Either way, i'm done with this format, If I can basically lock out or even stomp on a Combo deck and win by turn 2-3, it's not interesting.
.
See ya!
I find a lot of depth in creature combat. Stalled boards in Limited are some of the most interesting situations to get stuck in, but that's off topic.
What will happen to the banned list next? I predict no changes. The format is excellent at this point. Every archetype has representation, all of the colors have decks in tier 1, and there are easily 20 competitive decks to choose from. A minority of "engine" combo players are disenfranchised, but other combo players, aggro players, and control players have a new home for their rotated Standard cards.
IDK if this format even needs to have strong local support. It is really a place for people to use their old Standard cards that will not make the cut in Legacy or Vintage. In that sense simply having the format around in a official capacity gives players a bit of a price buffer for their cards, where more of their cards will keep or gain value instead of all dropping into bulk once they leave Standard and don't make it in Legacy.
The format would grow much faster if there were 5Ks or even exclusive Modern FNM support from Wizards. Something like a special promo given only to winners if they play Modern (so separate promos for Standard and Modern FNMs) or some other exclusivity would do the trick. As is I expect organic growth. Once people get used to the idea that "I can hold onto my Snapcasters, because there's an affordable format (no FOW, no original duals, no Moxen...) that uses them in top tier decks." they will warm up to building Modern decks, or at least have more faith in Wizards now that their cards don't instantly become unplayable.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
okay guys, reading compression lesson. did he say combo turn 2 or 3? no. he said there are aggro decks that can goldfish turn 2 or 3.
also, las vegas will not be a modern event. it will be a limited event where the set will probably contain high value cards. huge difference. hypothetically speaking, if portland pulls less people than previous events, (i'm going to guestimate around 800), what will your excuse be?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
It was from one of the other threads that got locked.
As for your turn 2-3 claim, I am guessing a turn 4 format like Modern wouldnt be for you if thats what you want. You do understand MOdern is a turn 4 format, and thats for all decks, not just certain ones.
Alright ban milira.
T1 bird
T2 Milira/seer
T3 redcap
Kiki jiki breaks the percentage rule, two decks play him as a combo card. Ergo ban.
Something more will get banned. Sig it, count on it.
In every case below, notice Wizards' language around the ban. They consistently take the conservative approach to try and keep the deck playable and alive!Banned: Golgari Grave-Troll Quote: "Therefore, it seemed like the best place to attack the deck. You can still play Dredge, but you'll be dredging a little bit slower, and you'll have to play real targets to reanimate instead of getting Golgari Grave-Troll for free." Could have banned: Bridge from Below and Narcomoeba.
Banned: Ponder and Preordain Banned: Rite of Flame Quote: "A large number of blue-red combination decks kept the field less diverse. One thing that made them so efficient was the cards that would find their combinations. Ponder and Preordain were the most widely used of those cards. Banning these should make those combination decks somewhat less efficient without removing the possibility of playing them." Could have banned: Grapeshot, Empty the Warrens, Pyromancer's Ascension, Splinter Twin, Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker
Banned: Second Sunrise Quote: "The DCI considered which card to ban to deal with this issue. We decided to try and do the narrowest possible ban: one that would reduce the chance of such long turns without banning a card used in other decks. That is why Second Sunrise is banned in Modern." Could have banned: Lotus Bloom, Faith's Reward, Reshape
In all of these cases, Wizards took a conservative and narrow approach to the bans. They could have utterly killed some of these decks, but decided to only ban certain offensive pieces instead. Unless Wizards has an unprecedented and unsignaled shift in its banning behavior, we can reasonable expect this of future announcements.
this is funny, they KILLED all this decks with this "conservative" bans.
edit: they banned elf because it was everywhere, with the lack of combo, tron could rise even more, and a turn 3 kark or emrakul (as a finisher) are very powerful, so maaaybe they could ban them
Kiki jiki breaks the percentage rule, two decks play him as a combo card. Ergo ban.
Something more will get banned. Sig it, count on it.
Still can not kill you until turn 4 when they play redcap.
I didnt know Kiki wins on turn 3 that high of a percentage.
If anything Melera/Kiki decks fall with in the guidelines of the format.
