I like these bannings. Keep in mind, neither of these cards was banned for being overpowered. They were banned for being oppressive. Usual format staples like White Weenie and Tribal strategies
When was the last time WW was a serious player in a format other than Standard? I am not talking about D+T, that already had a decent game, but traditional WW. I'll give you a hint...a long time. The only true Tribal decks that have done well in an eternal format are Gobs and Elvises, and Elvises at least were doing decent in the current meta anyway, so it seems some builders were being creative rather than complaining and waiting for wizards to ban PF.
Isochron Scepter(imprinted with Path) is a problem for these decks because it can kill anything for profit instead of loss. You Bolt/Path my Lotus Cobra, you're down a card, Isochron Scepter(imprinted with Path) it, and you're just enabling your combo while setting me back a turn.
How's that? They are both two card combos. They both require you to only cast one spell to get started, and they both can be disrupted with a decent SB. PF is harder to disrupt when first cast, but is harder to disrupt over time because you are doing the removal with an activated ability. Heck, you stick a boat load of things on a stick, not just ping folks to death.
Now, do I think that for repeatable burn Scepter is on par with PunishingGrove? No, though I will take it for it's versatility. My point is that using re-usability as the reason does not hold water, IMO.
BTW, I am not just picking on you. The things you are saying I have heard from several folks, just using your quotes as a jumping off point.
Basically, any deck that revolves around utility creatures. Punishing Fire is a problem for these decks because it can kill anything for profit instead of loss. You Bolt/Path my Lotus Cobra, you're down a card, PF it, and you're just enabling your combo while setting me back a turn.
Also, are the above listed competitive strategies? Who knows? Now at least they can be tested, instead of knowing beforehand that PF just crushes you.
TBQH and very blunt
Lotus cobra, ghost dad, merfolk and WW will not be decks until at least 10 other cards are banned. WW hasn't been competitive since lor standard which was a joke. Ghost dad was an anti-control midrange aggro deck that was barely good enough for its own standard format. Merfolk in modern years have only been historically good against faeries. Sure they are good in legacy, but they have a lot of shinny toys in legacy modern does not have. Lotus cobra is not something you would run in a deck with 20 other creatures that don't rely on it too be good thus it dies to removal is a very valid argument. This is pretty much the same with lords in this format since lighting bolt alone handles just about every lord.
I am not trying to be mean or rude. This is just the truth.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
When was the last time WW was a serious player in a format other than Standard? I am not talking about D+T, that already had a decent game, but traditional WW...
You do know that Death and Taxes is another name for white weenie, right? The name Death and Taxes is derived from a modification of the old cliche "the only certainties in life are death and taxes...[and someone playing white weenie]." I miss the good old days when deck names were actually interesting!
We won't know if D&T will be viable until there are some more results. But now that P-fires and Nacatl aren't strictly outrunning the kinds of creatures non-Zoo aggro would play, its possible. Legacy was an aggro Goblins dominated format at its first big event, and look at where it is today. I expect Modern will shake itself out into a creativity and skill driven metagame in half that time with how many events there are these days.
You do know that Death and Taxes is another name for white weenie, right? The name Death and Taxes is derived from a modification of the old cliche "the only certainties in life are death and taxes...[and someone playing white weenie]." I miss the good old days when deck names were actually interesting!
D+T is not WW. I is a mono-white midrangy deck. WW is stuff like Kithkin, or solders aggro. Sure it is derived from WW, but it is quite different than traditional ww.
It does not serve the same purpose in the meta game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
D+T is not WW. I is a mono-white midrangy deck. WW is stuff like Kithkin, or solders aggro. Sure it is derived from WW, but it is quite different than traditional ww.
It does not serve the same purpose in the meta game.
Quote from Finn, the MTGS member who developed the initial deck idea in Legacy and writer of the Legacy Primer:
banning goyf does make sense because they now are stating that some creature that are simply too efficient even if they can only attack and block are ban worthy.
