, imagine the Tier 1 of Modern in some alternate universe was: Jund, Bant Eldrazi, RG Tron, Cheeri0s and Burn. Does that sound like a nice, balanced, fun, cool, interesting tier 1? Does it sound like the matchups between those decks are overall fun and interesting? Because, to me, it sounds like that Tier 1 freaking sucks and it's a disaster. And that tier 1 is about equivalent to the one we have right now.
It's funny you mention that. I was just thinking about the new tier 1 to arise from your hypothetical bannings and this is the exact meta that I think would replace it.
So, this is all about 3 people in here who don't like Modern at all. Couldn't care less though.
Modern is more diverse than ever. There is strategic diversity and there is also diversity within every archetype, a thing that never existed in Modern(as I describe earlier you can choose one of many ramp decks, one of many control decks, you can choose one of many midrange, aggro, combo, tempo, etc)
I remember ktkenshinx making an excellent comment about Modern firing on 6 out of 7 cylinders; leaving Control archetype outside. I think we can somewhat say Modern is firing an all cylinders now. And this is courtesy of Death's Shadow mainly.
You can't complain about people posting the same things over and over and then do that exact same thing. We get it, you think modern is diverse, move on man. The discussion is flowing.
Very interesting. It's the first time I see a list with Sleigh of hand but it is an interesting alternative to Serum Visions and the shuffling problem. Are you confident this is the best build of RUG for the MTGO metagame? If not, what would you consider changing?
sleight of hand is definitely the best 1-mana option for RUG at this stage.
seems to be working brilliantly so far. most losses i've got have come from sequencing errors rather than the deck not being up to scratch. In particular, those two big uncounterable creatures really blindside control decks (and surrak munches down on gurmag anglers, thought-knot seers and tasigurs just fine).
the second anger was originally an engineered explosives, but recently i've found myself wanting to have the eary boardwipe more and more, and explosives won't clear a whole board. Death & Taxes os something I keep seeing more often of late, and anger is just amazing in this matchup.
counterflux is amazing. 100% permanent sideboard addition
primal command is an experiment, but yesterday I stuck a problematic planeswalker on my opponent's library, fetched a titan and when they shrugged and played it again (there was literally nothing else they could do) I had my window of opportunity to win. against burn, primal command gains you 7 and fetches a baloth, which is game over from a single spell. sometimes if you need to scapeshift twice, command can shuffle your lands back into your library.
overall i feel like i've reached a very precise tweaked list through many slight variations and it's what i'll continue to play going forward. lots of play to it. cryptic command continues to be the best spell to cast on turn 3 haha it's amazing.
You have some very intriguing sideboard options. I have been having a lot more success going more creature heavy after sideboarding. I'm going to test out some of your choices.
Very interesting. It's the first time I see a list with Sleigh of hand but it is an interesting alternative to Serum Visions and the shuffling problem. Are you confident this is the best build of RUG for the MTGO metagame? If not, what would you consider changing?
I can't say if it's the best build because I'm constantly tweaking and changing things. I've had plenty of 4-1's with different versions. I like where is is now, but I'm still tweaking. 6 win-cons feels too little, but I'm not sure where to make cuts. I hated drawing multiple titans in the early turns and the deck doesn't ramp enough like the RG version to justify it. The decks main weakness is fast and aggressive decks. As far as Sleight of Hand vs Serum Visions, Sleight is vastly superior IMO. It digs a a card deeper the turn I play it, and the amount of shuffling the deck does doesn't really work with Visions.
Sideboard is a little sketchy, but Kitchen Finks put in a lot of work. My MU's were Slivers, Jund, Grixis Delver, Burn, and Eldrazi Taxes. Not the strongest lineup, but I'll take it.
I've found quite a few times recently that I actually regretted having cinder glade and wanted a basic mountain. Comes from needing to fetch a basic & having run out, or needing specifically a basic mountain in the deck & having drawn it.
Still, it's probably variance & I'll keep playing with glade to see how it pans out.
Otherwise it's been good. Went undefeated at three fnms so far (admittedly the list was a little different before amonkhet). Gonna try it again tomorrow.
I run a similar list, and I came to the same conclusion and switched the Cinder Glade for a basic Mountain. I ran into far to many situations where fetching basics or drawing them made SfT and STE useless later in the game. I have not been hurt buy the mountain, except for one game where my opening lands were double mountain and I had to mulligan.