If they ban anything it will be glistener elf. Infect can go off more regularly then any pod deck can. Not sure if infect has the percentage of turn 3 wins as Storm did to get the ban though.
this is funny, they KILLED all this decks with this "conservative" bans
In the case of Storm and Second Sunrise, the decks had to be killed for the format's internal logic. If you want a turn 4 format, then Song and Rite had to go. If you want tournament logistics to stay as is, Sunrise had to go.
But even in those cases, Wizards still wanted the deck to exist as much as possible. For Storm, that meant banning just the cards that sped the decks to turn 3, not the cards that make the deck work. If Wizards truly wanted to kill these decks, they could have just banned Grapeshot or Past in Flames. They just banned the rituals that made the decks too fast for the format. For Eggs, that meant just killing the worst offender in the tournament-time department and keeping the rest.
Moreover, not all those decks are dead. Dredge will return once GGT gets off that list in September (I'm counting on you Wizards). Infect is doing just fine without its broken Shoal/Ponder/Preordain combination. Twin has been there since the beginning.
this is funny, they KILLED all this decks with this "conservative" bans.
edit: they banned elf because it was everywhere, with the lack of combo, tron could rise even more, and a turn 3 kark or emrakul (as a finisher) are very powerful, so maaaybe they could ban them
haha Wizards "KILLED" all the decks!
Dredge, Storm and Eggs are all still decks, albeit maybe not as potent, but you can still play them. People need to stop freaking out over bans because their netdecked lists are useless now. Talented deckbuilders are always gunna try to work lists out. Not even a day after Second Sunrise was banned we have new Eggs decks that boast just as consistent a win.
With DGM we have 2 maybe 3 new decks which are all combo, so it's kind of a new playground.
But even in those cases, Wizards still wanted the deck to exist as much as possible.
It's not possible for combo decks to exist as engine combo that is turn 4. It's intrinsic to the nature of engine combo. Engine combo is non interactive so if it takes 4 turns minimum it can't win the race and is therefor not a deck. As such there will be no engine combo and it will be banned out of existence.
I didnt know Kiki wins on turn 3 that high of a percentage.
No it breaks the percentage of the format rule. Two decks which are both good play the card and it's a combo card so it's clearly "Too good"
No deck has survived a ban after the rite of flame ban, and don't tell me jund "Survived" because it's a shell of its former self having bad matchups against much of it's former good matchups.
It's not possible for combo decks to exist as engine combo that is turn 4. It's intrinsic to the nature of engine combo. Engine combo is non interactive so if it takes 4 turns minimum it can't win the race and is therefor not a deck. As such there will be no engine combo and it will be banned out of existence.
So this is actually a real problem with the format right now. Aggro is perfectly capable of winning by turn 4. Just look at Burn, Robots, and the Blitz decks. If those decks can consistently stomp over an opponent on turn 4, then what incentive is there to play a combo deck winning on the same turn but with more vulnerability? It's a real problem right now, and I don't think Wizards has accounted for it.
The adjustment is to allow combo decks to win on turn 3 but not turn 2. This would give combo players the edge they need on aggro and, in turn, would open up a slot for control decks to stop a turn 3 combo.
That said, you wouldn't want turn 2 wins. That's just too fast in a format with no Daze, Wasteland, or Force of Will. So bannings would still have to be aimed at stopping the consistent turn 2 win, and that means that cards like Rite and Song would probably stayed banned. That said, a card like Dread Return could come off the list by that logic.
So this is actually a real problem with the format right now. Aggro is perfectly capable of winning by turn 4. Just look at Burn, Robots, and the Blitz decks. If those decks can consistently stomp over an opponent on turn 4, then what incentive is there to play a combo deck winning on the same turn but with more vulnerability? It's a real problem right now, and I don't think Wizards has accounted for it.
The adjustment is to allow combo decks to win on turn 3 but not turn 2. This would give combo players the edge they need on aggro and, in turn, would open up a slot for control decks to stop a turn 3 combo.
I'd support this rule. The intrinsic nature of combo is non interactive so if an interactive deck can accomplish the same thing in the same time you're making a terrible choice at deck selection. The only reason pod is still a deck is because it's just a midrange deck that happens to automatically win games every other game. Twin exists because its an interactive tempo deck with a combo finish. Engine combo can't exist based on format rules which alienates a portion of players for no good reason other than they want to alienate these players.
When there is record setting attendance in Las Vegas, dont expect Wotc to change their ways. The masses will have spoken.
You are confusing Magic growth with Format growth. Again. All magic is expanding, but guess what? Modern isn't.