And in the past they said many times how goyf was intended to be 1GG instead of 1G.
So it can be easily put on the radar.
Funny thing is:
they say they wlll ban less (they told the same last revision), yet they keep banning cards at high rates without unbanning anything .-.
Banning Goyf doesn't make sense. Nacatl makes more sense than Goyf because the other aggro decks that they said Zoo is limiting the growth of already run Goyf, but not Nacatl. Nacatl makes you run Naya lands at the least. Goyf doesn't. You don't see Jund running Nacatl.
TLDR Other decks already run Goyf to combat Goyf, but can't run Nacatl to combat Nacatl.
I personally do not like the banning of Nacatl. I was hoping for some unbannings rather than more bannings....
Did you not read the explanation? Modern currently has 29 cards on the banlist out of 6,535 cards. Legacy, at its initial announcement, had 62 cards out of 6,449 cards banned.
The length of the banlist is acceptable. Relax and play the damn format.
Yep. A 3/3 for 1 mana is totally fair and has no place to be banned. Which is why it was everywhere at Worlds, even in Bant lists.
there are 40 broken degenerate cards on that ban list, out of 61 cards in total. there are like 7 broken cards in modern ban list and now 31 cards on the list. the lenght of the banlist is in contention because people think it is not acceptable.
Banning Goyf doesn't make sense, because it's used in EVERY aggro deck and will hurt non-zoo decks even more than zoo itself. Wizards knew everyone is going to play Goyf in Modern, so it's very unlikely he'll get banned now. KotR costs 3 mana, which is ok, but i have to admit his abilities are quite strong.
No one runs 4-5 mana creatures, because there is too much cheap removal...
Path to Exile or Deathmark (maybe even Flame Slash ). The problem is, that most or at least a lot of those creatures used in Legacy came from newer sets. Thats also the reason why aggro is so strong in Modern. I don't know if I'm right but I do belive that all those cheap removals are mainly responsible for most 4 cmc+ creatures not being played.
that and the turn 4 kill clock makes them a dead card in a lot of games.
Merged - Please only use double posts if you haven't seen activity in a thread for two to three days. Otherwise use the Edit Button. t_c
Check your facts before you post. Your opinion that anything non-Affinity non-Zoo is midrange is just wrong.
I know that it is billed as WW, but it is not what is generally meant by WW, which is usually weenie aggro. I play D+T in Modern (can't speak to Legacy), I really enjoy it, but it is not played like an aggro deck at all. There are a few weenies (Student, that you play to keep pressure on your opponent, but you have to show restraint in playing your hand and hold back creatures used to flash in for removal or to hurt mana-bases. That is not how traditional WW is played. It is white, most if it's creatures enter the battlefield as weenies, but it is not an aggro deck.
I know that it is billed as WW, but it is not what is generally meant by WW, which is usually weenie aggro. I play D+T in Modern (can't speak to Legacy), I really enjoy it, but it is not played like an aggro deck at all. There are a few weenies (Student, that you play to keep pressure on your opponent, but you have to show restraint in playing your hand and hold back creatures used to flash in for removal or to hurt mana-bases. That is not how traditional WW is played. It is white, most if it's creatures enter the battlefield as weenies, but it is not an aggro deck.
But White Weenie is not always aggro. I play UW Humans in Standard. It is billed as White Weenie but is evolving away from its aggressive origins into a more disruptive midrange build. White Weenie only means what it is called: the creatures are White and are weenies. Disruptive or no, the deck is still White Weenie.
But White Weenie is not always aggro. I play UW Humans in Standard. It is billed as White Weenie but is evolving away from its aggressive origins into a more disruptive midrange build. White Weenie only means what it is called: the creatures are White and are weenies. Disruptive or no, the deck is still White Weenie.
Tell you what, you go down to your shop and ask the first 50 MTG players what kind of deck they think of when they think of traditional WW. I think you will find the majority think of it as aggro. That "common" defn was what I was using to respond to the point, and if we cannot use common terms next time I mention Zoo I will make sure I say aggro weenie Zoo instead- I would not want you to think I was talking about a control or midrange variant. I'll make sure, next time, that I include a glossary when I talk about traditional decks.