I am strictly in the boat that more bans at this time will only do bad for the format for several reasons. The biggest thing is the rampant ban mania within the format. Every time a deck does well on camera, the discussion isn't "wow that deck is cool" or "i wonder if card x would be good in that deck" it's straight to "what should get banned from that deck" wotc has gotten looser and looser with what they consider bannable, only worsening this. This creates a very Doom and gloom feeling about the format, which leads to players leaving the format, new players being skeptical about joining the format, and makes current players not want to buy into the decks they want to play.
In addition, each ban lowers the overall power level of the format. This could be a positive thing if the format was at too high of a power level, but when the format is at a good level this just makes the format more prone to being broken by random new cards. Eldrazi destroyed the post twin format, but probably would have just been a good deck at pro tour Philadelphia. This isn't me saying we should go back to that version of modern, just illustrating my point.
Finally talking about ancient Stirrings specifically, banning a card just because it is a Good card or because "blue can't have it" are terrible reasons to ban cards. Cards should be banned for enabling too many t3 wins, being so omnipresent in the format that decklists practically start at 56 cards, or they are a part of a meta share violator that is taking up far too many top 8/16 slots over a reasonable period of time. Cards are only as good as the format around them, while we can theorize for weeks about how "broken" ancient Stirrings is, if Stirrings decks are not taking up 20%+ of top 8 slots then the card quite clearly is not actually broken, you just do not like it. If your justification is something as terrible as "buy i dont get to cast Preordain so ban Stirrings damnit!" well clearly the solution to that problem is unban Preordain, and if tomorrow they say "we will never unban Preordain no matter what" the solution continues to not be ban stirrings.
The solution is UNBANS and NEW PRINTS. Yes, wotc has been very slow and failed to deliver on both of these fronts continuously, but they cannot ignore their playerbase forever. The community likes to bash wotc a lot, but they ARE indeed a business. If their customers continue to ask and prod at them, criticize them for bad bans and lack of unbans, while giving them praise for good bans and unbans, they will get off their asses and fix things. Yes, it may take some time, but modern is not in a "we need to fix this *****hole right now" situation, the format is very diverse both in individual decks and playstyles. Yes, blue control and white in general are weak, but both of those things have tier 2 decks that you can play and be reasonably successful with in the meantime. If you only have fun when you are winning, why are you not just playing the best decks? If you are expecting exactly your favorite strategy to always be the best, you have unreasonable expectations for literally every format. That is like me going to the legacy forums and whining about how weak aggro is there, it just isnt top tier in that format. If i want to play aggro and play legacy specifically, i am not going to expect to have a 75% wr top tier deck, but i would expect to play a deck i like in a format i enjoy. If i want to play legacy and win a bunch, i would just play miracles and get over it
More people need to have attitudes like this on this forum. The ban mania that has taken over is too much, and I feel, very counterproductive. It promotes an unhealthy discussion on the problems and solutions modern needs, as well as fosters negative attitudes toward the format.
I don't understand why that's a problem. It gives me the ability to play my deck even if my opponents hate combo. I only use combos where at most one of the cards is dead. Kiki combo still let's me copy stuff for value. RIP is still a good card even if you don't use helm. I build my decks to win without the combo and the combo is the backup in case I need a quick out against a cutthroat player or a way to just end the game if it drags. I mean, I'm probably still going to beat random noobs deck anyway, I'm just doing so in a way that lets them play it.
Magic is supposed to be a contest of skill. Not making an optimal play (and comboing), when you know it's the optimal play, is tantamount to losing on purpose. It's not a contest of skill anymore. It's you making a decision of whether or not you feel like winning. If I were one of your opponents, I'd either tell you to play your deck to its full potential, or don't play it. Don't play some cat-and-mouse BS where you're just toying with them.
If you want to be able to play against people with lower-powered decks, without making it unpleasant for them, just build a lower-powered, or at least non-combo, deck. That way you can actually try to win, and whoever wins it'll be an actual contest, not just you condescendingly deciding to give them a chance.
Who knows, maybe it'd actually be more fun.
I feel this way as well. Intentionally misplaying is disrespectful to your opponents.
The fact that he moved his graveyard could have also just slipped his mind when talking to the judge. Now, do I think he intentionally withheld that info? Yes I do. But that is really the crux of my argument. That it is only my opinion. There is no way for me to be able to actually prove that.