This is a chart tracking attendance across the Grand Prix circuit for Legacy and Modern across the same time period.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
It's not possible for combo decks to exist as engine combo that is turn 4. It's intrinsic to the nature of engine combo. Engine combo is non interactive so if it takes 4 turns minimum it can't win the race and is therefor not a deck. As such there will be no engine combo and it will be banned out of existence.
When there is record setting attendance in Las Vegas, dont expect Wotc to change their ways. The masses will have spoken.
The Modern Masters is a limited format... Not Modern. Infact it means more that people are excited there will be a set full of high powered reprints. Not modern...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing:
Modern: UWUW TronUW
Legacy: WDeath N TaxesW CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Playing Devil's Advocate: From a competitive aspect, wouldn't having less players be BETTER than having more players? There will be less rounds, which means less chances to lose, you only have to go 4-0 instead of 5-0 for the double draw into top 8, and there will be a shorter day overall. From a purely selfish aspect, I would want less opponents, especially if the opponents that left are ones that tend to play a tough match up for me, or that force me to dedicate a bunch of SB slots to beating them.
If all of the combo players leave, then I only have to worry about aggro, midrange, and control decks. Suddenly a LOT of room in my SB has opened up, where I can use my skill to beat all of those opponents.
Lord: Do you have a chart showing attendance numbers for Modern GPs compared to Extended GPs? I don't think comparing Modern attendance to Legacy is fair, considering that these are two completely separate formats. Wizards has made that point very clear.
Modern will not be Legacy for a long time. If you want to play Legacy-lite, I suggest spending your money on original duals and FOW if that's the kind of Magic you want to play. I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll just say that Legacy and Modern offer different types of play for different groups of players.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
Playing Devil's Advocate: From a competitive aspect, wouldn't having less players be BETTER than having more players? There will be less rounds, which means less chances to lose, you only have to go 4-0 instead of 5-0 for the double draw into top 8, and there will be a shorter day overall. From a purely selfish aspect, I would want less opponents, especially if the opponents that left are ones that tend to play a tough match up for me, or that force me to dedicate a bunch of SB slots to beating them.
Less opponents lower prizes. So you don't need to leave the FNM if that's how you feel. Each round you play is for prize, the more rounds the more prize.
If all of the combo players leave, then I only have to worry about aggro, midrange, and control decks. Suddenly a LOT of room in my SB has opened up, where I can use my skill to beat all of those opponents.
You realize the mirror typically (especially when non blue) involves very little skill. Example Jund/junk mirror whoever sticks bob will win.
Put simply creature combat doesn't equal skill. There's rarely any choice (even though there feels like one).
Lord: Do you have a chart showing attendance numbers for Modern GPs compared to Extended GPs? I don't think comparing Modern attendance to Legacy is fair, considering that these are two completely separate formats. Wizards has made that point very clear.
Modern will not be Legacy for a long time. If you want to play Legacy-lite, I suggest spending your money on original duals and FOW if that's the kind of Magic you want to play. I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll just say that Legacy and Modern offer different types of play for different groups of players.
It doesn't need to be legacy to be able to support a draw 3, a cantrip, or a few zepher sprites.
Dredge, Storm and Eggs are all still decks, albeit maybe not as potent, but you can still play them. People need to stop freaking out over bans because their netdecked lists are useless now. Talented deckbuilders are always gunna try to work lists out. Not even a day after Second Sunrise was banned we have new Eggs decks that boast just as consistent a win.
Unfortunately, if these lists catch on (maybe they won't because they don't have the hype of a pro tour win behind them) Faith's Reward will see a ban too.
Less opponents lower prizes. So you don't need to leave the FNM if that's how you feel. Each round you play is for prize, the more rounds the more prize.
You realize the mirror typically (especially when non blue) involves very little skill. Example Jund/junk mirror whoever sticks bob will win.
Put simply creature combat doesn't equal skill. There's rarely any choice (even though there feels like one).
If the tournament is a PTQ or a GP, less rounds means an easier chance of reaching the only prize that matters: The qualification. Why should I care if 2nd - 16th only get a few packs each? I'm only there for 1st place. The packs are just a consolation prize anyway. No one I know travels to PTQs to win boxes of product.