This is all pretty beside the point of the thread.
Banning Goyf doesn't make sense. Nacatl makes more sense than Goyf because the other aggro decks that they said Zoo is limiting the growth of already run Goyf, but not Nacatl. Nacatl makes you run Naya lands at the least. Goyf doesn't. You don't see Jund running Nacatl.
TLDR Other decks already run Goyf to combat Goyf, but can't run Nacatl to combat Nacatl.
I personally do not like the banning of Nacatl. I was hoping for some unbannings rather than more bannings....
no other aggro decks run goyf. jund did but it was hurt by the bannings. Junk is moreless a joke. Anytime you put goyf in an aggro deck it ends up becoming zoo because zoo is just better. Banning nactl did not make some other aggro deck magically viable. The only change in the meta is the loss of jund and maybe some sort of tempo/control deck that could take advantage of it also. Now I don't agree that goyf needs to be banned but if we are banning preordains and wild nactls then why the hell not goyf and KotR. Those are why zoo is head and shoulders above other aggro decks...not a 1 drop that is easily replaced by another 1 drop that is almost as good because it is better than any thing other aggro decks could run.
Can't believe everyone was running the wrong one drop for all these months.
steppe lynx has been perfectly acceptable in the past. This was in addition to nactl but I don't think that is really indicative of anything other than naclt being slightly more consistent. The mana base will need to be rehashed and it will need to replace groves with 2-3 more fetchlands, but lynx can be faster and bigger than nactl early on. People are too worried about losing consistancy. Do you remember how many of the "aggro elites" talked crap about boros in standard until they got their hats handed to them a few times.
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Tell you what, you go down to your shop and ask the first 50 MTG players what kind of deck they think of when they think of traditional WW. I think you will find the majority think of it as aggro. That "common" defn was what I was using to respond to the point, and if we cannot use common terms next time I mention Zoo I will make sure I say aggro weenie Zoo instead- I would not want you to think I was talking about a control or midrange variant. I'll make sure, next time, that I include a glossary when I talk about traditional decks.
This is all pretty beside the point of the thread.
This is why it's generally bad to consider decks in terms of archetypes. There are several decks that fall under the banner of Zoo: Aggro Zoo with Kird Ape, Nacatl, and Steppe Lynx; Big Zoo with Elspeth, Noble Hierarch, and Baneslayer Angel; and Tempo Zoo with Bant Charm, Geist of Saint Traft, and Snapcaster Mage. Death and Taxes might be White Weenie, but it is Death and Taxes. To call it anything else construes the deck into a supertype that isn't very descriptive.
This is why it's generally bad to consider decks in terms of archetypes. There are several decks that fall under the banner of Zoo: Aggro Zoo with Kird Ape, Nacatl, and Steppe Lynx; Big Zoo with Elspeth, Noble Hierarch, and Baneslayer Angel; and Tempo Zoo with Bant Charm, Geist of Saint Traft, and Snapcaster Mage. Death and Taxes might be White Weenie, but it is Death and Taxes. To call it anything else construes the deck into a supertype that isn't very descriptive.
I agree but the MTG community at large is the one that makes things into archetypes so you have to organize this way. That's one of the reasons I like the Archetype subforums because there are about 5-6 different "zoo" builds. Now what you call "Big Zoo" I would traditionally call "Bant" or something like that. Up until this point, I would normally call "Zoo" anything that ran Nactal, Goyf and some Burn.
(We'll be getting a new thread soon btw).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Out of the blackness and stench of the engulfing swamp emerged a shimmering figure. Only the splattered armor and ichor-stained sword hinted at the unfathomable evil the knight had just laid waste.