There is a great deal of motive for him to withhold that information from the judge, and all the signs seem to point that way, but there is no hard evidence to say that is exactly what transpired. We can certainly prove the physical actions that took place, but we cannot prove why they were preformed. I know this may seem like a strange thing to be hung up on, but I feel that we cannot condemn a man unless we know for certain that he played/presented play dishonestly. And the only real proof would be an admittance of guilt by Kent. We can't really tell why he didn't mention that to the judge, only Kent knows that, and for that reason we cannot label the lie as intentional or not.
Since this event transpired, plenty of stories have come about Mr. Ketter and his shady past play. All purely anecdotal, but they paint a picture of his play style. Is this something that is limited to a few players or is it more widespread? To bring in the PED in sports example brought up earlier in the discussion, are these tactics used by some players desperate to keep up since the competition is so tight at the higher levels and every little edge matters? I really can't say, since my magic is pretty much on the FNM level, but we can take some lessons from this. If you are ever in a situation where you are invested in a game/match/tournament, it behooves you to stay on top of both your, and your opponents game. There is nothing wrong with trying to keep people honest.
You derogatorily refer to people as a 'mob' instead of listening to their arguments. Bravo.
If you're so interested in 'moving on', then why don't you do so?
Hello? What have I been trying to do in my last two posts? I have not made a comment on the current discussion in hopes that it will end. I will say my piece one last time then I'll stop even trying to get other people to stop as well.
I am of the position that the play discussed earlier was shady/scummy/whatever you want to call it, but it was within the legal rules of the game, and any actual evidence needed to prove cheating is impossible to obtain. We can only speculate at best that the lie by omission was intentional. I have read all the arguments and taken it all into consideration. The problem is that any presentation of new evidence to repudiate the claims that cheating was undeniably proved is met with the exact same argument, which seems to ignore any of the new arguments set forth by the opposite party. The conversation has not budged. I tried to move off of the topic. I obviously failed.
The mob metaphor wasn't meant to be derogatory. I thought it perfectly highlighted the pro-cheating crowd's anger toward the situation and their refusal to let it go despite evidence that the cheating "technically" didn't happen. If you did the same as I, and listened and considered the views of the opposition, and still feel that my views are wrong, you are certainly entitled to that. But surely you must know that no one is getting anywhere in regards to the topic at hand. I will now attempt to move on for a third time. Hopefully this will be good enough for you to believe me.
Lying by omission
Also known as a continuing misrepresentation, a lie by omission occurs when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. Lying by omission includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions. For example, when the seller of a car declares it has been serviced regularly but does not tell that a fault was reported at the last service, the seller lies by omission. It can be compared to dissimulation. An omission is when a person tells most of the truth, but leaves out a few key facts that therefore completely change the story.
once again... this is a wikipedia definition. Not a IPG competitive REL definition.
Additionally a key component of that definition is
when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception
You have to actually prove that Kent purposefully left out him picking up his graveyard to foster misconception.
I don't really think you can prove that from this one scenario. But you are welcome to that opinion.
Lying to a judge is against the rules. Lying through omission is a form of lying (as described above). It seems you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. What he did was wrong and against the rules. He has already lost his job over this and ruined his public image. Arguing semantics and technicalities really does nothing to defend what he did. If the judge had all information available (or was able to review tapes), the call would have been quick and easy. Kent's omission that he moved his GY was both malicious and intentional. His lack of disclosing the information to the judge (which was highly relevant to the ruling) is considered lying through omission.
If you feel he did no wrong, I don't feel anything else that hasn't already been discussed would lead you to believe otherwise. Carry on.
Ten thumbs up. The fact that the judge said he would have made a different call had Kent mentioned that he moved his graveyard makes that information relevant. The fact that he omitted said information and that said omission benefits him means he lied to a judge with intent. We know he had this information because there is video footage him doing it. End of story.
4x Arbor Elf
2x Birds of Paradise
2x Courser of Kruphix
2x Huntmaster of the Fells
2x Inferno Titan
2x Stormbreath Dragon
1x Thragtusk
2x Tireless Tracker
1x Wurmcoil Engine
3x Mwonvuli Acid-Moss
4x Stone Rain
4x Blood Moon
4x Utopia Sprawl
4x Lightning Bolt
2x Chandra, Torch of Defiance
9x Forest
1x Mountain
3x Stomping Ground
4x Windswept Heath
4x Wooded Foothills
2x Ancient Grudge
2x Anger of the Gods
2x Beast Within
2x Relic of Progenitus
2x Scavenging Ooze
1x Shatterstorm
2x Trinisphere
So what do you think it would take to topple the current tier 1 stagnation without replacing it with the exact same thing? Obviously new printings help, but do you see any specific unbans that could achieve the same goal?