But that's my Devil's Advocate position. From Wizards view -> more players = more $ for them. They certainly want GPs to grow. They want PTQs to be swamped, and they certainly want all of the online events to fire. I bet WOTC knows what they're doing with the ban list, making the calculated risk of losing some Eggs and Legacy die-hards in exchange for getting greater customer retention from the Standard crowd.
Have you played Limited? Most of the Pros say that Limited is the most skill testing format... and its mostly creature combat. I also doubt Wizards would schedule half of each of their Pro Tour tournaments around a format like that if it had no skill.
Creature-based constructed formats take the Limited combat situations and streamline them. There are less varied types of creatures to deal with, but there are still plenty of creature battles to consider. You may not like this type of Magic, but to say it has no skill is insulting to every Limited expert and all of the best players in the game, who have to be experts at creatures in order to make money at this game.
And mirror matches take way more skill than "stick x and win." I suggest testing more with higher skilled players. Just like in 99% of your matches, if you lose it is your fault. It is better to look for mistakes and try to improve as a player than to blame anything of who drew what.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
Lord: Do you have a chart showing attendance numbers for Modern GPs compared to Extended GPs?
Yes.
As you can see, increasing trends that end about where Modern attendance begins.
I don't think comparing Modern attendance to Legacy is fair, considering that these are two completely separate formats. Wizards has made that point very clear.
People want to keep saying Modern an "eternal format." so comparing it to an actual eternal format is apt. Or rather I could link the Tom LaPile article where he says that Modern was literally created because of growing Legacy numbers.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
Playing Devil's Advocate: From a competitive aspect, wouldn't having less players be BETTER than having more players? There will be less rounds, which means less chances to lose, you only have to go 4-0 instead of 5-0 for the double draw into top 8, and there will be a shorter day overall. From a purely selfish aspect, I would want less opponents, especially if the opponents that left are ones that tend to play a tough match up for me, or that force me to dedicate a bunch of SB slots to beating them.
If all of the combo players leave, then I only have to worry about aggro, midrange, and control decks. Suddenly a LOT of room in my SB has opened up, where I can use my skill to beat all of those opponents.
Formats grow and thrive because of attendance. Although it might benefit a player in the short run to have more PTQ wins and prize payouts, in the long run most players are going to prefer our format to expand. This means more innovation, more players, and more fun at larger and more frequent events.
Even from a purely economic perspective, an open and inviting Modern format is better than a closed one. As the format grows, there will be more events with increasing payouts. SCG could add Modern to the Open series. More FNMs will take place. More local tournaments will be hosted. And players who win at these events will gain more money and more prestige. So even if we assess it from a purely economical and selfish perspective, it is better to have Modern expand than it is for Modern to stagnate.
People want to keep saying Modern an "eternal format." so comparing it to an actual eternal format is apt. Or rather I could link the Tom LaPile article where he says that Modern was literally created because of growing Legacy numbers.
A fairer comparison would be Modern attendance today to Legacy attendance a few years back. The format definitely needs time and room to grow and I don't think anyone is denying that.
Unfortunately, if these lists catch on (maybe they won't because they don't have the hype of a pro tour win behind them) Faith's Reward will see a ban too.
Only if they make the rounds go too long or break the turn 4 rule.
There are tons of fair combo decks that a) don't take forever to win, and b) win on turn 4 most often. The key I see between all of the remaining combos is that they are based around creatures.
I suggest picking up Twin, Pod, or Infect. You are vulnerable to creature removal, but you will have a fair combo deck that doesn't look like it will see a banning. Having creatures is almost like a "ban shield" in this case, because I bet WOTC figures that everyone has cards to deal with creatures, so even a potential turn 2 win from Infect can be stopped by something as simple as Devour Flesh.
This is good for the format. SBs don't have to be warped. Everyone will feel like they are in the game. The combo decks themselves will have to interact in order to keep their combo creatures alive.
Look at the Twin deck. It runs Spellskite, Flame Slash, Dispel, and other spells to interact with opponents answers to their cards. The opponents in turn get to play their own Spellskites or answer cards. There is a back and forth here, instead of one player sitting while another is playing solo for several minutes. This is just a better game play experience overall.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
A fairer comparison would be Modern attendance today to Legacy attendance a few years back. The format definitely needs time and room to grow and I don't think anyone is denying that.
The game wasn't big enough back then to make such comparisons.
The format has had time to grow. Modern GPs weren't even a thing in 2011, the year the format was invented. Modern grew, then got banned right back where it started, just over 700 players. About where Extended was when it ended ~three years earlier.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What's the big deal? You could have played multiple Righteous Avengers for years now.
Yes.
As you can see, increasing trends that end about where Modern attendance begins.
People want to keep saying Modern an "eternal format." so comparing it to an actual eternal format is apt. Or rather I could link the Tom LaPile article where he says that Modern was literally created because of growing Legacy numbers.
Thanks for the info.
According to the chart on page 3, the Modern GP numbers average out to a notch above the mid-point from this chart, and just below the highest peaks on the Extended chart. Every single Modern GP is outperforming the average for Extended GPs.
According to the Extended chart, the highest peak is at ~1250 players? Yet the highest Modern peak shows ~1500 players. It looks like Modern is outperforming Extended, the format that it is supposed to be replacing. If I can get the numbers for the data points I can combine both charts.
If Modern was created to replace Legacy, then why didn't all of the Legacy GPs get replaced with Modern, instead of the Extended ones? Maybe Wizards realizes that both formats cater to different players, so its a smart move to offer both. One is a non-rotating format for older players, spell-based Magic fans, and collectors, while the other is more of an extension and value buffer for Standard players.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You can't always win, and just because you lose doesn't mean you played badly.
Even if you lose, it is important to remain confident in your ability to make good plays and decisions. Lose that and you are truly lost.
Testing is great, and the better the testing is, the better off you'll be.
It is impossible to tilt and play well.
It is possible to make no mistakes and still lose.
Have you played Limited? Most of the Pros say that Limited is the most skill testing format... and its mostly creature combat. I also doubt Wizards would schedule half of each of their Pro Tour tournaments around a format like that if it had no skill.
Creature-based constructed formats take the Limited combat situations and streamline them. There are less varied types of creatures to deal with, but there are still plenty of creature battles to consider. You may not like this type of Magic, but to say it has no skill is insulting to every Limited expert and all of the best players in the game, who have to be experts at creatures in order to make money at this game.
And mirror matches take way more skill than "stick x and win." I suggest testing more with higher skilled players. Just like in 99% of your matches, if you lose it is your fault. It is better to look for mistakes and try to improve as a player than to blame anything of who drew what.
A) I'm primarily a limited player. The skill from playing limited is drafting not deciding if you can race with a 2/2. I'd say limited is either the most skill testing or second most skill testing format (Depending on if you're playing legacy/vintage storm as those lines of play especially with cabal therapy are more difficult.) It's not the most skill testing because it's creature combat it's the most skill testing because over 3 picks the total possible picks are 2184, the reasonable picks are probably around 900 but that's still extremely high comparable only to playing cabal therapies and brainstorms.
B) Creature combat in limited is largely decided before the game begins by how your deck has been drafted. You rarely have many real choices when it comes to attacking or blocking.
C) No they don't. It doesn't matter how skilled you are if you keep an opening hand with Goyf, DRS, bolt, Lingering souls, land, land, land and your opponent casts a discard spell (For bolt) and then plays dark confidant. You've just lost unless you top deck removal quickly which has no skill involved. This is especially true in mirror matches but not as extreme in most other match ups. The same is true of for example the pod matchup.
According to the chart on page 3, the Modern GP numbers average out to a notch above the mid-point from this chart, and just below the highest peaks on the Extended chart. Every single Modern GP is outperforming the average for Extended GPs.
You'll notice higher and hgiher peaks for Extended, with the last event being at 711, the first modern GP was at 716 people, practically the same amount. It also continued to have higher peaks. The two basically have the same attendance, and it's not hard to imagine the Modern numbers being simple extensions of the Extended ones.
According to the Extended chart, the highest peak is at ~1250 players? Yet the highest Modern peak shows ~1500 players. It looks like Modern is outperforming Extended, the format that it is supposed to be replacing. If I can get the numbers for the data points I can combine both charts.
See ya!
I find a lot of depth in creature combat. Stalled boards in Limited are some of the most interesting situations to get stuck in, but that's off topic.
What will happen to the banned list next? I predict no changes. The format is excellent at this point. Every archetype has representation, all of the colors have decks in tier 1, and there are easily 20 competitive decks to choose from. A minority of "engine" combo players are disenfranchised, but other combo players, aggro players, and control players have a new home for their rotated Standard cards.
IDK if this format even needs to have strong local support. It is really a place for people to use their old Standard cards that will not make the cut in Legacy or Vintage. In that sense simply having the format around in a official capacity gives players a bit of a price buffer for their cards, where more of their cards will keep or gain value instead of all dropping into bulk once they leave Standard and don't make it in Legacy.
The format would grow much faster if there were 5Ks or even exclusive Modern FNM support from Wizards. Something like a special promo given only to winners if they play Modern (so separate promos for Standard and Modern FNMs) or some other exclusivity would do the trick. As is I expect organic growth. Once people get used to the idea that "I can hold onto my Snapcasters, because there's an affordable format (no FOW, no original duals, no Moxen...) that uses them in top tier decks." they will warm up to building Modern decks, or at least have more faith in Wizards now that their cards don't instantly become unplayable.
~ Brian DeMars
also, las vegas will not be a modern event. it will be a limited event where the set will probably contain high value cards. huge difference. hypothetically speaking, if portland pulls less people than previous events, (i'm going to guestimate around 800), what will your excuse be?
Alright ban milira.
T1 bird
T2 Milira/seer
T3 redcap
Kiki jiki breaks the percentage rule, two decks play him as a combo card. Ergo ban.
Something more will get banned. Sig it, count on it.
Wizards in relation to modern.
"The bannings will continue until attendance improves."
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid.:fry:
this is funny, they KILLED all this decks with this "conservative" bans.
edit: they banned elf because it was everywhere, with the lack of combo, tron could rise even more, and a turn 3 kark or emrakul (as a finisher) are very powerful, so maaaybe they could ban them
Still can not kill you until turn 4 when they play redcap.
I didnt know Kiki wins on turn 3 that high of a percentage.
If anything Melera/Kiki decks fall with in the guidelines of the format.
If they ban anything it will be glistener elf. Infect can go off more regularly then any pod deck can. Not sure if infect has the percentage of turn 3 wins as Storm did to get the ban though.
In the case of Storm and Second Sunrise, the decks had to be killed for the format's internal logic. If you want a turn 4 format, then Song and Rite had to go. If you want tournament logistics to stay as is, Sunrise had to go.
But even in those cases, Wizards still wanted the deck to exist as much as possible. For Storm, that meant banning just the cards that sped the decks to turn 3, not the cards that make the deck work. If Wizards truly wanted to kill these decks, they could have just banned Grapeshot or Past in Flames. They just banned the rituals that made the decks too fast for the format. For Eggs, that meant just killing the worst offender in the tournament-time department and keeping the rest.
Moreover, not all those decks are dead. Dredge will return once GGT gets off that list in September (I'm counting on you Wizards). Infect is doing just fine without its broken Shoal/Ponder/Preordain combination. Twin has been there since the beginning.
haha Wizards "KILLED" all the decks!
Dredge, Storm and Eggs are all still decks, albeit maybe not as potent, but you can still play them. People need to stop freaking out over bans because their netdecked lists are useless now. Talented deckbuilders are always gunna try to work lists out. Not even a day after Second Sunrise was banned we have new Eggs decks that boast just as consistent a win.
With DGM we have 2 maybe 3 new decks which are all combo, so it's kind of a new playground.
I'm sorry I'll explain
T1: Forest, Birds
T2: Fetch Black/Green. Cast Seer, Cast Milira
T3: Land Cast Murderous redcap.
Explain to me how that isn't turn 3.
It's not possible for combo decks to exist as engine combo that is turn 4. It's intrinsic to the nature of engine combo. Engine combo is non interactive so if it takes 4 turns minimum it can't win the race and is therefor not a deck. As such there will be no engine combo and it will be banned out of existence.
No it breaks the percentage of the format rule. Two decks which are both good play the card and it's a combo card so it's clearly "Too good"
No deck has survived a ban after the rite of flame ban, and don't tell me jund "Survived" because it's a shell of its former self having bad matchups against much of it's former good matchups.
Wizards in relation to modern.
"The bannings will continue until attendance improves."
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid.:fry:
So this is actually a real problem with the format right now. Aggro is perfectly capable of winning by turn 4. Just look at Burn, Robots, and the Blitz decks. If those decks can consistently stomp over an opponent on turn 4, then what incentive is there to play a combo deck winning on the same turn but with more vulnerability? It's a real problem right now, and I don't think Wizards has accounted for it.