This is why it's generally bad to consider decks in terms of archetypes. There are several decks that fall under the banner of Zoo: Aggro Zoo with Kird Ape, Nacatl, and Steppe Lynx; Big Zoo with Elspeth, Noble Hierarch, and Baneslayer Angel; and Tempo Zoo with Bant Charm, Geist of Saint Traft, and Snapcaster Mage. Death and Taxes might be White Weenie, but it is Death and Taxes. To call it anything else construes the deck into a supertype that isn't very descriptive.
Bad but helpful because it is mostly necessary for growth. If we didn't label decks differently in the past then IMO decks would just be called the same thing with x card. Like aggro-goyf.
The biggest problem with this is that we don't typically have a general base line for what makes a deck different. when is a jund deck and aggro deck and not a midrange deck ect. I'm not going to get into that argument, but the main point is that logical splits are helpful for development.
I would have loved to seen at least one card come off of the ban list. Even if it was GGT since it is pretty much useless without dread return. I have a bad feeling since wotc won't even remove a card of a deck that they later banned. I just wonder how long if ever it is that we get staples back since they should not have been on the list in the first place.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Zoo is weakened with the loss of Wild Nacatl, but not very much, they still have plenty of creatures that are very powerful with the Fetch + Shocklands mana base: Steppe Lynx (wich is even better now that PF is banned), Kird Ape, Loam Lion, Grim Lavamancer (also better as a replacement to kill small creatures), Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary just to name the most emblematic. I bet Zoo is still the best deck in the format.
On the other hand, the banning of Punishing Fire does open a lot of space for other aggro decks, more weenie oriented ones. I'm sure we'll be seeing some in the next few weeks.
In the end, we all knew something like this was going to happen. It's very unlikely that they are going to unban cards that were banned just a few mounts ago. So, given that they were not willing to unban anything, this isn't that bad, it's still better than doing nothing imo.
Zoo is weakened with the loss of Wild Nacatl, but not very much, they still have plenty of creatures that are very powerful with the Fetch + Shocklands mana base: Steppe Lynx (wich is even better now that PF is banned), Kird Ape, Loam Lion, Grim Lavamancer (also better as a replacement to kill small creatures), Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary just to name the most emblematic. I bet Zoo is still the best deck on the format.
On the other hand, the banning of Punishing Fire does opens a lot of space for other aggro decks, more weenie oriented ones. I'm sure we'll be seeing some in the next few weeks.
They will have to still compete with zoo which is for the most part impossible for another aggro deck because zoo is just better. It doesn't have to rely on lords or enchantments to make its creatures massive. IMHO this is a way for wotc to not have to unban faerie cards mostly.
In the end, we all knew something like this was going to happen. It's very unlikely that they are going to unban cards that were banned just a few mounts ago. So, given that they were not willing to unban anything, this isn't that bad, is still better than doing nothing imo.
Honestly we would have been better off had wotc not done anything post Philly. As much as I hated 12post being in the meta there was no 1 deck that ruled that format, and combo hating control had a niche as long as the combo decks keep 12post from dominating.(which they would have)
It that scenario the best decks would have been zoo, storm, jund, 12post, and probably teachings.
In opposed to zoo then everything else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
I don't think you can compare them so easily. As I already said, Wizzards knew how strong Goyf was / is and they didn't ban it. Honestly, how would Zoo decks change after such a move? Goyf gets replaced by either Snapcaster or Bob or both. There are so many efficient 1 drops, so Bob may become a keycard. I also bet that we will see other (too) good 2 drops, maybe not the power level of Goyf, but close to Snapcaster, Bob, etc.
I welcome the unbanning of cards, as long as it's not Jace, the iWin Sculptor or Mental Misstep.
With Punishing Fire now gone, maybe other decks will become viable, I think this was a very good move.
what decks that aren't faeries does punishing fire stop? WW or merfolk decks right. These are still not good enough to beat zoo. In this format if a deck isn't good enough to be around 50% with zoo its not good enough to be in this format. Not to mention that WW is pretty weak to combo and merfolk are weak to control.