It's funny you mention that. I was just thinking about the new tier 1 to arise from your hypothetical bannings and this is the exact meta that I think would replace it.
I can't say if it's the best build because I'm constantly tweaking and changing things. I've had plenty of 4-1's with different versions. I like where is is now, but I'm still tweaking. 6 win-cons feels too little, but I'm not sure where to make cuts. I hated drawing multiple titans in the early turns and the deck doesn't ramp enough like the RG version to justify it. The decks main weakness is fast and aggressive decks. As far as Sleight of Hand vs Serum Visions, Sleight is vastly superior IMO. It digs a a card deeper the turn I play it, and the amount of shuffling the deck does doesn't really work with Visions.
4 Stomping Ground
4 Steam Vents
2 Mountain
3 Island
2 Forest
1 Breeding Pool
4 Misty Rainforest
4 Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle
Creatures (8)
4 Sakura-Tribe Elder
2 Snapcaster Mage
2 Primeval Titan
4 Remand
2 Izzet Charm
2 Supreme Will
4 Cryptic Command
Sorcery (12)
4 Sleight of Hand
4 Search for Tomorrow
4 Scapeshift
Enchantment (4)
4 Prismatic Omen
2 Nature's Claim
2 Surgical Extraction
1 Sudden Shock
2 Anger of the Gods
3 Kitchen Finks
1 Pulse of Murasa
1 Struggle // Survive
2 Obstinate Baloth
1 Fracturing Gust
Sideboard is a little sketchy, but Kitchen Finks put in a lot of work. My MU's were Slivers, Jund, Grixis Delver, Burn, and Eldrazi Taxes. Not the strongest lineup, but I'll take it.
More people need to have attitudes like this on this forum. The ban mania that has taken over is too much, and I feel, very counterproductive. It promotes an unhealthy discussion on the problems and solutions modern needs, as well as fosters negative attitudes toward the format.
There is a great deal of motive for him to withhold that information from the judge, and all the signs seem to point that way, but there is no hard evidence to say that is exactly what transpired. We can certainly prove the physical actions that took place, but we cannot prove why they were preformed. I know this may seem like a strange thing to be hung up on, but I feel that we cannot condemn a man unless we know for certain that he played/presented play dishonestly. And the only real proof would be an admittance of guilt by Kent. We can't really tell why he didn't mention that to the judge, only Kent knows that, and for that reason we cannot label the lie as intentional or not.
Since this event transpired, plenty of stories have come about Mr. Ketter and his shady past play. All purely anecdotal, but they paint a picture of his play style. Is this something that is limited to a few players or is it more widespread? To bring in the PED in sports example brought up earlier in the discussion, are these tactics used by some players desperate to keep up since the competition is so tight at the higher levels and every little edge matters? I really can't say, since my magic is pretty much on the FNM level, but we can take some lessons from this. If you are ever in a situation where you are invested in a game/match/tournament, it behooves you to stay on top of both your, and your opponents game. There is nothing wrong with trying to keep people honest.
I am of the position that the play discussed earlier was shady/scummy/whatever you want to call it, but it was within the legal rules of the game, and any actual evidence needed to prove cheating is impossible to obtain. We can only speculate at best that the lie by omission was intentional. I have read all the arguments and taken it all into consideration. The problem is that any presentation of new evidence to repudiate the claims that cheating was undeniably proved is met with the exact same argument, which seems to ignore any of the new arguments set forth by the opposite party. The conversation has not budged. I tried to move off of the topic. I obviously failed.
The mob metaphor wasn't meant to be derogatory. I thought it perfectly highlighted the pro-cheating crowd's anger toward the situation and their refusal to let it go despite evidence that the cheating "technically" didn't happen. If you did the same as I, and listened and considered the views of the opposition, and still feel that my views are wrong, you are certainly entitled to that. But surely you must know that no one is getting anywhere in regards to the topic at hand. I will now attempt to move on for a third time. Hopefully this will be good enough for you to believe me.