The adjustment is to allow combo decks to win on turn 3 but not turn 2. This would give combo players the edge they need on aggro and, in turn, would open up a slot for control decks to stop a turn 3 combo.
That said, you wouldn't want turn 2 wins. That's just too fast in a format with no Daze, Wasteland, or Force of Will. So bannings would still have to be aimed at stopping the consistent turn 2 win, and that means that cards like Rite and Song would probably stayed banned. That said, a card like Dread Return could come off the list by that logic.
I'd support this rule. The intrinsic nature of combo is non interactive so if an interactive deck can accomplish the same thing in the same time you're making a terrible choice at deck selection. The only reason pod is still a deck is because it's just a midrange deck that happens to automatically win games every other game. Twin exists because its an interactive tempo deck with a combo finish. Engine combo can't exist based on format rules which alienates a portion of players for no good reason other than they want to alienate these players.
Wizards in relation to modern.
"The bannings will continue until attendance improves."
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid.:fry:
You are confusing Magic growth with Format growth. Again. All magic is expanding, but guess what? Modern isn't.
This is a chart tracking attendance across the Grand Prix circuit for Legacy and Modern across the same time period.
"They didn't kill the decks, they just made them not worth playing."
Losing: The number one reason people play magic.
thank you +5465465464652489
The Modern Masters is a limited format... Not Modern. Infact it means more that people are excited there will be a set full of high powered reprints. Not modern...
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
If all of the combo players leave, then I only have to worry about aggro, midrange, and control decks. Suddenly a LOT of room in my SB has opened up, where I can use my skill to beat all of those opponents.
Lord: Do you have a chart showing attendance numbers for Modern GPs compared to Extended GPs? I don't think comparing Modern attendance to Legacy is fair, considering that these are two completely separate formats. Wizards has made that point very clear.
Modern will not be Legacy for a long time. If you want to play Legacy-lite, I suggest spending your money on original duals and FOW if that's the kind of Magic you want to play. I don't want to get off-topic, so I'll just say that Legacy and Modern offer different types of play for different groups of players.
~ Brian DeMars
Less opponents lower prizes. So you don't need to leave the FNM if that's how you feel. Each round you play is for prize, the more rounds the more prize.
You realize the mirror typically (especially when non blue) involves very little skill. Example Jund/junk mirror whoever sticks bob will win.
Put simply creature combat doesn't equal skill. There's rarely any choice (even though there feels like one).
It doesn't need to be legacy to be able to support a draw 3, a cantrip, or a few zepher sprites.
Wizards in relation to modern.
"The bannings will continue until attendance improves."
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid.:fry:
Unfortunately, if these lists catch on (maybe they won't because they don't have the hype of a pro tour win behind them) Faith's Reward will see a ban too.
If the tournament is a PTQ or a GP, less rounds means an easier chance of reaching the only prize that matters: The qualification. Why should I care if 2nd - 16th only get a few packs each? I'm only there for 1st place. The packs are just a consolation prize anyway. No one I know travels to PTQs to win boxes of product.
But that's my Devil's Advocate position. From Wizards view -> more players = more $ for them. They certainly want GPs to grow. They want PTQs to be swamped, and they certainly want all of the online events to fire. I bet WOTC knows what they're doing with the ban list, making the calculated risk of losing some Eggs and Legacy die-hards in exchange for getting greater customer retention from the Standard crowd.
Have you played Limited? Most of the Pros say that Limited is the most skill testing format... and its mostly creature combat. I also doubt Wizards would schedule half of each of their Pro Tour tournaments around a format like that if it had no skill.
Creature-based constructed formats take the Limited combat situations and streamline them. There are less varied types of creatures to deal with, but there are still plenty of creature battles to consider. You may not like this type of Magic, but to say it has no skill is insulting to every Limited expert and all of the best players in the game, who have to be experts at creatures in order to make money at this game.
And mirror matches take way more skill than "stick x and win." I suggest testing more with higher skilled players. Just like in 99% of your matches, if you lose it is your fault. It is better to look for mistakes and try to improve as a player than to blame anything of who drew what.
~ Brian DeMars
Yes.
As you can see, increasing trends that end about where Modern attendance begins.
People want to keep saying Modern an "eternal format." so comparing it to an actual eternal format is apt. Or rather I could link the Tom LaPile article where he says that Modern was literally created because of growing Legacy numbers.
