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 Limited Archetypes of Ixalan
 
Treasure Cruisin' with Monored Burn
 
Changes to MTGSalvation User Accounts
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    Just played the Skred mirror. It seems to be in the Merfolk caliber of bonkers mirrors. Game 1 I stuck a Koth and rode to victory. Game 2 my opponent slamed Dragon's Claw on turn 2 and he went to town. After a massive grind and slogging through 3 walkers and a second Claw with a Batterskull that couldn't stay equipped for more than a turn, I managed to stick the clutch sideboard card -- Ensnaring Bridge. I sat on my Koth emblem and domed him for 7 and 8 for a few turns, turning his 37 life points to nothing.

    I also wanted to bring up the rules change concerning Blood Moon. Now, the lands coming into play are Mountains before hitting the battlefield. This means a few things:
    A) Shock lands now enter untapped under a Moon. Not a huge deal, but it could be relevant in GBx matchups.
    B) Temples (such as Temple of Enlightenment) also enter untapped, and no longer get a scry trigger.
    C) As far as I know, all other "comes into play tapped" lands come in untapped when Blood Moon is in play. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
    D) You can't name a creature type with Cavern of Souls.
    E) For those of us who found that Blood Mooning people in one format wasn't enough, Dark Depths now enters with 0 counters thanks to Moon, but thankfully won't make a 20/20.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    I agree strongly. I'm pretty biased in the experience field because Skred does very well against those decks, but I watch other decks get rolled so often that it gets depressing. I don't like turning to bans, but rather innovation. Not that it gets us very far, because beating all the tier 1 decks isn't exactly viable in this format.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from idSurge »
    Suicide by Mod? Seems extreme.

    Just walk away if the thread doesn't provide what you want.

    Fact is, this thread is an outlet for venting steam. That's it. We do not shape policy. We do not present arguments based on fact (with 2 or 3 exceptions) and even people who are reasonable 99% of the time knee-jerk right off the deep end of someone dares to imply their pet deck is borderline too good.

    TLDR: why so serious, the thread isn't.

    Sorry for the double post, but I do want to address this. Understand that I am speaking for me, not the mod team, and while I will make reference to them, these are my observations, not a presentation of the moderator's views and opinions. Basically, I'm not speaking for them.

    I will start by saying that the mod team does treat this thread as more serious than a vent for frustration. That's my fault. My understanding was the intention of the thread was to be a more serious discussion (and for a time, it arguably was), but the thread slowly shifted and I didn't exactly keep up with that. We started dishing out so many infractions that the amount of infractions we were giving out was absurd. We noticed that the issue came from Twin, and we decided to take action. Was it extreme? Absolutely, and perhaps it was mistake. While the Legacy subforum enjoyed success with a moratorium on discussion surrounding banning Brainstorm, what I failed to realize was that the community was universally sick of it. Here, there was a larger split of opinions on the topic, and that cost us dearly. I will say that we got significantly less reports out of this thread and we also gave out far less infractions (if possible, I want to compile the numbers for you to see, but it's pretty difficult given how the forum works). The intention wasn't to push away people who liked Twin. It's not a personal bias, or a hidden agenda of any kind. I don't ignore the reports concerning those I agree with. Similarly, I don't go out of my way to punish someone I disagree with if how the message is presented is fine. I like having different perspectives, and even if I disagree with them I at least respect their view. I also understand that this comes out of what I play. My pet deck is Skred Red -- a tier 3 deck at best, and my favorite card is Blood Moon, which is renowned for generating non-games. I also write budget Modern articles. Consequently, I appreciate diversity and interesting gameplay over absolute power level (I am well aware this sounds like a flat-out lie considering my love of Blood Moon, but I'm 100% serious).

    StubbsMcAwesome described what I saw pretty well
    The reason splinter twin talk was banned was because of the very scenario you mentioned: people re-routing every post, whether it was warranted or not, to splinter twin. No new ideas could be discussed in this thread for more than a page before someone shoehorned twin talk into the fray.

    In hindsight, this ordeal feels like a delayed knee-jerk. The build up of the past few months of reports, on top of the amount of users asking us to do something about this thread, led to where we are now. I guess the real question is whether or not State of the Meta was better off without the moratorium?

    I'm going to stop here because I realize I'm rambling a lot.

    TLDR: Splinter Twin moratorium wasn't out of bias against user who like Twin, and this whole thing may have been a mistake.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from idSurge »
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    I guess I'm curious about what a good format is supposed to look like. I'd hate for a lock-down control or prison deck to dominate like miracles did in Legacy forever or hell workshop prison decks in Vintage. For a while Standard was a midrange grindfest, and I find battleship MtG totally boring. I like where we are at now. I know its subjective, but I'm curious as to what is missing?

    And here's another thing: we either get a format with a lot of viable decks or top tier control. Control decks are good when they can properly attack a meta, so you won't have good blue based control unless we get banned down to like six playable decks. That's just the reality.


