Banned List Discussion outside of this thread is Prohibited and will be Infracted!
To summarize Wizards' position, they feel they have banned cards that give decks the ability to either win or be in a controlling position by turn 3.
These cards fall in that list:
Ancient Den
Blazing Shoal
Chrome Mox
Dark Depths
Dread Return
Glimpse of Nature
Golgari Grave-Troll
Great Furnace
Hypergenesis
Seat of the Synod
Sword of the Meek
Tree of Tales
Vault of Whispers
The other main category of cards exist because they make decks too consistant/reliable and thus hamper the deck diversity of the metagame. I think these cards are the best candidates for an unbanning.
Ancestral Vision
Cloudpost
Green Sun's Zenith
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Mental Misstep
Ponder
Preordain
Punishing Fire
Rite of Flame
Stoneforge Mystic
Umezawa's Jitte
Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle
Then there are cards which wizards currently feels were mistakes or were never really tested in eternal formats.
Skullclamp
Sensei's Divining Top
I realize Jace/Stoneforge could possibly be here depending on your point of view.
Please keep discussion related to the cards and leave personal attacks at home. Thanks!
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
As for the new ban list IMO it should change very little.
WILD NACTL:
Zoo was a strong deck in extended before nactl was printed so losing that little bit shouldn't matter very much. If zoo could deal with (almost) legacy teps, dredge, and NLU then I imagine the slow combo decks and the control decks with key staples banned shouldn't be too big of a deal.
replacements are either loam lion or steppe lynx depending on how aggressive your deck was. This is sort of like the difference between preordain and serum visions.
I don't agree with this ban because staples should not be on the ban list IMO. Zoo being so domiant was a product of the mantra that wotc has taken for this format. If control doesn't have the powerful toys and combo doesn't have the speed then zoo was and is still dominant. Look at past history and trends from other formats. Powerful control and fast combo exist in these formats and zoo was/is far from being too good.
PUNISHING FIRE:
This card was mostly used in jund although lately it made an appearance in a gifts control deck sort of like the one that Wafo took to PT Austin, and a lot in Zoo because it was an easy way to get an additional 5% in the mirror.(which was pretty prevalent because zoo was ~30% of the meta at worlds if I remember correctly)
Zoo will likely put in tribal flames to be more explosive. We can mostly assume this because of past information and the fact that decks have already been doing this in modern with great sucess.
Jund is hit pretty hard by the loss of punishing fire. Jund will probably have to retool and attempt to go a big bigger which means that bob might have to be cut. Time and testing will tell, although it doesn't look good for the typical jund list we have now.
This ban I really don't have any feeling towards one way or the other. It is pretty unlikely that this card kept any deck other than faeries from being good, but faeries has already lost a lot to the ban list. Also ample hate exist for faeries so I don't thing the fae will be above tier 2 at best anytime soon unless we have a return to lorwyn with some broken fae cards.(yeah right lol)
I believe that most people are still going to end up building zoo like some of the pros said. They started out wanting to play an aggressive deck and after adding in the best cards it ended up being zoo.
Another aside from the cards themselves is it appears that wotc does not want to unban cards. I at least figured Golgari grave-troll would have been unbanned since the deck that put it on the ban list got a more key card banned that pretty much bans the whole deck outright.
This unwillingness to unban a card that would now have no meaning to the format bothers me because unbanning cards surgically is actually the best tool for balancing the format. It is much like printing card in future sets for modern except you don't have to worry about them destroying standard.
That is all.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
I have posted my reasons in the other thread, I will not spam y'all with the same argument unless I have something new to add, or a better way to try an get my point across. Essentially:
Punishing Fire:Unnessicary, and an more of a statment on players inability or unwillingness to adapt to new threats.
Wild Nacatl:Pointless, as it will not effect Zoo's game enough to make a difference. Yes, a 2/3 is very different from a 3/3, but that would only be relevant if Zoo was a deck that cast one creature and then spent the remaining turns beating you over the head with it. That is not what Zoo is about. Zoo already runs KirdLion, Goyf, and KotR. It uses all of these cards played quickly and in multiples (in conjunction with removal) to overwhelm their opponent and win. Taking out one power from that barrage is simply meaningless. If you assume a conservative turn 5 win you are most likely looking at a 5 life net difference, and that is without any defensive removal. If the deck you are running cannot manage removal by turn 4 you should probably rework it. It does not make it any easier to stop, because toughness is unchanged, nor does it do anything about Zoo's idealized speed. Zoo's possible turn 3 win was all about Lynx, and frankly I rarely saw Lynx played...now, on the other hand, 4 one-drop slots just opened up and either GG or Lynx will fill that void.
Another thing to consider is how this will effect mana-bases. I am fairly sure that the number of shocks played will drop significantly, so a deck that once started the game with 15 life, now will start the game with more like 17 life- making Zoo slightly more resilient.
If you have the ability (as I do because I save my games) go back and look at games you lost to Zoo. Then take out any instance of Miss Kitty and put in a 2/3 instead. How much of a difference does that make over the length of the game? Does it even extend the game a whole turn?
Yeah DrWorm you are right, they should ban Lightning Bolt too, i mean, how much of a difference does it make to run Shock instead?
And you didn't quite get how oppressive punishing groves was for the format, no deck except zoo could play anything with less than 3 thoughness, unless it was called Snapcaster Mage.
I am 100% on favor of banning of the groves engine but i think it was just stupid to wait several months to ban wild nacatl. They kept neutering every single top deck until all left was zoo and then they expected zoo not to dominate? And it doesn't even really dominate with 52% win rate on worlds. Did it really take WOTC this many months to realize that a 3/3 for G was too strong for the format? It didn't take a genius to see how zoo would be the aggro deck of choice after bannings and yet they expected the metagame to diversify.
This speaks wonders of the playtests groups of R&D, they got 2 broken cards in the same set, then they made mental misstep the next block and simultaneously screwed up an entire format. And that's if you don't take into account small 'mistakes' like dismember.
Yeah DrWorm you are right, they should ban Lightning Bolt too, i mean, how much of a difference does it make to run Shock instead?
There is a difference between one more power and a burn spell that does one more damage.
And you didn't quite get how oppressive punishing groves was for the format, no deck except zoo could play anything with less than 3 thoughness, unless it was called Snapcaster Mage.
Actually jund Ran both PK-Fire and had creatures that had less than 3 toughness. Remember that it takes 3 mana to achieve kill an x/2 and one of the lands has to be a grove. Zoo itself is what is oppressive to other aggro decks. and banning nactl isn't going to change that. Even with nactl zoo has better drops at 1-4 mana than tribal decks.
I am 100% on favor of banning of the groves engine but i think it was just stupid to wait several months to ban wild nacatl. They kept neutering every single top deck until all left was zoo and then they expected zoo not to dominate? And it doesn't even really dominate with 52% win rate on worlds. Did it really take WOTC this many months to realize that a 3/3 for G was too strong for the format? It didn't take a genius to see how zoo would be the aggro deck of choice after bannings and yet they expected the metagame to diversify.
I agree that wotc has made mistakes, but the mistakes were actually banning cards, and the initial ban list. Certain cards should be on the list. Staples like GSZ, Nactl, Artifact lands, Ancestral visions, Bitterblossom, ect should be left off of the list unless one deck was absolutely dominant which probably would not happen. For the most part a big card pool(that hasn't been altered much by the ban list) can overcome its own problems. This has been proven time and time again in the past.
This speaks wonders of the playtests groups of R&D, they got 2 broken cards in the same set, then they made mental misstep the next block and simultaneously screwed up an entire format. And that's if you don't take into account small 'mistakes' like dismember.
R&D don't really understand the game that they make. We need more modern players to join R&D. Most of the R&D crew are pros from the 90s and early 00s.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Yeah DrWorm you are right, they should ban Lightning Bolt too, i mean, how much of a difference does it make to run Shock instead?
Uh, no. Even if one damage of burn was equal to one point of power, my whole point is that Miss Kitty should not be banned. Why would I want Lightning Bolt banned?
And you didn't quite get how oppressive punishing groves was for the format, no deck except zoo could play anything with less than 3 thoughness, unless it was called Snapcaster Mage.
That is so true...if you are unwilling to put cards in the SB to combat it. Heck, if it was that prominant you might want to MD an answer...but no, that would be too much to expect of players that are playing a competitive format.:o
See, I was one of those idiots that actually prepared for PunishingGrove rather than complaining about it. When I faced it across the table from me it only really hurt if I got bad draws game 2 and 3, otherwise I just dealt with it. I see now how wrong I was-that when a threat becomes strong in a format I should just complain about it and Wizards will make it go away. That is so comforting.
Uh, no. Even if one damage of burn was equal to one point of power, my whole point is that Miss Kitty should not be banned. Why would I want Lightning Bolt banned?
That is so true...if you are unwilling to put cards in the SB to combat it. Heck, if it was that prominant you might want to MD an answer...but no, that would be too much to expect of players that are playing a competitive format.:o
See, I was one of those idiots that actually prepared for PunishingGrove rather than complaining about it. When I faced it across the table from me it only really hurt if I got bad draws game 2 and 3, otherwise I just dealt with it. I see now how wrong I was-that when a threat becomes strong in a format I should just complain about it and Wizards will make it go away. That is so comforting.
This. There is a big difference between a deck that is too good and a card/synergy that is too good. Look at MRD-forward extended. You could drop a 20/20 indestructable on turn 1 and yet the meta adapted to it.
It is not like your opponent is going to have the PK-Fire set up up and running on turn 3 every game. The land is also not indestructible. A little bit of LD is another way to deal with it. We also have like 100 ways to remove cards from the graveyard. Sure it requires a little skill to remove the punishing fire with something like tormod's crypt.
Standard is a format were noobs can gather and play Magic lite. I myself miss the combat rules and stuff that game me a competitive edge over players who don't understand the 3 phases of competitive magic.
This is why I object most of the banlist. Stuff like skullclamp is too good. Hypergen is probably too fast and resilient. Dark depths is way to format warping.
The rest of the stuff on that list for the most part would be perfectly acceptable because answers exist. Say your playing zoo and your getting your tail kicked by storm. Sideboard in some ethersworn cannonist and maybe even Mindbreak trap.
This is a game of questions and answers.
If something can't be answered feasibly then it is broken. If your unwilling to use a sideboard or want to have as little interaction with your opponent as possible then you deserve to lose.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Uh, no. Even if one damage of burn was equal to one point of power, my whole point is that Miss Kitty should not be banned. Why would I want Lightning Bolt banned?
That is so true...if you are unwilling to put cards in the SB to combat it. Heck, if it was that prominant you might want to MD an answer...but no, that would be too much to expect of players that are playing a competitive format.:o
See, I was one of those idiots that actually prepared for PunishingGrove rather than complaining about it. When I faced it across the table from me it only really hurt if I got bad draws game 2 and 3, otherwise I just dealt with it. I see now how wrong I was-that when a threat becomes strong in a format I should just complain about it and Wizards will make it go away. That is so comforting.
Cards in the sb? What does a deck like faeries, merfolk or white weenies do game 1 against punishing fires? scoop? what about control decks game 1?
It was an absurd card that warped the format in an unhealthy way. It was repeatable removal and a win condition that had no cost whatsoever to run if you were on color and many many decks had no way to interact with it. Why would i want to play a deck that loses to it even if i have good sideboard options if half the aggro, combo and even control decks run it? Don't you see how oppressive it is? It was run by Jund, Zoo, Gifts, Teachings, 12post and exarch twin since the very beggining of the format at the highest levels of competition. And it didn't pay off to 'prepare' for it, noone did because it was just stupid to run a deck that lost to it and hope you hit your hate before they start burning your creatures and it was already an uphill battle from game 1.
If a card sees play in every single possible archetype in the highest possible levels of competition then you can't argue that it warped the metagame and that it is worth it 'to hate it' with decks that scoop to it.
Which reminds me this card saw play the last extended season as well as legacy play, good job wizards.
Cards in the sb? What does a deck like faeries, merfolk or white weenies do game 1 against punishing fires? scoop? what about control decks game 1?
ghost quarter. Win before they get it set up? Faeries, merfol, and WW are not playable in modern anyways because of zoo. Control decks have tons of ways of defeating the combo that are main deckable.
It was an absurd card that warped the format in an unhealthy way. It was repeatable removal and a win condition that had no cost whatsoever to run if you were on color and many many decks had no way to interact with it.
It was bad against zoo unless it was in a zoo or jund deck. Honestly the culprit is zoo. If zoo wasn't the best deck then zoo decks wouldn't be running it just to gain the extra % points in the mirror. What decks could not run a ghost quarter or two? Or a stone rain?
Why would i want to play a deck that loses to it even if i have good sideboard options if half the aggro, combo and even control decks run it?
Because you could sideboard for it.... If your deck loses to punishing fire then it is probably not competitive in the meta in the first place because your running x/2s and can't finish off opponents fast.
Don't you see how oppressive it is? It was run by Jund, Zoo, Gifts, Teachings, 12post and exarch twin since the very beggining of the format at the highest levels of competition. And it didn't pay off to 'prepare' for it, noone did because it was just stupid to run a deck that lost to it and hope you hit your hate before they start burning your creatures and it was already an uphill battle from game 1.
One gifts deck had it. No teachings decks from modern that have placed anywhere have ran it. 12post sometimes ran it, but not so commonly. That deck got banned anyways. This leaves zoo and jund as valid decks that actually ran it. It was part of the reason why jund was viable. Again zoo only ran it to have a better win % against the mirror.
If a card sees play in every single possible archetype in the highest possible levels of competition then you can't argue that it warped the metagame and that it is worth it 'to hate it' with decks that scoop to it.
Path to exile sees play in control, combo, and aggro. Forest sees play in control, combo and aggro. Lightning bolt, ect. This is not a valid argument and it was much less prevelant than you're making it out to be.
Which reminds me this card saw play the last extended season as well as legacy play, good job wizards.
Last extended season had a smaller card pool than modern did. Also faeries was a dominant deck so the meta adapted punishing fire. It was also better in that format because less x/3s were floating around. Oh and ghost quarters did not exist in that format. I could go on, but hopefully this is quite enough because I grow tired.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
This Modern subforum looks more like a Slipknot conversation with others than a normal forum.
Also, if you think the DCI bans cards based on people's crys you are very wrong. It just happens very often that what people consider ban worthy is actually ban worthy.
Cards in the sb? What does a deck like faeries, merfolk or white weenies do game 1 against punishing fires? scoop? what about control decks game 1?
See, I must be mistaken, because I was under the impression that both Tectonic Edge and Ghost Quarter could legally be run in those decks. What was I thinking? I was also under the impression that competetive magic was played in matches of best two out of three, but clearly I am playing it wrong. I was not even considering WW- after all, how can you possibly find room for four copies of either GQ or TE (or both) in WW? Especially since they do not come in to play tapped, and tap for mana. I would be shooting myself in the foot if I was 12 plains instead of 16.