I don't want bans. I want good control and combo cards to come off of the ban list, but this is not going to happen. The next best thing to unbanning things is too hit zoo directly with as little repercussions to other decks as possible.
Goyf and KotR are the most powerful cards in zoo. This would weaken Junk decks and Jund decks, but might be enough for slower combo and control decks to compete. These slower decks are what allows decks like boros, burn, or WW to actually exist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Thomas Jefferson
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Now, do I think that for repeatable burn Scepter is on par with Punishing Grove? No, though I will take it for it's versatility. My point is that using re-usability as the reason does not hold water, IMO.
BTW, I am not just picking on you. The things you are saying I have heard from several folks, just using your quotes as a jumping off point.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
TBQH and very blunt
Lotus cobra, ghost dad, merfolk and WW will not be decks until at least 10 other cards are banned. WW hasn't been competitive since lor standard which was a joke. Ghost dad was an anti-control midrange aggro deck that was barely good enough for its own standard format. Merfolk in modern years have only been historically good against faeries. Sure they are good in legacy, but they have a lot of shinny toys in legacy modern does not have. Lotus cobra is not something you would run in a deck with 20 other creatures that don't rely on it too be good thus it dies to removal is a very valid argument. This is pretty much the same with lords in this format since lighting bolt alone handles just about every lord.
I am not trying to be mean or rude. This is just the truth.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
You do know that Death and Taxes is another name for white weenie, right? The name Death and Taxes is derived from a modification of the old cliche "the only certainties in life are death and taxes...[and someone playing white weenie]." I miss the good old days when deck names were actually interesting!
We won't know if D&T will be viable until there are some more results. But now that P-fires and Nacatl aren't strictly outrunning the kinds of creatures non-Zoo aggro would play, its possible. Legacy was an aggro Goblins dominated format at its first big event, and look at where it is today. I expect Modern will shake itself out into a creativity and skill driven metagame in half that time with how many events there are these days.
Link to first Legacy GP:
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/events.aspx?x=mtgevent/gpphi05/welcomea
Speculate less. Test more.
D+T is not WW. I is a mono-white midrangy deck. WW is stuff like Kithkin, or solders aggro. Sure it is derived from WW, but it is quite different than traditional ww.
It does not serve the same purpose in the meta game.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
Quote from Finn, the MTGS member who developed the initial deck idea in Legacy and writer of the Legacy Primer:
Check your facts before you post. Your opinion that anything non-Affinity non-Zoo is midrange is just wrong.
Legacy: UB(R/G) Storm UB(R/G)
Vintage: UBG Gush Storm UBG
Banning Goyf doesn't make sense. Nacatl makes more sense than Goyf because the other aggro decks that they said Zoo is limiting the growth of already run Goyf, but not Nacatl. Nacatl makes you run Naya lands at the least. Goyf doesn't. You don't see Jund running Nacatl.
TLDR Other decks already run Goyf to combat Goyf, but can't run Nacatl to combat Nacatl.
I personally do not like the banning of Nacatl. I was hoping for some unbannings rather than more bannings....
there are 40 broken degenerate cards on that ban list, out of 61 cards in total. there are like 7 broken cards in modern ban list and now 31 cards on the list. the lenght of the banlist is in contention because people think it is not acceptable.
that and the turn 4 kill clock makes them a dead card in a lot of games.
Merged - Please only use double posts if you haven't seen activity in a thread for two to three days. Otherwise use the Edit Button. t_c
Can't believe everyone was running the wrong one drop for all these months.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
But White Weenie is not always aggro. I play UW Humans in Standard. It is billed as White Weenie but is evolving away from its aggressive origins into a more disruptive midrange build. White Weenie only means what it is called: the creatures are White and are weenies. Disruptive or no, the deck is still White Weenie.