    I think this really depends on just what you call (or refuse to call) Control. HolyDiva hits on an important thing here that I've not seen articulated well previously.

    Its one thing to have variety, its another to have the games between all this variety be interesting. Put another way, many decks can be interesting, but what if the games between these various decks are not?

    Is that a good format?

    I think this is something that needed to be said, but like you said has never been articulated well. Something that drove me away from many decks is that they look cool on paper, and on camera, but when I sit down to play the games are just so boring. To me, that's an issue that does come down to personal preference, but the format does take some of the blame for that. If the format is diverse but uninteresting, what good is it all?
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    As of today, the Splinter Twin moratorium is over. We will try to get a new thread rolled out today, and we will also be keeping an eye on the the topic. If we fall back into the same issues, we will take more action.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    This sounds exactly like the Rock opponent I played against a few weeks back. Assuming you're in the US, what state are you in? Maybe we're secretly locals and never knew it lol. Truthfully, the salt is always worth it, and there is nothing more fun than smashing face with a Koth while the opponent can't do anything.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    I now have the strong urge to build the slowest, grindiest version of Skred possible with the win con being to Shrine of Burning Rage someone for 20.

    Looking over the Ixalan spoilers, there isn't much else for us in this set. I guess the hasty trampling 5/5 is funny if you detest that lizards have wings. Maybe with the next set we can build Pirate Skred!
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    Why would we want to play Cannons ovsr Chandra? She deals damage when we hit lands and can add mana, and kill creatures no problem. The land side of this doesn't matter because we play Blood Moon, and while being more resilient once we flip this it never changes back; we lose the card advantage this brings. I honestly think Chandra is the better card, and we also can't play lands with it.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Truthfully, it is tier 1. I was directing my point more towards the validity of one person saying something is tier 1 makes the deck tier 1. One person doesn't do it, but the deck has seen enough success that it is at least tier 1.5, closer to tier 1
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Let's keep in mind that, as far as what has been brought up in this thread, Caleb is the only person saying Opt makes Storm tier 1. As good of a player as he is, one person isn't much to go off of. That being said, Storm is good to have in the format. It gives players who want a linear combo strategy a deck to play. From what I remember, we haven't had one of those be successful since Amulet Bloom.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Combo has a place in this format. There isn't a reason to ban combo into oblivion simply for existing. Plus, what do you ban from it? Gifts? Fringe decks get caught in the crossfire, which should be minimized at all costs. Rituals? That hurts the All-In Red decks (but to be transparent, I may be a bit biased in there -- Blood Moon is my favorite card...). The Storm payloads could conceivably be banned if we're looking to obliterate the deck, not nerf it. Baral or Electromancer? It nerfs the deck, but they'll still find a way.

    There will always be top decks in any format. Banning a top tier deck only makes another deck take its place, or a few begin to rise rather than just one. Storm has never gotten a pass. In fact, it's probably been effect by more bans than any other deck in the format. Gifts Storm should be allowed to exist in Modern. As we've learned from Standard, always banning the top dog is detrimental to a format.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    I would argue that Path sees more play now due to GDS. Many of the decks that have seen a resurgence due to Death's Shadow play Path. Wurmcoil seems fine as a one of, but disregarding one of, if not the, format's best removal spells would be mistake.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    My philosophy on Mind Stone is that while we can have excellent mana ramp, if you're running 23 lands you can still consistently land your four drops, and a lot of that bias came in to my sideboard plan. While the cycling is useful, I believe just playing another live draw over something that could potentially find my sideboard card to be better. There are plenty of matchups where I keep them in (namely control, where we want to hit the ground running), but other matchups (i.e, Burn), we don't want a free Destructive Revelry target on turn two. Heck, I usually take a net loss in artifact count post board just to deal with Revelry.

    Morcrux, that list is hot and spicy! How has it performed outside of being smooth? I found Sweltering Suns to be underwhelming, but I'm curious about what your analysis discovered.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Skred Red
    Here's my list, from memory.

    Nobody sees the surprise Bridge coming. Note that it is miles better with Hazoret, but I simply don't own her right now. If you play her, she's great as a one of, but she takes a four drop slot -- do not play her in addition to the usually slew you play, but rather in place of one.
    Posted in: Developing Competitive (Modern)
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    The math to make it work is difficult. Assuming you were on the play and didn't cast anything prior to Search, you end your second turn with five cards in hand. Being on the draw puts you at six cards, and because it's an upkeep trigger, it could get you to five lands on turn four, which is significantly less relevant than four on turn three.

    EDIT: I thought it said seven in hand, not graveyard (I can read, I swear!). Seven in the bin is much easier to accomplish, but still takes some doing. If you cast this on turn two, it demands a Thought Scour at some point to get you a land. It's a cool ability, but if you're dumping this many resources in the early game to get a land you've probably wasted the early game.
    Posted in: Modern
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.