Formats grow and thrive because of attendance. Although it might benefit a player in the short run to have more PTQ wins and prize payouts, in the long run most players are going to prefer our format to expand. This means more innovation, more players, and more fun at larger and more frequent events.
Even from a purely economic perspective, an open and inviting Modern format is better than a closed one. As the format grows, there will be more events with increasing payouts. SCG could add Modern to the Open series. More FNMs will take place. More local tournaments will be hosted. And players who win at these events will gain more money and more prestige. So even if we assess it from a purely economical and selfish perspective, it is better to have Modern expand than it is for Modern to stagnate.
A fairer comparison would be Modern attendance today to Legacy attendance a few years back. The format definitely needs time and room to grow and I don't think anyone is denying that.
Only if they make the rounds go too long or break the turn 4 rule.
There are tons of fair combo decks that a) don't take forever to win, and b) win on turn 4 most often. The key I see between all of the remaining combos is that they are based around creatures.
I suggest picking up Twin, Pod, or Infect. You are vulnerable to creature removal, but you will have a fair combo deck that doesn't look like it will see a banning. Having creatures is almost like a "ban shield" in this case, because I bet WOTC figures that everyone has cards to deal with creatures, so even a potential turn 2 win from Infect can be stopped by something as simple as Devour Flesh.
This is good for the format. SBs don't have to be warped. Everyone will feel like they are in the game. The combo decks themselves will have to interact in order to keep their combo creatures alive.
Look at the Twin deck. It runs Spellskite, Flame Slash, Dispel, and other spells to interact with opponents answers to their cards. The opponents in turn get to play their own Spellskites or answer cards. There is a back and forth here, instead of one player sitting while another is playing solo for several minutes. This is just a better game play experience overall.
~ Brian DeMars
The game wasn't big enough back then to make such comparisons.
The format has had time to grow. Modern GPs weren't even a thing in 2011, the year the format was invented. Modern grew, then got banned right back where it started, just over 700 players. About where Extended was when it ended ~three years earlier.
Thanks for the info.
According to the chart on page 3, the Modern GP numbers average out to a notch above the mid-point from this chart, and just below the highest peaks on the Extended chart. Every single Modern GP is outperforming the average for Extended GPs.
According to the Extended chart, the highest peak is at ~1250 players? Yet the highest Modern peak shows ~1500 players. It looks like Modern is outperforming Extended, the format that it is supposed to be replacing. If I can get the numbers for the data points I can combine both charts.
If Modern was created to replace Legacy, then why didn't all of the Legacy GPs get replaced with Modern, instead of the Extended ones? Maybe Wizards realizes that both formats cater to different players, so its a smart move to offer both. One is a non-rotating format for older players, spell-based Magic fans, and collectors, while the other is more of an extension and value buffer for Standard players.
~ Brian DeMars
A) I'm primarily a limited player. The skill from playing limited is drafting not deciding if you can race with a 2/2. I'd say limited is either the most skill testing or second most skill testing format (Depending on if you're playing legacy/vintage storm as those lines of play especially with cabal therapy are more difficult.) It's not the most skill testing because it's creature combat it's the most skill testing because over 3 picks the total possible picks are 2184, the reasonable picks are probably around 900 but that's still extremely high comparable only to playing cabal therapies and brainstorms.
B) Creature combat in limited is largely decided before the game begins by how your deck has been drafted. You rarely have many real choices when it comes to attacking or blocking.
C) No they don't. It doesn't matter how skilled you are if you keep an opening hand with Goyf, DRS, bolt, Lingering souls, land, land, land and your opponent casts a discard spell (For bolt) and then plays dark confidant. You've just lost unless you top deck removal quickly which has no skill involved. This is especially true in mirror matches but not as extreme in most other match ups. The same is true of for example the pod matchup.
Wizards in relation to modern.
"The bannings will continue until attendance improves."
Not sure if trolling or just very stupid.:fry:
You'll notice higher and hgiher peaks for Extended, with the last event being at 711, the first modern GP was at 716 people, practically the same amount. It also continued to have higher peaks. The two basically have the same attendance, and it's not hard to imagine the Modern numbers being simple extensions of the Extended ones.
Wikipedia List of Grand Prix Events
Google Docs is a terrible spreadsheet tool. I need to pick up excel one of these days.
I didn't say that. I said Modern was created as a direct result to the growth of Legacy.