Legacy: UB(R/G) Storm UB(R/G)
Vintage: UBG Gush Storm UBG
This is all pretty beside the point of the thread.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
no other aggro decks run goyf. jund did but it was hurt by the bannings. Junk is moreless a joke. Anytime you put goyf in an aggro deck it ends up becoming zoo because zoo is just better. Banning nactl did not make some other aggro deck magically viable. The only change in the meta is the loss of jund and maybe some sort of tempo/control deck that could take advantage of it also. Now I don't agree that goyf needs to be banned but if we are banning preordains and wild nactls then why the hell not goyf and KotR. Those are why zoo is head and shoulders above other aggro decks...not a 1 drop that is easily replaced by another 1 drop that is almost as good because it is better than any thing other aggro decks could run.
steppe lynx has been perfectly acceptable in the past. This was in addition to nactl but I don't think that is really indicative of anything other than naclt being slightly more consistent. The mana base will need to be rehashed and it will need to replace groves with 2-3 more fetchlands, but lynx can be faster and bigger than nactl early on. People are too worried about losing consistancy. Do you remember how many of the "aggro elites" talked crap about boros in standard until they got their hats handed to them a few times.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
This is why it's generally bad to consider decks in terms of archetypes. There are several decks that fall under the banner of Zoo: Aggro Zoo with Kird Ape, Nacatl, and Steppe Lynx; Big Zoo with Elspeth, Noble Hierarch, and Baneslayer Angel; and Tempo Zoo with Bant Charm, Geist of Saint Traft, and Snapcaster Mage. Death and Taxes might be White Weenie, but it is Death and Taxes. To call it anything else construes the deck into a supertype that isn't very descriptive.
Legacy: UB(R/G) Storm UB(R/G)
Vintage: UBG Gush Storm UBG
I agree but the MTG community at large is the one that makes things into archetypes so you have to organize this way. That's one of the reasons I like the Archetype subforums because there are about 5-6 different "zoo" builds. Now what you call "Big Zoo" I would traditionally call "Bant" or something like that. Up until this point, I would normally call "Zoo" anything that ran Nactal, Goyf and some Burn.
(We'll be getting a new thread soon btw).
Bad but helpful because it is mostly necessary for growth. If we didn't label decks differently in the past then IMO decks would just be called the same thing with x card. Like aggro-goyf.
The biggest problem with this is that we don't typically have a general base line for what makes a deck different. when is a jund deck and aggro deck and not a midrange deck ect. I'm not going to get into that argument, but the main point is that logical splits are helpful for development.
I would have loved to seen at least one card come off of the ban list. Even if it was GGT since it is pretty much useless without dread return. I have a bad feeling since wotc won't even remove a card of a deck that they later banned. I just wonder how long if ever it is that we get staples back since they should not have been on the list in the first place.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
On the other hand, the banning of Punishing Fire does open a lot of space for other aggro decks, more weenie oriented ones. I'm sure we'll be seeing some in the next few weeks.
In the end, we all knew something like this was going to happen. It's very unlikely that they are going to unban cards that were banned just a few mounts ago. So, given that they were not willing to unban anything, this isn't that bad, it's still better than doing nothing imo.
Honestly we would have been better off had wotc not done anything post Philly. As much as I hated 12post being in the meta there was no 1 deck that ruled that format, and combo hating control had a niche as long as the combo decks keep 12post from dominating.(which they would have)
It that scenario the best decks would have been zoo, storm, jund, 12post, and probably teachings.
In opposed to zoo then everything else.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
what decks that aren't faeries does punishing fire stop? WW or merfolk decks right. These are still not good enough to beat zoo. In this format if a deck isn't good enough to be around 50% with zoo its not good enough to be in this format. Not to mention that WW is pretty weak to combo and merfolk are weak to control.
I don't want bans. I want good control and combo cards to come off of the ban list, but this is not going to happen. The next best thing to unbanning things is too hit zoo directly with as little repercussions to other decks as possible.
Goyf and KotR are the most powerful cards in zoo. This would weaken Junk decks and Jund decks, but might be enough for slower combo and control decks to compete. These slower decks are what allows decks like boros, burn, or WW to actually exist.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson