I know Punishing Fire is banned due to the comob with it and Grove of the Burn Willows. But how about a swap ban with them? Punishing Fire seems like a fine card that could be used for other fun things, whereas Grove is just stupidly good. I think doing the swap ban would, while completely wrecking soul sisters, lead to more fun interactions, and shake up the meta a bit.
EDIT: also, now when they've made a dozens announcements about what they don't want for the format it would be nice to hear what they do want for a change
They did not too long ago, well it was when they announced the PT schedule and Modern was not on it and everyone flipped out. Wotc came out and said they didnt like how the meta looked and they wanted multiple decks from each archetype (aggro, combo, control, midrange) viable in the format. That is why they can not have a single dominating force in the format.
EDIT EDIT. Also I read an article by Caleb Duwall that kinda pissed me off. Basically he argued that the Modern banning policy was refreshing because it "shakes things up" and "creates a rotating feel to a non-rotating format" or something along those lines. This is a serious disregard to the majority of the Modern community that don't want a rotating format and have moved from Standard to avoid this. Especially people who don't have sponsors, money or just a large play group to borrow cards from
I actually agree with him. I like the fact they are handling Modern different then they did Legacy.
I'm not claiming that a Legacy player is wiser, I'm claiming that there's less need to be paranoid as a Legacy player because bannings happens less frequent. I mean why is it so big of a a crime to be pissed off about 15 bannings in 3.5 year and ask legitimate questions about the format as a whole that you're ready to push the ignore button?
You seem mad because Wotc is handling Modern different then they handled Legacy. Wotc has many formats flaws and mistakes to go off while building Modern. Where some might not agree with Wotc, not everyone feels that way. Instead of comparing, just play the format. Even with the bans plenty like the format.
Quote from SuperHans99 »
Now many people think that AV could be broken with strong cascade cards like BBE and if it's between these 2 cards AV is in my opinion obviously the better unban.
I am of the belief Wotc sees AV as a cheap consistency card and they have set a precedent of banning them from the format. I dont see AV coming off anytime soon.
Quote from Figurative »
I know Punishing Fire is banned due to the comob with it and Grove of the Burn Willows. But how about a swap ban with them? Punishing Fire seems like a fine card that could be used for other fun things, whereas Grove is just stupidly good. I think doing the swap ban would, while completely wrecking soul sisters, lead to more fun interactions, and shake up the meta a bit.
I am going to say you have never played with or against the card. Punishing fire is rough to deal with once it gets started. Burnwillows is the most common activator of Pfire, but there are others that can be used.
Remember that Pod was not just banned for winning too many GPs. It is very clear from the ban announcement that metagame prevalence was also an important factor:
"Over the past year, Birthing Pod decks have won significantly more Grand Prix than any other Modern decks and compose the largest percentage of the field"
"The high percentage of the field playing Pod suppresses decks, especially other creature decks, that have an unfavorable matchup"
This is absolutely hilarious considering Junk was a third of the field of the PT - I doubt Pod ever got CLOSE to those numbers.
In a single event. If the trend continues, I am sure Wotc will do something in May.
Yay! The ban list will get even longer!
If this continues, pretty soon Modern will just be Standard.
The size of the ban list shouldnt matter. We have thousands of cards to play with. The object is to have a balanced format.
I dont care of the ban list is 100 cards deep as long as we end up with a balanced format.
I find it saddening that every time there's a major event, people look onto the top 8 and start predicting what gets banned next (Bloom Titan, really?). That's not the sad part though, the sad part is that those people are usually right. I haven't read the Legacy banned list discussions but I doubt that it's filled with as much paranoia as this one is.
After the initial bans Modern has had 15 bannings! That's in less than 4 years. During this time frame Legacy has only had 2 and Standard 0.
I remember playing when Delver completely dominated Standard to a point that makes any dominance in the history of Modern look like child's play. Everybody talked about a Ponder ban, but nothing happened. I mean I guess Standard rotates which means that bans are less needed, but still...
Why is it that Wizards feel the need to interfere as heavily with this particular format? Is it because the card pool isn't as deep, so they're afraid that the format wont self adjust as easily? Is it because the format is young so they don't know what to do with it yet? Is it because something about the combination of cards originally made available in the format will inherently skew the meta game in some way or another?
I mean whatever Wizards do it's the same story over again. They ban something, something new starts to dominate and then it's back to square one. Isn't it better to just accept the fact that that it is the apparent nature of Modern and just go with it?
EDIT: also, now when they've made a dozens announcements about what they don't want for the format it would be nice to hear what they do want for a change
EDIT EDIT. Also I read an article by Caleb Duwall that kinda pissed me off. Basically he argued that the Modern banning policy was refreshing because it "shakes things up" and "creates a rotating feel to a non-rotating format" or something along those lines. This is a serious disregard to the majority of the Modern community that don't want a rotating format and have moved from Standard to avoid this. Especially people who don't have sponsors, money or just a large play group to borrow cards from
There really isn't that many aggregious bannings in modern. That's why there are only like 3-4 cards with a real potential to be unbanned, that's cause it actually IS fairly well managed. And quite frankly your comment about the legacy banlist is idiotic. I've read that thread, despite what people like you like to think, the average legacy player isn't wiser or more mature or anything like that. Just read the never ending whining about brainstorm to get an idea of how stupid that thread can get. I'm gonna ignore most of the rest of what you wrote cause it isn't really worth discussing, but they have written what they want. They talked about wanting 3-4 decks of each archetype to be viable. Whether or not you consider this realistic or not is another matter, but they have stated their desire.
I'm not claiming that a Legacy player is wiser, I'm claiming that there's less need to be paranoid as a Legacy player because bannings happens less frequent. I mean why is it so big of a a crime to be pissed off about 15 bannings in 3.5 year and ask legitimate questions about the format as a whole that you're ready to push the ignore button?
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
I find it saddening that every time there's a major event, people look onto the top 8 and start predicting what gets banned next (Bloom Titan, really?). That's not the sad part though, the sad part is that those people are usually right. I haven't read the Legacy banned list discussions but I doubt that it's filled with as much paranoia as this one is.
After the initial bans Modern has had 15 bannings! That's in less than 4 years. During this time frame Legacy has only had 2 and Standard 0.
I remember playing when Delver completely dominated Standard to a point that makes any dominance in the history of Modern look like child's play. Everybody talked about a Ponder ban, but nothing happened. I mean I guess Standard rotates which means that bans are less needed, but still...
Why is it that Wizards feel the need to interfere as heavily with this particular format? Is it because the card pool isn't as deep, so they're afraid that the format wont self adjust as easily? Is it because the format is young so they don't know what to do with it yet? Is it because something about the combination of cards originally made available in the format will inherently skew the meta game in some way or another?
I mean whatever Wizards do it's the same story over again. They ban something, something new starts to dominate and then it's back to square one. Isn't it better to just accept the fact that that it is the apparent nature of Modern and just go with it?
EDIT: also, now when they've made a dozens announcements about what they don't want for the format it would be nice to hear what they do want for a change
EDIT EDIT. Also I read an article by Caleb Duwall that kinda pissed me off. Basically he argued that the Modern banning policy was refreshing because it "shakes things up" and "creates a rotating feel to a non-rotating format" or something along those lines. This is a serious disregard to the majority of the Modern community that don't want a rotating format and have moved from Standard to avoid this. Especially people who don't have sponsors, money or just a large play group to borrow cards from
There really isn't that many aggregious bannings in modern. That's why there are only like 3-4 cards with a real potential to be unbanned, that's cause it actually IS fairly well managed. And quite frankly your comment about the legacy banlist is idiotic. I've read that thread, despite what people like you like to think, the average legacy player isn't wiser or more mature or anything like that. Just read the never ending whining about brainstorm to get an idea of how stupid that thread can get. I'm gonna ignore most of the rest of what you wrote cause it isn't really worth discussing, but they have written what they want. They talked about wanting 3-4 decks of each archetype to be viable. Whether or not you consider this realistic or not is another matter, but they have stated their desire.
I'm not claiming that a Legacy player is wiser, I'm claiming that there's less need to be paranoid as a Legacy player because bannings happens less frequent. I mean why is it so big of a a crime to be pissed off about 15 bannings in 3.5 year and ask legitimate questions about the format as a whole that you're ready to push the ignore button?
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
while i agree that pod was living on borrowed time, because if it didn't get banned now, something ridiculous might've been printed that would've broken it, i feel like saying that people are 'idiotic' for expecting a non-rotating format to not artificially be rotated via unbannings and bannings is silly. a major reason why the average player invests into modern is because he/she wants to use his/her cards beyond standard. out of the banlist, i'm sure that 20 or so card definitely belong there, and probably 10 or so should definitely be serious considered modern legal. again, saying that it's idiotic to be frustrated at caleb's article is kind of ridiculous, because the whole point of investing into a non-rotating format is to leave the fear of rotation behind - it's not an outrageous expectation to have. if they wanted modern to have a rotating banlist, it's something that should've been told and made clear from the beginning instead of banning criteria being quite obscure as of late.
Remember that Pod was not just banned for winning too many GPs. It is very clear from the ban announcement that metagame prevalence was also an important factor:
"Over the past year, Birthing Pod decks have won significantly more Grand Prix than any other Modern decks and compose the largest percentage of the field"
"The high percentage of the field playing Pod suppresses decks, especially other creature decks, that have an unfavorable matchup"
This is absolutely hilarious considering Junk was a third of the field of the PT - I doubt Pod ever got CLOSE to those numbers.
In a single event. If the trend continues, I am sure Wotc will do something in May.
Yay! The ban list will get even longer!
If this continues, pretty soon Modern will just be Standard.
The size of the ban list shouldnt matter. We have thousands of cards to play with. The object is to have a balanced format.
I dont care of the ban list is 100 cards deep as long as we end up with a balanced format.
Oh, okay. Let's just keep banning things until blue control is viable again. That makes sense.
I'm surprised that WotC hasn't already hired you to fix Modern. Maybe you should let them know that you're available?
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
I find it saddening that every time there's a major event, people look onto the top 8 and start predicting what gets banned next (Bloom Titan, really?). That's not the sad part though, the sad part is that those people are usually right. I haven't read the Legacy banned list discussions but I doubt that it's filled with as much paranoia as this one is.
After the initial bans Modern has had 15 bannings! That's in less than 4 years. During this time frame Legacy has only had 2 and Standard 0.
I remember playing when Delver completely dominated Standard to a point that makes any dominance in the history of Modern look like child's play. Everybody talked about a Ponder ban, but nothing happened. I mean I guess Standard rotates which means that bans are less needed, but still...
Why is it that Wizards feel the need to interfere as heavily with this particular format? Is it because the card pool isn't as deep, so they're afraid that the format wont self adjust as easily? Is it because the format is young so they don't know what to do with it yet? Is it because something about the combination of cards originally made available in the format will inherently skew the meta game in some way or another?
I mean whatever Wizards do it's the same story over again. They ban something, something new starts to dominate and then it's back to square one. Isn't it better to just accept the fact that that it is the apparent nature of Modern and just go with it?
EDIT: also, now when they've made a dozens announcements about what they don't want for the format it would be nice to hear what they do want for a change
EDIT EDIT. Also I read an article by Caleb Duwall that kinda pissed me off. Basically he argued that the Modern banning policy was refreshing because it "shakes things up" and "creates a rotating feel to a non-rotating format" or something along those lines. This is a serious disregard to the majority of the Modern community that don't want a rotating format and have moved from Standard to avoid this. Especially people who don't have sponsors, money or just a large play group to borrow cards from
There really isn't that many aggregious bannings in modern. That's why there are only like 3-4 cards with a real potential to be unbanned, that's cause it actually IS fairly well managed. And quite frankly your comment about the legacy banlist is idiotic. I've read that thread, despite what people like you like to think, the average legacy player isn't wiser or more mature or anything like that. Just read the never ending whining about brainstorm to get an idea of how stupid that thread can get. I'm gonna ignore most of the rest of what you wrote cause it isn't really worth discussing, but they have written what they want. They talked about wanting 3-4 decks of each archetype to be viable. Whether or not you consider this realistic or not is another matter, but they have stated their desire.
I'm not claiming that a Legacy player is wiser, I'm claiming that there's less need to be paranoid as a Legacy player because bannings happens less frequent. I mean why is it so big of a a crime to be pissed off about 15 bannings in 3.5 year and ask legitimate questions about the format as a whole that you're ready to push the ignore button?
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
while i agree that pod was living on borrowed time, because if it didn't get banned now, something ridiculous might've been printed that would've broken it, i feel like saying that people are 'idiotic' for expecting a non-rotating format to not artificially be rotated via unbannings and bannings is silly. a major reason why the average player invests into modern is because he/she wants to use his/her cards beyond standard. out of the banlist, i'm sure that 20 or so card definitely belong there, and probably 10 or so should definitely be serious considered modern legal. again, saying that it's idiotic to be frustrated at caleb's article is kind of ridiculous, because the whole point of investing into a non-rotating format is to leave the fear of rotation behind - it's not an outrageous expectation to have. if they wanted modern to have a rotating banlist, it's something that should've been told and made clear from the beginning instead of banning criteria being quite obscure as of late.
Yea I don't buy the artificial rotation argument. VERY few decks have been banned to the unplayable point. What, pod and eggs? It's just another exagerration. You can't really think TEN cards on the list should be modern legal? I don't think you can do that without either getting into either te cards that break the turn 4 rule or cards that are overly efficient like skullclamp DRS or jitte.
I'm sorry for being so flippant but that argument is just really hard to take seriously.
Just because I wish for something that you dont, doesnt mean you need to get snarky.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
The fact blue isnt the dominating color in Modern is a huge plus to many. I am sure you would disagree.
If you look at my signature, I play everything. I chose blue control as the antithesis to your suggestion because the number of cards that would need to be banned in order for blue control to be competitive in Modern, would be astronomical. Blue control is so weak in Modern that you'd need just about every green, black, and red staple to be added to the ban list. No one is having fun in that format, not even the blue control players.
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
There really isn't that many aggregious bannings in modern. That's why there are only like 3-4 cards with a real potential to be unbanned, that's cause it actually IS fairly well managed. And quite frankly your comment about the legacy banlist is idiotic. I've read that thread, despite what people like you like to think, the average legacy player isn't wiser or more mature or anything like that. Just read the never ending whining about brainstorm to get an idea of how stupid that thread can get. I'm gonna ignore most of the rest of what you wrote cause it isn't really worth discussing, but they have written what they want. They talked about wanting 3-4 decks of each archetype to be viable. Whether or not you consider this realistic or not is another matter, but they have stated their desire.
I'm not claiming that a Legacy player is wiser, I'm claiming that there's less need to be paranoid as a Legacy player because bannings happens less frequent. I mean why is it so big of a a crime to be pissed off about 15 bannings in 3.5 year and ask legitimate questions about the format as a whole that you're ready to push the ignore button?
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
while i agree that pod was living on borrowed time, because if it didn't get banned now, something ridiculous might've been printed that would've broken it, i feel like saying that people are 'idiotic' for expecting a non-rotating format to not artificially be rotated via unbannings and bannings is silly. a major reason why the average player invests into modern is because he/she wants to use his/her cards beyond standard. out of the banlist, i'm sure that 20 or so card definitely belong there, and probably 10 or so should definitely be serious considered modern legal. again, saying that it's idiotic to be frustrated at caleb's article is kind of ridiculous, because the whole point of investing into a non-rotating format is to leave the fear of rotation behind - it's not an outrageous expectation to have. if they wanted modern to have a rotating banlist, it's something that should've been told and made clear from the beginning instead of banning criteria being quite obscure as of late.
Yea I don't buy the artificial rotation argument. VERY few decks have been banned to the unplayable point. What, pod and eggs? It's just another exagerration. You can't really think TEN cards on the list should be modern legal? I don't think you can do that without either getting into either te cards that break the turn 4 rule or cards that are overly efficient like skullclamp DRS or jitte.
I'm sorry for being so flippant but that argument is just really hard to take seriously.
the artificial rotation argument is a pretty good one. it's not only limited to cards that have been banned, but also to cards that have simply not been allowed into the format in order to see what impact there really have. so you have banned cards, plus cards that haven't even been given the time of day. you say what you say because, and i'm going to make a judgment call here, because you are a young player. if you've been around long enough, you'd feel completely different if you weren't able to port some variation of a pet standard or extended deck into modern, for example, thopter/sword combo, or tezz control. sure, i don't think all past decks should allow to exist in modern, such as any stoneforge/blade decks, or hypergenesis decks.
also, if i didn't make myself clear before, i will now, there are maybe 8 - 10 cards i'd look at for unbanning, it doesn't mean i'd unban them all - just that there are 8 - 10 cards are the maximum i consider should even be looked at. also, nothing you said changes that fact that the banning criteria wotc has enforced, is very different than the one they officially announced. as of late, the bannings have been pretty obscure, their reasoning each time gets less and less scientific/data in nature, and more and more conjecture/feelings. it is no secret that wotc hates certain types of decks, and although they say they want 3 or 4 archetypes of each type in modern, their actions as of late seem to indicate that they are perfectly content having some archetypes such as graveyard, and control to be almost non-existent.
edit: looking at the banlist one more time, i guess i'd say there are only 7 cards i'd seriously consider, so i will admit to that exaggeration.
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If you look at my signature, I play everything
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If you look at my signature, I play everything
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If you look at my signature, I play everything
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
I think part of the reason that Wizards banned Pod is because it makes them unable to have standard have good enter the battlefield effects without wrecking modern. Also I don't think township is enough to stop pod from being a problem.
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If you look at my signature, I play everything
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
I think your understanding of the game is awful if you think AV is like any of those cards. It's only cosmetically similar to TC but vastly less powerful. Having Suspend 4 is the opposite of what Preordain and Ponder give a deck as they smooth things out. AV is feast or famine and is only useful for breaking parity, it's an awful top deck when you're chasing a game.
I'm not claiming that a Legacy player is wiser, I'm claiming that there's less need to be paranoid as a Legacy player because bannings happens less frequent. I mean why is it so big of a a crime to be pissed off about 15 bannings in 3.5 year and ask legitimate questions about the format as a whole that you're ready to push the ignore button?
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
while i agree that pod was living on borrowed time, because if it didn't get banned now, something ridiculous might've been printed that would've broken it, i feel like saying that people are 'idiotic' for expecting a non-rotating format to not artificially be rotated via unbannings and bannings is silly. a major reason why the average player invests into modern is because he/she wants to use his/her cards beyond standard. out of the banlist, i'm sure that 20 or so card definitely belong there, and probably 10 or so should definitely be serious considered modern legal. again, saying that it's idiotic to be frustrated at caleb's article is kind of ridiculous, because the whole point of investing into a non-rotating format is to leave the fear of rotation behind - it's not an outrageous expectation to have. if they wanted modern to have a rotating banlist, it's something that should've been told and made clear from the beginning instead of banning criteria being quite obscure as of late.
Yea I don't buy the artificial rotation argument. VERY few decks have been banned to the unplayable point. What, pod and eggs? It's just another exagerration. You can't really think TEN cards on the list should be modern legal? I don't think you can do that without either getting into either te cards that break the turn 4 rule or cards that are overly efficient like skullclamp DRS or jitte.
I'm sorry for being so flippant but that argument is just really hard to take seriously.
the artificial rotation argument is a pretty good one. it's not only limited to cards that have been banned, but also to cards that have simply not been allowed into the format in order to see what impact there really have. so you have banned cards, plus cards that haven't even been given the time of day. you say what you say because, and i'm going to make a judgment call here, because you are a young player. if you've been around long enough, you'd feel completely different if you weren't able to port some variation of a pet standard or extended deck into modern, for example, thopter/sword combo, or tezz control. sure, i don't think all past decks should allow to exist in modern, such as any stoneforge/blade decks, or hypergenesis decks.
also, if i didn't make myself clear before, i will now, there are maybe 8 - 10 cards i'd look at for unbanning, it doesn't mean i'd unban them all - just that there are 8 - 10 cards are the maximum i consider should even be looked at. also, nothing you said changes that fact that the banning criteria wotc has enforced, is very different than the one they officially announced. as of late, the bannings have been pretty obscure, their reasoning each time gets less and less scientific/data in nature, and more and more conjecture/feelings. it is no secret that wotc hates certain types of decks, and although they say they want 3 or 4 archetypes of each type in modern, their actions as of late seem to indicate that they are perfectly content having some archetypes such as graveyard, and control to be almost non-existent.
edit: looking at the banlist one more time, i guess i'd say there are only 7 cards i'd seriously consider, so i will admit to that exaggeration.
Not a young player, been playing for well over 10 years but hey, thanks for stereotyping that anyone who disagrees with you just doesn't understand the game.
You clearly fall into the camp of giving every card a shot. If the banlist was managed that way then we would suffer FAR worse meta and price fluctuations. And I don't feel about not being able to port my favorite extended deck cause guess what? I accept modern as a different format and play it because I like modern, not cause I want the next best thing to extended. In fact Id be so bold as to say modern would be far less popular if it was possible to port a lot of the extended decks.
That said, I do think sword of the meek could come off and that control should be strengthened in modern, but I really don't think the banlist is being managed all that terribly at all. Dig sword and AV are the only cards Id like to see come off soon, with BBE EVENTUALLY returning to the format. Jace would possibly be safe as well but it's just too risky and really would be a net negative in the format for many players.
As for hating archetypes, I actually have a lot of respect for their handling of storm. It's a deck that has a VERY high potential to be oppressive, yet they've managed to carefully ban the correct pieces so it's still a competitive option. I know a lot of people are mad about pod, but there just wasn't the same option there. I'm sure they considered other options, but the deck is too malleable and you would need up banning cards that don't truly hurt pod and do completely destroy other decks.
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If you look at my signature, I play everything
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
I think your understanding of the game is awful if you think AV is like any of those cards. It's only cosmetically similar to TC but vastly less powerful. Having Suspend 4 is the opposite of what Preordain and Ponder give a deck as they smooth things out. AV is feast or famine and is only useful for breaking parity, it's an awful top deck when you're chasing a game.
The point is, AV draws 3 cards for 1 mana. It is a cheap consistency card something Wotc has been consistent in keeping out of the format. It was awful to start the game with 2 TC in hand also. All cards have weakness and are bad at some time during a game. Your top deck complaint is moot.
Quote from DaBuddahN »
edit: looking at the banlist one more time, i guess i'd say there are only 7 cards i'd seriously consider
Without even knowing the 7 you are thinking of, I will say I would not want to play in the format you envision. I am willing to go out on a limb and say anyone not willing to buy into Legacy wouldnt. The format you are envisioning would break the turn 4 rule in pieces. The format would devolve into a handful of either lightning fast combo or aggro or super consistent decks that might be able to battle the speed of the format without the proper policing cards. In short, broken Magic. No thank you.
And before you go and assume I am a newer player, I am not. I have been playing since the inception of the game. I am not fond of Legacy, wont play Vintage, and I own all the cards.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
I think your understanding of the game is awful if you think AV is like any of those cards. It's only cosmetically similar to TC but vastly less powerful. Having Suspend 4 is the opposite of what Preordain and Ponder give a deck as they smooth things out. AV is feast or famine and is only useful for breaking parity, it's an awful top deck when you're chasing a game.
The point is, AV draws 3 cards for 1 mana. It is a cheap consistency card something Wotc has been consistent in keeping out of the format. It was awful to start the game with 2 TC in hand also. All cards have weakness and are bad at some time during a game. Your top deck complaint is moot.
That's the opposite of consistency, your entire line of reasoning is faulty. You can't point to what AV does that would be bad for the meta so you're resorting to blabbering about something nonsensical in terms of a game of Magic.
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
I think your understanding of the game is awful if you think AV is like any of those cards. It's only cosmetically similar to TC but vastly less powerful. Having Suspend 4 is the opposite of what Preordain and Ponder give a deck as they smooth things out. AV is feast or famine and is only useful for breaking parity, it's an awful top deck when you're chasing a game.
The point is, AV draws 3 cards for 1 mana. It is a cheap consistency card something Wotc has been consistent in keeping out of the format. It was awful to start the game with 2 TC in hand also. All cards have weakness and are bad at some time during a game. Your top deck complaint is moot.
That's the opposite of consistency, your entire line of reasoning is faulty. You can't point to what AV does that would be bad for the meta so you're resorting to blabbering about something nonsensical in terms of a game of Magic.
AV is drawing 3 cards for 1 mana. I dont care what turn you get the cards, it is cheap card draw and makes decks more consistent. It is exactly what the card does. Cheap card draw, cantrips lead to more consistency in decks that run them. I dont understand how you can say AV does not lead to more consistent decks.
If Wotc wasnt going to unban AV while banning TC and DTT, it would seem that Wotc sees AV at least on the same level as TC and DTT, no matter how you feel about it.
You just want to play with AV and refuse to hear or see anyone elses point of view.
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
while i agree that pod was living on borrowed time, because if it didn't get banned now, something ridiculous might've been printed that would've broken it, i feel like saying that people are 'idiotic' for expecting a non-rotating format to not artificially be rotated via unbannings and bannings is silly. a major reason why the average player invests into modern is because he/she wants to use his/her cards beyond standard. out of the banlist, i'm sure that 20 or so card definitely belong there, and probably 10 or so should definitely be serious considered modern legal. again, saying that it's idiotic to be frustrated at caleb's article is kind of ridiculous, because the whole point of investing into a non-rotating format is to leave the fear of rotation behind - it's not an outrageous expectation to have. if they wanted modern to have a rotating banlist, it's something that should've been told and made clear from the beginning instead of banning criteria being quite obscure as of late.
Yea I don't buy the artificial rotation argument. VERY few decks have been banned to the unplayable point. What, pod and eggs? It's just another exagerration. You can't really think TEN cards on the list should be modern legal? I don't think you can do that without either getting into either te cards that break the turn 4 rule or cards that are overly efficient like skullclamp DRS or jitte.
I'm sorry for being so flippant but that argument is just really hard to take seriously.
the artificial rotation argument is a pretty good one. it's not only limited to cards that have been banned, but also to cards that have simply not been allowed into the format in order to see what impact there really have. so you have banned cards, plus cards that haven't even been given the time of day. you say what you say because, and i'm going to make a judgment call here, because you are a young player. if you've been around long enough, you'd feel completely different if you weren't able to port some variation of a pet standard or extended deck into modern, for example, thopter/sword combo, or tezz control. sure, i don't think all past decks should allow to exist in modern, such as any stoneforge/blade decks, or hypergenesis decks.
also, if i didn't make myself clear before, i will now, there are maybe 8 - 10 cards i'd look at for unbanning, it doesn't mean i'd unban them all - just that there are 8 - 10 cards are the maximum i consider should even be looked at. also, nothing you said changes that fact that the banning criteria wotc has enforced, is very different than the one they officially announced. as of late, the bannings have been pretty obscure, their reasoning each time gets less and less scientific/data in nature, and more and more conjecture/feelings. it is no secret that wotc hates certain types of decks, and although they say they want 3 or 4 archetypes of each type in modern, their actions as of late seem to indicate that they are perfectly content having some archetypes such as graveyard, and control to be almost non-existent.
edit: looking at the banlist one more time, i guess i'd say there are only 7 cards i'd seriously consider, so i will admit to that exaggeration.
Not a young player, been playing for well over 10 years but hey, thanks for stereotyping that anyone who disagrees with you just doesn't understand the game.
You clearly fall into the camp of giving every card a shot. If the banlist was managed that way then we would suffer FAR worse meta and price fluctuations. And I don't feel about not being able to port my favorite extended deck cause guess what? I accept modern as a different format and play it because I like modern, not cause I want the next best thing to extended. In fact Id be so bold as to say modern would be far less popular if it was possible to port a lot of the extended decks.
That said, I do think sword of the meek could come off and that control should be strengthened in modern, but I really don't think the banlist is being managed all that terribly at all. Dig sword and AV are the only cards Id like to see come off soon, with BBE EVENTUALLY returning to the format. Jace would possibly be safe as well but it's just too risky and really would be a net negative in the format for many players.
As for hating archetypes, I actually have a lot of respect for their handling of storm. It's a deck that has a VERY high potential to be oppressive, yet they've managed to carefully ban the correct pieces so it's still a competitive option. I know a lot of people are mad about pod, but there just wasn't the same option there. I'm sure they considered other options, but the deck is too malleable and you would need up banning cards that don't truly hurt pod and do completely destroy other decks.
you come off as an incredibly flippant child, and then you wonder why i stereotype you as a young player? are you kidding? you throw a temper tantrum and then wonder why i treat you the way i did, classic.
anyways, the category of player i fall under is the rational one. there are cards that were initially banned that do deserve their day in the format, wotc proved by unbanning cards like bitterblossom and such, that there are cards that probably don't deserve to be there in the first place. also, in a single paragraph, you mentioned like 4 or 5 cards that you'd like to see unbanned. do you really think my 7 cards is such a crazy number then? i don't see how your opinion is that much different than my vision.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If your goal is to make Modern as diverse as possible, then we should just keep adding things to the ban list until it doesn't make sense to discuss a metagame anymore. There would be so little power in the format that literally anything could be playable.
Playing millions of cards every turn... Slowly and systematically obliterating any chance my opponent has of winning... Clicking the multitude of locking mechanisms into place... Not even trying to win myself until turn 10+ once I have nigh absolute control... Watching my opponent desperately trying to navigate the labyrinthine prison that I've constructed... Seeing the light of hope fade and ultimately extinguished in an excruciatingly slow manner... THAT'S fun Magic.
We have 2-3 users that are dramatically making this thread incomprehensible and non-productive for anyone else to possibly join in the discussion. This needs to change.
Every time I see [ktkenshinx] post in here, I get the impression of a stern dad walking in on a bunch of kids trying to do something dumb and just shaking his head in disappointment.
Near Mint: The same as Slightly Played, but we threw some Altoids in the box we stored it in to cover up the scent of dead mice. Slightly Played: The base condition for all MTG cards. This card looks OK, but there’s one minor annoying ding in it that will always irritate and distract you whenever you draw it. Moderately Played: This card looks like it survived the Tet Offensive tucked inside the waistband of GI underwear. It may smell like it, too. Heavily Played: This card looks like the remains of Mohammed Atta’s passport after 9/11. It may be playable if you double-sleeve it to stop the chunks from falling out. The condition formerly known as "Washing Machine Grade" Damaged: This card is the unfortunate victim of a Mirrorweave/March of the Machines/Chaos Confetti/Mindslaver combo.
[M]aking counterfeit cards is the absolute height of dishonesty. Ask yourself this question: Since most people...are totally cool with the use of proxies...what purpose do [high] quality counterfeit cards serve?
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If your goal is to make Modern as diverse as possible, then we should just keep adding things to the ban list until it doesn't make sense to discuss a metagame anymore. There would be so little power in the format that literally anything could be playable.
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
I do pilot High Tide. But you should definitely keep thinking of Dredge, D&T, and Lands as blue decks. That won't confuse anybody.
You can not raise the power level of the format and balance the format at the same time. As long as the power level falls between Standard and Legacy, which it still does, you dont have to worry about the power drop. As I said, there are zero cards that would balance the format on the ban list. They would just tilt the format toward another direction at the cost of another deck(s).
As for the decks, I didnt read the names , I just looked at the mana symbols. Not my fault you put the wrong mana symbols by them.
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
If you look at my signature, I play everything
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
And as long as any reasonably cheap way of gaining card advantage is banned, Control will not exist. Wizards has to sacrifice one of those two goals. Either we will not have archetype diversity or we will not have a format dominated by who topdecks better. I personally would prefer archetype diversity. I think most people would agree with me.
I know Punishing Fire is banned due to the comob with it and Grove of the Burn Willows. But how about a swap ban with them? Punishing Fire seems like a fine card that could be used for other fun things, whereas Grove is just stupidly good. I think doing the swap ban would, while completely wrecking soul sisters, lead to more fun interactions, and shake up the meta a bit.
Modern
UBR Grixis Control
U Merfolk
Pauper
U Mono U Delver
Ancestral Visions is freed
They did not too long ago, well it was when they announced the PT schedule and Modern was not on it and everyone flipped out. Wotc came out and said they didnt like how the meta looked and they wanted multiple decks from each archetype (aggro, combo, control, midrange) viable in the format. That is why they can not have a single dominating force in the format.
I actually agree with him. I like the fact they are handling Modern different then they did Legacy.
You seem mad because Wotc is handling Modern different then they handled Legacy. Wotc has many formats flaws and mistakes to go off while building Modern. Where some might not agree with Wotc, not everyone feels that way. Instead of comparing, just play the format. Even with the bans plenty like the format.
I am of the belief Wotc sees AV as a cheap consistency card and they have set a precedent of banning them from the format. I dont see AV coming off anytime soon.
I am going to say you have never played with or against the card. Punishing fire is rough to deal with once it gets started. Burnwillows is the most common activator of Pfire, but there are others that can be used.
The size of the ban list shouldnt matter. We have thousands of cards to play with. The object is to have a balanced format.
I dont care of the ban list is 100 cards deep as long as we end up with a balanced format.
Oh I didnt hit the ignore button it's just that your post is SO WHINY and very little of it is actually trying to raise issues beyond "why can't it be more like legacy!?" Which is kinda stupid since many players play because they LIKE how unlike legacy it is. You're panicking over bans cause pod got banned. EVERYONE has been saying it'll get banned eventually for years. This is no shock and certainly shouldn't make you as paranoid as it is.
Bottom line; pod hit every check box for a card that should be on the Banlist for modern and almost everyone playing that deck knew it was on borrowed time.
while i agree that pod was living on borrowed time, because if it didn't get banned now, something ridiculous might've been printed that would've broken it, i feel like saying that people are 'idiotic' for expecting a non-rotating format to not artificially be rotated via unbannings and bannings is silly. a major reason why the average player invests into modern is because he/she wants to use his/her cards beyond standard. out of the banlist, i'm sure that 20 or so card definitely belong there, and probably 10 or so should definitely be serious considered modern legal. again, saying that it's idiotic to be frustrated at caleb's article is kind of ridiculous, because the whole point of investing into a non-rotating format is to leave the fear of rotation behind - it's not an outrageous expectation to have. if they wanted modern to have a rotating banlist, it's something that should've been told and made clear from the beginning instead of banning criteria being quite obscure as of late.
Oh, okay. Let's just keep banning things until blue control is viable again. That makes sense.
I'm surprised that WotC hasn't already hired you to fix Modern. Maybe you should let them know that you're available?
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
I wouldnt move to Seattle.
Just because I wish for something that you dont, doesnt mean you need to get snarky.
The fact blue isnt the dominating color in Modern is a huge plus to many. I am sure you would disagree.
What are you talking about? Wotc has been pretty consistent about bannings since the beginning of the format.
Yea I don't buy the artificial rotation argument. VERY few decks have been banned to the unplayable point. What, pod and eggs? It's just another exagerration. You can't really think TEN cards on the list should be modern legal? I don't think you can do that without either getting into either te cards that break the turn 4 rule or cards that are overly efficient like skullclamp DRS or jitte.
I'm sorry for being so flippant but that argument is just really hard to take seriously.
Nope, it is more like this. Let's ban everything until blue control is viable again and then let's ban blue control.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
If you explained that you're clairvoyant, I'm sure they'd let you do it remotely.
There are a lot of ways to balance a format, and this format in particular. Banning things until you need a desk reference just to know what's still legal, isn't the way to go. If your ban list is 100 cards long, then you're doing the whole "balance" thing wrong.
If you look at my signature, I play everything. I chose blue control as the antithesis to your suggestion because the number of cards that would need to be banned in order for blue control to be competitive in Modern, would be astronomical. Blue control is so weak in Modern that you'd need just about every green, black, and red staple to be added to the ban list. No one is having fun in that format, not even the blue control players.
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
the artificial rotation argument is a pretty good one. it's not only limited to cards that have been banned, but also to cards that have simply not been allowed into the format in order to see what impact there really have. so you have banned cards, plus cards that haven't even been given the time of day. you say what you say because, and i'm going to make a judgment call here, because you are a young player. if you've been around long enough, you'd feel completely different if you weren't able to port some variation of a pet standard or extended deck into modern, for example, thopter/sword combo, or tezz control. sure, i don't think all past decks should allow to exist in modern, such as any stoneforge/blade decks, or hypergenesis decks.
also, if i didn't make myself clear before, i will now, there are maybe 8 - 10 cards i'd look at for unbanning, it doesn't mean i'd unban them all - just that there are 8 - 10 cards are the maximum i consider should even be looked at. also, nothing you said changes that fact that the banning criteria wotc has enforced, is very different than the one they officially announced. as of late, the bannings have been pretty obscure, their reasoning each time gets less and less scientific/data in nature, and more and more conjecture/feelings. it is no secret that wotc hates certain types of decks, and although they say they want 3 or 4 archetypes of each type in modern, their actions as of late seem to indicate that they are perfectly content having some archetypes such as graveyard, and control to be almost non-existent.
edit: looking at the banlist one more time, i guess i'd say there are only 7 cards i'd seriously consider, so i will admit to that exaggeration.
More snarky comments, I should just put you on ignore again.
There are zero cards on the ban list that would 'balance' the format. All of them would tilt the format in another direction at the cost of other decks in the format, in turn narrowing the format. Not something I would like to see.
A lot of blue there. Are you sure you are not just an angry blue Legacy mage?
GWUB 4C Gifts Control
Commander:
GWU Derevi
BGW Ghave
BUG Muldrotha
Tiny Leaders:
BGW Doran
BGU Leovold
Exactly what is AV killing in the format? And I remember you being pretty mad after a set of bannings and complaining about how bad Modern was, and yet, the game goes on.
If you have been paying attention, AV is a consistency card in the area of P&P, TC, DTT, GSZ... Not all bans are for power reason, not all bans come from dominating the format. Wotc has been pretty consistent in banning cheap consistency cards such as cantrops and deck manipulation.
I think your understanding of the game is awful if you think AV is like any of those cards. It's only cosmetically similar to TC but vastly less powerful. Having Suspend 4 is the opposite of what Preordain and Ponder give a deck as they smooth things out. AV is feast or famine and is only useful for breaking parity, it's an awful top deck when you're chasing a game.
Not a young player, been playing for well over 10 years but hey, thanks for stereotyping that anyone who disagrees with you just doesn't understand the game.
You clearly fall into the camp of giving every card a shot. If the banlist was managed that way then we would suffer FAR worse meta and price fluctuations. And I don't feel about not being able to port my favorite extended deck cause guess what? I accept modern as a different format and play it because I like modern, not cause I want the next best thing to extended. In fact Id be so bold as to say modern would be far less popular if it was possible to port a lot of the extended decks.
That said, I do think sword of the meek could come off and that control should be strengthened in modern, but I really don't think the banlist is being managed all that terribly at all. Dig sword and AV are the only cards Id like to see come off soon, with BBE EVENTUALLY returning to the format. Jace would possibly be safe as well but it's just too risky and really would be a net negative in the format for many players.
As for hating archetypes, I actually have a lot of respect for their handling of storm. It's a deck that has a VERY high potential to be oppressive, yet they've managed to carefully ban the correct pieces so it's still a competitive option. I know a lot of people are mad about pod, but there just wasn't the same option there. I'm sure they considered other options, but the deck is too malleable and you would need up banning cards that don't truly hurt pod and do completely destroy other decks.
The point is, AV draws 3 cards for 1 mana. It is a cheap consistency card something Wotc has been consistent in keeping out of the format. It was awful to start the game with 2 TC in hand also. All cards have weakness and are bad at some time during a game. Your top deck complaint is moot.
Without even knowing the 7 you are thinking of, I will say I would not want to play in the format you envision. I am willing to go out on a limb and say anyone not willing to buy into Legacy wouldnt. The format you are envisioning would break the turn 4 rule in pieces. The format would devolve into a handful of either lightning fast combo or aggro or super consistent decks that might be able to battle the speed of the format without the proper policing cards. In short, broken Magic. No thank you.
And before you go and assume I am a newer player, I am not. I have been playing since the inception of the game. I am not fond of Legacy, wont play Vintage, and I own all the cards.
That's the opposite of consistency, your entire line of reasoning is faulty. You can't point to what AV does that would be bad for the meta so you're resorting to blabbering about something nonsensical in terms of a game of Magic.
AV is drawing 3 cards for 1 mana. I dont care what turn you get the cards, it is cheap card draw and makes decks more consistent. It is exactly what the card does. Cheap card draw, cantrips lead to more consistency in decks that run them. I dont understand how you can say AV does not lead to more consistent decks.
If Wotc wasnt going to unban AV while banning TC and DTT, it would seem that Wotc sees AV at least on the same level as TC and DTT, no matter how you feel about it.
You just want to play with AV and refuse to hear or see anyone elses point of view.
you come off as an incredibly flippant child, and then you wonder why i stereotype you as a young player? are you kidding? you throw a temper tantrum and then wonder why i treat you the way i did, classic.
anyways, the category of player i fall under is the rational one. there are cards that were initially banned that do deserve their day in the format, wotc proved by unbanning cards like bitterblossom and such, that there are cards that probably don't deserve to be there in the first place. also, in a single paragraph, you mentioned like 4 or 5 cards that you'd like to see unbanned. do you really think my 7 cards is such a crazy number then? i don't see how your opinion is that much different than my vision.
I'm pretty sure that being ignored by you is how people earn their stripes in this thread.
If your goal is to make Modern as diverse as possible, then we should just keep adding things to the ban list until it doesn't make sense to discuss a metagame anymore. There would be so little power in the format that literally anything could be playable.
I do pilot High Tide. But you should definitely keep thinking of Dredge, D&T, and Lands as blue decks. That won't confuse anybody.
WUDeath&TaxesWG
Legacy
UBRGDredgeUBRG
UHigh TideU
URGLandsURG
WR Card Choice List
WUR American D&T
WUB Esper D&T
The Reserved List
Heat Maps
You can not raise the power level of the format and balance the format at the same time. As long as the power level falls between Standard and Legacy, which it still does, you dont have to worry about the power drop. As I said, there are zero cards that would balance the format on the ban list. They would just tilt the format toward another direction at the cost of another deck(s).
As for the decks, I didnt read the names , I just looked at the mana symbols. Not my fault you put the wrong mana symbols by them.
And as long as any reasonably cheap way of gaining card advantage is banned, Control will not exist. Wizards has to sacrifice one of those two goals. Either we will not have archetype diversity or we will not have a format dominated by who topdecks better. I personally would prefer archetype diversity. I think most people would agree with me.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.