There should always be matchups that are going to be unfavorable for a deck game one, if a deck truly has no unfavorable matchup then it is probably too strong. Why else do we have sideboards if not to shore up our matchup for games 2 and 3?
And it didn't pay off to 'prepare' for it, noone did because it was just stupid to run a deck that lost to it and hope you hit your hate before they start burning your creatures and it was already an uphill battle from game 1.
No, you did not have to prepare for it. Just sit back and let papa ban it for you.
If a card sees play in every single possible archetype in the highest possible levels of competition then you can't argue that it warped the metagame and that it is worth it 'to hate it' with decks that scoop to it.
I believe I just did. With the exception of decks that have a very precarious mana base, how is running non-basic land destruction harming your game against other decks? I find it worth it to run such cards even after this ban, and if you cannot see how destroying non-basic lands in this format is advantageous, then I am talking to a brick wall. Then agian, you don't want to have to run answers, do you?
hmmm, see's play in every single possible archetype, hmm. I wonder if any other cards *cough*manaleakgoyflightningboltpathtoexile*cough* fall in to that catagory.
This Modern subforum looks more like a Slipknot conversation with others than a normal forum.
SK and I have very different positions on this format, so be careful who you lump together.
Also, if you think the DCI bans cards based on people's crys you are very wrong. It just happens very often that what people consider ban worthy is actually ban worthy.
You are right, I am being hyperbolic to some extent. Wizzos banned PF because it saw a ton of play, and no one bothered to pack any hate. Why they did not pack hate is a mystery to me, but by doing so they gave the impression that the combo was warping the format, though forcing people to adapt and run hate is not what I call warping the format.
But, golly guys...I sure am sorry that I am expressing my opinion. Posting in these threads should only be done if you have the same opinion as the masses, right?
Labeling any white deck that runs smallish dudes as white weenie is pretty dumb.
Actual white weenie with Anthem effects hasn't been viable since forever.
The current white decks (Martyr Proc/DnT) don't play anything like that (and for good reason). They're not even aggro decks. One functions kinda like a combo deck and the other as a midrange/controllish deck.
*edit* was thinking of Soul Sisters for the combo bit.
Really. I can't completely agree with the Nacatl ban, but I have been saying for a while now that Punishing Fire needed to be banned.
All the people complaining about the bans need to shut it. Something needed to be done about zoo. They had to ban SOMETHING, but because no single card looked threatening (or is) on its own they were forced to makes bans that would look stupid (when in reality they weren't). There isn't a single card in zoo they could have banned that would have made them look good, but something needed to be done. People who don't get this fact just are not thinking.
This is far beyond what i can't take, slipknot just told me i should run Stone Rain in order to fight the groves engine if it was so dominant. I stopped reading there. If that isn't the definition of a metagame warping card then i don't know what it is. Too bad WOTC agrees with me, so farewell punishing fire.
This is far beyond what i can't take, slipknot just told me i should run Stone Rain in order to fight the groves engine if it was so dominant. I stopped reading there. If that isn't the definition of a metagame warping card then i don't know what it is. Too bad WOTC agrees with me, so farewell punishing fire.
This is why I have all but stopped contributing to these conversations. It is pointless. I just poke my head in every so often and put in my obligatory "lol" post and move on...
I want to have a meaningful conversation, but it is nigh impossible due to the fact that 2 or 3 peoples' heads are big enough to fill 7 threads on their own.
Foaming at the mouth is en vogue...
BANS:
I don't care any more. I am going to play the format regardless of what they ban/don't ban
Bah, who needs bans. Just run Ghost Quarter to kill Grove and Cloudpost, Nix to deal with Hypergenesis, Naturalize to deal with Bitterblossom, Extirpate to deal with Dread Return, Maelstrom Pulse to deal with Jace, Ancestral Grudge to deal with Skullclamp, Squelch to deal with Stoneforge Mystic, Spell Pierce to deal with Shoal, and Negate to deal with Glimpse of Nature, and you're golden.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On average, Magic players are worse at new card evaluation than almost every other skill, except perhaps sideboarding.
Bannings were fine. We want something stable and consistent and more on the slow side for the formats first PTQ season ever.
The problem with Punishing fire was three-fold. First, it invalidated/made a lot of cards really bad while also completely shutting down a few decks entirely. Second, people were running MD graveyard hate just to combat it - I mean, people were running Surgical Extraction maindeck, that's how bad it got to be, which is pretty format warping(true, this has happened before for other reasons, but in a mildly healthy case - think singleton Tormod's Crypt with 4 Trinket Mage). Third problem was it stifled creativity. Running red? Play Punishing Fire+Grove! The fact that Grove also made G which just happened to imply the "hey, you should run Tarmo too" idea didn't help, either.
Oh, wait, there was also a fourth problem. It was a very, very slow thing to play out. Even if you speed things up, if you're running it multiple times it could take a decent chunk of time - arguably more than SDT would take.
As far as Nacatl went, it wasn't really enough. But whatever. I'm taking the hint that Tarmo being still legal means that a reprint is planned/in the works, so they're saving their hide on marketing front. I think the most animosity that comes from Tarmo being "everywhere" is just how expensive monetarily he is. If he were a $5 uncommon or something no one would really care - just look at Path to Exile, no one cares that 80~+% of all decks running white have some number of copies in its 75.
Nacatl does have a point that it's extremely restrictive in what kind of decks can play it(you're forced to run RGW), and with him being the most efficient 1-drop in the format it's pretty obvious he can stifle a bit of creativity, especially considering the colors he forces are so good for aggro to begin with.
Bah, who needs bans. Just run Ghost Quarter to kill Grove and Cloudpost, Nix to deal with Hypergenesis, Naturalize to deal with Bitterblossom, Extirpate to deal with Dread Return, Maelstrom Pulse to deal with Jace, Ancestral Grudge to deal with Skullclamp, Squelch to deal with Stoneforge Mystic, Spell Pierce to deal with Shoal, and Negate to deal with Glimpse of Nature, and you're golden.
there is a point to where people should just learn how to beat certain things. I have been messing around with an elf deck that didn't lose to punishing fire because I was faster than it. It is called meta gaming and hiding flaws. Not every combo enabler is too good and not every powerful card is too good. What do you even play anyways?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
All the people complaining about the bans need to shut it.
You know what? Fine. Apparently opinions that are contrary to the popular dogma are scorned, derided, and generally hated here- I can see that now. I guess if you question the orthodoxy you should not actually say it in a place that just anyone could read it- then people might start to question whether two and two really do make five here. I hope, in the rest of your life you don't shun opinions because they differ from yours, because that leads to stagnation and a lack of growth.
New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common. ~John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
Their is a difference between a contrary opinion, and complaint. This ban has ZERO effect on me personally, except that with the kind of "reasoning" behind these bans, I fear for the future of the format. Until players are expected to adapt with creativity and daring, this format is not truly competitive.
People who don't get this fact just are not thinking.
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently. ~Friedrich Nietzsche, The Dawn, 1881
The difference between you and I is that while I disagree with positions that contradict mine, I do not necessarily assume you are wrong. I am not arrogant enough to think that all of my opinions will prove to be objectively correct; since I cannot always determine which of my opinions will turn out to be objectivly correct over time, I hold very few of them as so absolute that I feel that those who disagree with me "are just not thinking".
I am really just done trying to contribute to the conversation on topics like these and add a different perspective to the conversation. It is not worth all of the hate. This game is supposed to be fun.
Worm- I respect where you come from. I understand why you are up in arms about he bans. I can assure you, the ban list will be smaller as time goes on. Until they get all the decks fighting fair just doing what they do, they won't release anything back into the fray.
I was around at the beginning of Legacy. Legacy was allowed to grow more organically through players' observations, without the heavy-handed bans. I think this is one fundamental difference. While I may not agree with how these bans are being handled, as long as there are dedicated players (me-you), the format will be fine. It looks like they are starting to listen because the format is getting better. whether you agree with the last round of bannings or not- Nacatl on t2 represents ~16% of your life when a Loam Lion is 10%. This game is about gaining small percentage advantages over time, which is the definition of a Sum-Zero game. That 6% gives you a full 4 turns to deal with it, while you can spell snare the t2 play, Leak the t3, etc etc etc.
Just give it time because I think there will be a couple of more bans/sets until they start unbanning anything. This seems to be how they are handling it, but they will listen better if people can thoughtfully send in email/tweets/etc and let them know your opinion. Just be ready to present your argument meaningfully and not harshly.
I for one want to play my Bitterblossoms, AVs, Chrome Moxen, etc....but I am not holding my breath. While I don't agree with the process, I think that these bans are *at least* necessary to see what decks do when they are "fighting fair".
Regardless of all the bans, Modern is making a comeback. We went what, a few months without a daily firing, and we've had numerous in the past week. Modern will be fine. It's had some growing pains during this "puberty" phase, but it will blossom and mature into a fine format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Mythic Rares: "What's next, Wizards will print six golden Black Lotuses and randomly place them in boosters, and if someone gets one, they get to tour the Wizards facility?"
No disrespect intended, apau but I am not sure why people keep saying this. Of course I will give it time. What choice do I have? I am not a child who rage quits, urinates on all his cards, and never plays again. That does not mean that I can't be unhappy about the direction of the management of the card pool. That does not mean that when Wizzers makes a ban that I feel is uncalled for I will not have an opinion about it. What "give it time" seems to be saying is "do not say anything negative about the management of the format for a while", and that seems to me to be a dangerous position to take.
I am just tired of getting told not to share my opinion and position.
This is a continuation of the discussion in these two threads:
[Discussion] Current Modern Ban List (9/20 Update)
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=358037
Dec 20 Bannings Announced
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=378792
Banned List Discussion outside of this thread is Prohibited and will be Infracted!
To summarize Wizards' position, they feel they have banned cards that give decks the ability to either win or be in a controlling position by turn 3.
These cards fall in that list:
Ancient Den
Blazing Shoal
Chrome Mox
Dark Depths
Dread Return
Glimpse of Nature
Golgari Grave-Troll
Great Furnace
Hypergenesis
Seat of the Synod
Sword of the Meek
Tree of Tales
Vault of Whispers
The other main category of cards exist because they make decks too consistant/reliable and thus hamper the deck diversity of the metagame. I think these cards are the best candidates for an unbanning.
Ancestral Vision
Cloudpost
Green Sun's Zenith
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Mental Misstep
Ponder
Preordain
Punishing Fire
Rite of Flame
Stoneforge Mystic
Umezawa's Jitte
Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle
Then there are cards which wizards currently feels were mistakes or were never really tested in eternal formats.
Skullclamp
Sensei's Divining Top
I realize Jace/Stoneforge could possibly be here depending on your point of view.
Please keep discussion related to the cards and leave personal attacks at home. Thanks!
As for the new ban list IMO it should change very little.
WILD NACTL:
Zoo was a strong deck in extended before nactl was printed so losing that little bit shouldn't matter very much. If zoo could deal with (almost) legacy teps, dredge, and NLU then I imagine the slow combo decks and the control decks with key staples banned shouldn't be too big of a deal.
replacements are either loam lion or steppe lynx depending on how aggressive your deck was. This is sort of like the difference between preordain and serum visions.
I don't agree with this ban because staples should not be on the ban list IMO. Zoo being so domiant was a product of the mantra that wotc has taken for this format. If control doesn't have the powerful toys and combo doesn't have the speed then zoo was and is still dominant. Look at past history and trends from other formats. Powerful control and fast combo exist in these formats and zoo was/is far from being too good.
PUNISHING FIRE:
This card was mostly used in jund although lately it made an appearance in a gifts control deck sort of like the one that Wafo took to PT Austin, and a lot in Zoo because it was an easy way to get an additional 5% in the mirror.(which was pretty prevalent because zoo was ~30% of the meta at worlds if I remember correctly)
Zoo will likely put in tribal flames to be more explosive. We can mostly assume this because of past information and the fact that decks have already been doing this in modern with great sucess.
Jund is hit pretty hard by the loss of punishing fire. Jund will probably have to retool and attempt to go a big bigger which means that bob might have to be cut. Time and testing will tell, although it doesn't look good for the typical jund list we have now.
This ban I really don't have any feeling towards one way or the other. It is pretty unlikely that this card kept any deck other than faeries from being good, but faeries has already lost a lot to the ban list. Also ample hate exist for faeries so I don't thing the fae will be above tier 2 at best anytime soon unless we have a return to lorwyn with some broken fae cards.(yeah right lol)
I believe that most people are still going to end up building zoo like some of the pros said. They started out wanting to play an aggressive deck and after adding in the best cards it ended up being zoo.
Another aside from the cards themselves is it appears that wotc does not want to unban cards. I at least figured Golgari grave-troll would have been unbanned since the deck that put it on the ban list got a more key card banned that pretty much bans the whole deck outright.
This unwillingness to unban a card that would now have no meaning to the format bothers me because unbanning cards surgically is actually the best tool for balancing the format. It is much like printing card in future sets for modern except you don't have to worry about them destroying standard.
That is all.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
I have posted my reasons in the other thread, I will not spam y'all with the same argument unless I have something new to add, or a better way to try an get my point across. Essentially:
Punishing Fire:Unnessicary, and an more of a statment on players inability or unwillingness to adapt to new threats.
Wild Nacatl:Pointless, as it will not effect Zoo's game enough to make a difference. Yes, a 2/3 is very different from a 3/3, but that would only be relevant if Zoo was a deck that cast one creature and then spent the remaining turns beating you over the head with it. That is not what Zoo is about. Zoo already runs Kird Lion, Goyf, and KotR. It uses all of these cards played quickly and in multiples (in conjunction with removal) to overwhelm their opponent and win. Taking out one power from that barrage is simply meaningless. If you assume a conservative turn 5 win you are most likely looking at a 5 life net difference, and that is without any defensive removal. If the deck you are running cannot manage removal by turn 4 you should probably rework it. It does not make it any easier to stop, because toughness is unchanged, nor does it do anything about Zoo's idealized speed. Zoo's possible turn 3 win was all about Lynx, and frankly I rarely saw Lynx played...now, on the other hand, 4 one-drop slots just opened up and either GG or Lynx will fill that void.
Another thing to consider is how this will effect mana-bases. I am fairly sure that the number of shocks played will drop significantly, so a deck that once started the game with 15 life, now will start the game with more like 17 life- making Zoo slightly more resilient.
If you have the ability (as I do because I save my games) go back and look at games you lost to Zoo. Then take out any instance of Miss Kitty and put in a 2/3 instead. How much of a difference does that make over the length of the game? Does it even extend the game a whole turn?
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
And you didn't quite get how oppressive punishing groves was for the format, no deck except zoo could play anything with less than 3 thoughness, unless it was called Snapcaster Mage.
I am 100% on favor of banning of the groves engine but i think it was just stupid to wait several months to ban wild nacatl. They kept neutering every single top deck until all left was zoo and then they expected zoo not to dominate? And it doesn't even really dominate with 52% win rate on worlds. Did it really take WOTC this many months to realize that a 3/3 for G was too strong for the format? It didn't take a genius to see how zoo would be the aggro deck of choice after bannings and yet they expected the metagame to diversify.
This speaks wonders of the playtests groups of R&D, they got 2 broken cards in the same set, then they made mental misstep the next block and simultaneously screwed up an entire format. And that's if you don't take into account small 'mistakes' like dismember.
R&D don't really understand the game that they make. We need more modern players to join R&D. Most of the R&D crew are pros from the 90s and early 00s.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
That is so true...if you are unwilling to put cards in the SB to combat it. Heck, if it was that prominant you might want to MD an answer...but no, that would be too much to expect of players that are playing a competitive format.:o
See, I was one of those idiots that actually prepared for Punishing Grove rather than complaining about it. When I faced it across the table from me it only really hurt if I got bad draws game 2 and 3, otherwise I just dealt with it. I see now how wrong I was-that when a threat becomes strong in a format I should just complain about it and Wizards will make it go away. That is so comforting.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
This. There is a big difference between a deck that is too good and a card/synergy that is too good. Look at MRD-forward extended. You could drop a 20/20 indestructable on turn 1 and yet the meta adapted to it.
It is not like your opponent is going to have the PK-Fire set up up and running on turn 3 every game. The land is also not indestructible. A little bit of LD is another way to deal with it. We also have like 100 ways to remove cards from the graveyard. Sure it requires a little skill to remove the punishing fire with something like tormod's crypt.
Standard is a format were noobs can gather and play Magic lite. I myself miss the combat rules and stuff that game me a competitive edge over players who don't understand the 3 phases of competitive magic.
This is why I object most of the banlist. Stuff like skullclamp is too good. Hypergen is probably too fast and resilient. Dark depths is way to format warping.
The rest of the stuff on that list for the most part would be perfectly acceptable because answers exist. Say your playing zoo and your getting your tail kicked by storm. Sideboard in some ethersworn cannonist and maybe even Mindbreak trap.
This is a game of questions and answers.
If something can't be answered feasibly then it is broken. If your unwilling to use a sideboard or want to have as little interaction with your opponent as possible then you deserve to lose.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
Cards in the sb? What does a deck like faeries, merfolk or white weenies do game 1 against punishing fires? scoop? what about control decks game 1?
It was an absurd card that warped the format in an unhealthy way. It was repeatable removal and a win condition that had no cost whatsoever to run if you were on color and many many decks had no way to interact with it. Why would i want to play a deck that loses to it even if i have good sideboard options if half the aggro, combo and even control decks run it? Don't you see how oppressive it is? It was run by Jund, Zoo, Gifts, Teachings, 12post and exarch twin since the very beggining of the format at the highest levels of competition. And it didn't pay off to 'prepare' for it, noone did because it was just stupid to run a deck that lost to it and hope you hit your hate before they start burning your creatures and it was already an uphill battle from game 1.
If a card sees play in every single possible archetype in the highest possible levels of competition then you can't argue that it warped the metagame and that it is worth it 'to hate it' with decks that scoop to it.
Which reminds me this card saw play the last extended season as well as legacy play, good job wizards.
Last extended season had a smaller card pool than modern did. Also faeries was a dominant deck so the meta adapted punishing fire. It was also better in that format because less x/3s were floating around. Oh and ghost quarters did not exist in that format. I could go on, but hopefully this is quite enough because I grow tired.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
Also, if you think the DCI bans cards based on people's crys you are very wrong. It just happens very often that what people consider ban worthy is actually ban worthy.
There should always be matchups that are going to be unfavorable for a deck game one, if a deck truly has no unfavorable matchup then it is probably too strong. Why else do we have sideboards if not to shore up our matchup for games 2 and 3?
No, you did not have to prepare for it. Just sit back and let papa ban it for you.
I believe I just did. With the exception of decks that have a very precarious mana base, how is running non-basic land destruction harming your game against other decks? I find it worth it to run such cards even after this ban, and if you cannot see how destroying non-basic lands in this format is advantageous, then I am talking to a brick wall. Then agian, you don't want to have to run answers, do you?
hmmm, see's play in every single possible archetype, hmm. I wonder if any other cards *cough*manaleakgoyflightningboltpathtoexile*cough* fall in to that catagory.
SK and I have very different positions on this format, so be careful who you lump together.
You are right, I am being hyperbolic to some extent. Wizzos banned PF because it saw a ton of play, and no one bothered to pack any hate. Why they did not pack hate is a mystery to me, but by doing so they gave the impression that the combo was warping the format, though forcing people to adapt and run hate is not what I call warping the format.
But, golly guys...I sure am sorry that I am expressing my opinion. Posting in these threads should only be done if you have the same opinion as the masses, right?
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Actual white weenie with Anthem effects hasn't been viable since forever.
The current white decks (Martyr Proc/DnT) don't play anything like that (and for good reason). They're not even aggro decks. One functions kinda like a combo deck and the other as a midrange/controllish deck.
*edit* was thinking of Soul Sisters for the combo bit.
Really. I can't completely agree with the Nacatl ban, but I have been saying for a while now that Punishing Fire needed to be banned.
All the people complaining about the bans need to shut it. Something needed to be done about zoo. They had to ban SOMETHING, but because no single card looked threatening (or is) on its own they were forced to makes bans that would look stupid (when in reality they weren't). There isn't a single card in zoo they could have banned that would have made them look good, but something needed to be done. People who don't get this fact just are not thinking.
WURDelver
[/MANA]MANA]R[/MANA]GTron
WDeath and Taxes
WSoul Sisters
RWG Pod Combo
URSplinter Twin
URStorm
RBurn
Just to nitpick: Right now, there are not one, not two, but three real decks in Standard that play small aggressive white dudes and anthem effects.
This is why I have all but stopped contributing to these conversations. It is pointless. I just poke my head in every so often and put in my obligatory "lol" post and move on...
I want to have a meaningful conversation, but it is nigh impossible due to the fact that 2 or 3 peoples' heads are big enough to fill 7 threads on their own.
Foaming at the mouth is en vogue...
BANS:
I don't care any more. I am going to play the format regardless of what they ban/don't ban
The problem with Punishing fire was three-fold. First, it invalidated/made a lot of cards really bad while also completely shutting down a few decks entirely. Second, people were running MD graveyard hate just to combat it - I mean, people were running Surgical Extraction maindeck, that's how bad it got to be, which is pretty format warping(true, this has happened before for other reasons, but in a mildly healthy case - think singleton Tormod's Crypt with 4 Trinket Mage). Third problem was it stifled creativity. Running red? Play Punishing Fire+Grove! The fact that Grove also made G which just happened to imply the "hey, you should run Tarmo too" idea didn't help, either.
Oh, wait, there was also a fourth problem. It was a very, very slow thing to play out. Even if you speed things up, if you're running it multiple times it could take a decent chunk of time - arguably more than SDT would take.
As far as Nacatl went, it wasn't really enough. But whatever. I'm taking the hint that Tarmo being still legal means that a reprint is planned/in the works, so they're saving their hide on marketing front. I think the most animosity that comes from Tarmo being "everywhere" is just how expensive monetarily he is. If he were a $5 uncommon or something no one would really care - just look at Path to Exile, no one cares that 80~+% of all decks running white have some number of copies in its 75.
Nacatl does have a point that it's extremely restrictive in what kind of decks can play it(you're forced to run RGW), and with him being the most efficient 1-drop in the format it's pretty obvious he can stifle a bit of creativity, especially considering the colors he forces are so good for aggro to begin with.
there is a point to where people should just learn how to beat certain things. I have been messing around with an elf deck that didn't lose to punishing fire because I was faster than it. It is called meta gaming and hiding flaws. Not every combo enabler is too good and not every powerful card is too good. What do you even play anyways?
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common. ~John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
Their is a difference between a contrary opinion, and complaint. This ban has ZERO effect on me personally, except that with the kind of "reasoning" behind these bans, I fear for the future of the format. Until players are expected to adapt with creativity and daring, this format is not truly competitive.
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently. ~Friedrich Nietzsche, The Dawn, 1881
The difference between you and I is that while I disagree with positions that contradict mine, I do not necessarily assume you are wrong. I am not arrogant enough to think that all of my opinions will prove to be objectively correct; since I cannot always determine which of my opinions will turn out to be objectivly correct over time, I hold very few of them as so absolute that I feel that those who disagree with me "are just not thinking".
I am really just done trying to contribute to the conversation on topics like these and add a different perspective to the conversation. It is not worth all of the hate. This game is supposed to be fun.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
I was around at the beginning of Legacy. Legacy was allowed to grow more organically through players' observations, without the heavy-handed bans. I think this is one fundamental difference. While I may not agree with how these bans are being handled, as long as there are dedicated players (me-you), the format will be fine. It looks like they are starting to listen because the format is getting better. whether you agree with the last round of bannings or not- Nacatl on t2 represents ~16% of your life when a Loam Lion is 10%. This game is about gaining small percentage advantages over time, which is the definition of a Sum-Zero game. That 6% gives you a full 4 turns to deal with it, while you can spell snare the t2 play, Leak the t3, etc etc etc.
Just give it time because I think there will be a couple of more bans/sets until they start unbanning anything. This seems to be how they are handling it, but they will listen better if people can thoughtfully send in email/tweets/etc and let them know your opinion. Just be ready to present your argument meaningfully and not harshly.
I for one want to play my Bitterblossoms, AVs, Chrome Moxen, etc....but I am not holding my breath. While I don't agree with the process, I think that these bans are *at least* necessary to see what decks do when they are "fighting fair".
On Mythic Rares: "What's next, Wizards will print six golden Black Lotuses and randomly place them in boosters, and if someone gets one, they get to tour the Wizards facility?"
Wydwen|Edric|Sakashima|Marrow-Gnawer|Hazezon
8.5 Tails|Seton|Rasputin|Doran|Gisela|Karona|Márton
I am just tired of getting told not to share my opinion and position.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!