I think you can turn it around and be just as correct. Since the deck died it proves how over powered a 1 drop 3/3 is.
Also I think Wotc was upset because every time someone was interviewed that played Zoo to a big tournament, they would say they were lazy and just sleeved up Zoo. I am not saying its an easy deck to pilot but a lot of pros were saying that with Zoo. No ingenuity came from laziness.
Just the opposite was true for the Channelfireball crew, which is arguably who WoTC pays the most attention to. They instantly decided they weren't going to play Zoo, except for Kibler. While they were testing decks Kibler just kept winning, so then they all switched to Zoo.
Anyway, WoTC's explination to why they banned Nacatl is to make cards like Treefolk Harbringer playable. Seeing as these cards are just as awful as they were pre banning, WoTC's justification for banning Nacatl failed. If they want to go ahead and explain why it's still on the banned list, and give more reasons, sure, but from their reasoning, their banning of Nacatl isn't valid.
Nacatl is a freaking delver that doesn't need to be built around with noncreatures. With nacatl zoo would be the best aggro deck and there would be no point in playing other aggro strategies. Why is it that hard to understand.
Of course if you are the kind of player that was saying that nacatl was just a bit better than loam lion and that nothing would change after its ban, I can understand.
There's nothing difficult to understand why Nacatal is banned. Not to anyone who's been on the receiving end of
T: 1 Temple Garden, Nacatal go
T2: Noble Hierarch, Nacatal, swing 4
T:3 Lightning Bolt you, swing 6
T:4 Very likely you lose.
Or you're chump blocking your board just to not die. Which means you're losing anyway.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
It's ability to produce turn 4 kills is still a relevant reason.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
Rancor was an example of what I meant by reprint (Not sure about Nyzzeh). Though price is an initial obstacle for drawing interest into the format, I can see true competitive players biting the bullet and saving up for $100 goyfs (doesn't mean I would though)
Dont know how I missed this post.
Rancor is going to cause some problems in Modern and I can see it being banned if infect gets TOO good. My first impression is rancor in Modern will be a mistake.
I see a lot of players say 'I want 'X' card from before the cut off reprinted so Modern can use it. I dont want older cards in Modern, we have other formats that play those. I dont want it to come to the point where you can port Legacy decks straight into Modern. All I want is reprints of staples in the format now for availability issues.
Lol Rancor won't be a problem in modern. You're a funny guy Bocephus.
It'll be good, sure, but "good" as in "as good" as any enchantment since you run the risk of your opponent 2-for-1ing you with ALL the efficient removal in this format unless you play hexproof creatures. There are no Hexproof creatures with Infect to my knowledge.
I mean, sure okay Bant-Enchantment-Hexproof Party or whatever you wanna' call it is a viable deck concept for Modern, I guess. But i'd still rather just play Bant with a few swords.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
It's ability to produce turn 4 kills is still a relevant reason.
It's turn 2 and turn 3 kills they want to avoid, not turn 4 kills. UR storm can get a turn 4 kill very easily. Wild Nacatl was banned because it stifled creativity. A 3/3 for G is a powerhouse turns 1-3, and it forced all zoo decks to be base naya. Now that it's gone, zoo decks have a wider range of options and are 1-1.5 turns slower.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from ClockworkSwordfish »
Had semenulative upkeep before it was fashionable. Look what you forced me to do, Wizards! IT DIDN'T HAVE TO GO DOWN LIKE THIS!
Quote from LandBoySteve »
Like I said, I can only go by my own experience, which is now 18 years. Kind of disheartening when you think you know something and you find out that you're a notch below a low grade moron.
I think they need to ban melina, with kitchen finks, exploit. Its not a combo its an exploit of cards not meant to be used together. I dont mind combos, but exploits are different. When a game has a glitch, they patch it. I think they need to patch the persist exploit
I think they need to ban melina, with kitchen finks, exploit. Its not a combo its an exploit of cards not meant to be used together. I dont mind combos, but exploits are different. When a game has a glitch, they patch it. I think they need to patch the persist exploit
Whats the difference between an "exploit" and a combo?
Most combos are found / made without wizards prior knowledge, and are "exploited" by the players.
Melira combo is a very fair combo, that isn't even close to ban worthy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find me online - I'm on Cockatrice * Tag - Badd B - Or on MTGO - Tag - Cbus05
It's turn 2 and turn 3 kills they want to avoid, not turn 4 kills. UR storm can get a turn 4 kill very easily. Wild Nacatl was banned because it stifled creativity. A 3/3 for G is a powerhouse turns 1-3, and it forced all zoo decks to be base naya. Now that it's gone, zoo decks have a wider range of options and are 1-1.5 turns slower.
However, the problem is I see an inconsistency in what wizards has set as the precedence for eternal formats. The other two eternal formats always have their "pillars" that people cling to even though they may be "bad decks" at the time.
Legacy for example has storm, zoo, merfolk, goblins, ect. that comprise a diverse metagame even though they may be at one time or another not positioned well in the meta.
Vintage is the same deal with stax, tezz, oath, ect (I'm obviously not as well versed in vintage so I'm less attune to their format excuse me if there are any glaring omissions...) to the same effect.
Now Modern is trying to find that same balance. I've played with and against nacatl many times and I agree that it is a great card but it is still just a vanilla creature with no evasion. Without it, zoo has taken a pretty big hit.
Seriously, it is weird when I see this thing on the banned list and then look at tarmogoyf, another "vanilla 3/3+."In fact, I feel like goyf is a good wall against nacatl.
It's not like zoo didn't already have bad matchups, and maybe I am underestimating the removal in the format but these are the reasons why I see wild nacatl and scratch my head. Though, let me be clear that I am glad they (Wizards) are being careful with the format, I just think nacatl could come off eventually.
The UWRestoration Angel deck seems to be really strong. Sure, its no Caw Blade, but its basically a standard import with better counterspells, better removal, Vendillion Clique, and Kitchen Finks. Heck, it doesn't even need Delver.
Not sure if it warrants taking a look at, but I feel like it will be a top contender for as long as its legal anyway. It looks to have an answer to anything.
Lol Rancor won't be a problem in modern. You're a funny guy Bocephus.
It'll be good, sure, but "good" as in "as good" as any enchantment since you run the risk of your opponent 2-for-1ing you with ALL the efficient removal in this format unless you play hexproof creatures. There are no Hexproof creatures with Infect to my knowledge.
I mean, sure okay Bant-Enchantment-Hexproof Party or whatever you wanna' call it is a viable deck concept for Modern, I guess. But i'd still rather just play Bant with a few swords.
When you have infect decks winning turn 3 in a turn 4 format, its going to cause problems. I think you underestimate what cheap trample and recursion will cause.
The UWRestoration Angel deck seems to be really strong. Sure, its no Caw Blade, but its basically a standard import with better counterspells, better removal, Vendillion Clique, and Kitchen Finks. Heck, it doesn't even need Delver.
Not sure if it warrants taking a look at, but I feel like it will be a top contender for as long as its legal anyway. It looks to have an answer to anything.
yeah, i'm probably going to jump on this train. it seems really strong with the ability to blink snapcaster or v.clique. plus the whole deck is instant speed minus the swords if they want to run them or geist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I speak in sarcasm because calling people ******* ******** is not allowed.
I don't want Pod to be banned, but doesn't your sentence apply to pretty much every card on the banned list?
Everything with First strike and every removal will destroy your little combo. Without all the tools Infect Stompy has in Legacy, the Infect Stompy archtype will never go beyond "Developing Competitive".
O.k. no sense in arguing it, we will see. This isnt Legacy.
When you have infect decks winning turn 3 in a turn 4 format, its going to cause problems. I think you underestimate what cheap trample and recursion will cause.
I think you over value Rancor in a card pool this large. Agree to disagree, moving on.
That U/W mid range blink deck looks really strong. Def' better than Caw-blade is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
Nacatl is a freaking delver that doesn't need to be built around with noncreatures. With nacatl zoo would be the best aggro deck and there would be no point in playing other aggro strategies. Why is it that hard to understand.
And what I'm saying is I'd rather have Nacatl unbanned than no aggro deck at all. Because right now, there isn't one.
And what I'm saying is I'd rather have Nacatl unbanned than no aggro deck at all. Because right now, there isn't one.
What exactly do you think most versions of RUG Delver are? Cheap efficient beaters and a lot of burn spells is close enough to what Zoo was. Delver just has blue in it so it's more versatile and can shift to tempo at any given time. Oh, and there's also Ravager Affinity still. I don't care what you call it; that is an aggro deck. There is also Bant which in many lists do not run any form of disruption. Just 8 mana dorks and a bunch of efficient beaters. This is not a format that is lacking on deck's that turn dude's sideways.
Modern is achieving a diversity that is near on par with Legacy. If it keeps going this way Modern may not completely suck one day.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
Truth. It really is developing, which is why I dont mind no bans/unbans. I meeeeeannnnn I'd love for natcl and Rancor to be legal together... but thats totally not going to happen.
I can't imagine Infect becoming too good with Rancor.. One single card cannot catapult 1 deck type from non existent to tier 1. Rancor is not Tolarian Academy (In my beginnings of Magic this was the one card that messed everything up). Rancor might see some play, even in [SNIP] decks, but it won't cause problems.
Like Wild Nacatl and Cranial Plating can't catapult their respective homes into T1 greatness? Single cards DO make decks happen. Rancor could potentially singlehandedly make Infect something you're going to have to worry about.
I've been having a problem with goyf's price these past 6 years.
I couldn't agree with this more, but since this is ban list discussion I will say this:
Nothing needs to happen to it for a long time now.
Like Wild Nacatl and Cranial Plating can't catapult their respective homes into T1 greatness? Single cards DO make decks happen. Rancor could potentially singlehandedly make Infect something you're going to have to worry about.
Indeed, very true. But if infect becomes a deck it probably won't warp the meta too badly. I personaly would love to see an infect deck make into tier 1.5 status in modern.
Like Wild Nacatl and Cranial Plating can't catapult their respective homes into T1 greatness? Single cards DO make decks happen. Rancor could potentially singlehandedly make Infect something you're going to have to worry about.
No it can't and it won't. >_>
Infect isn't just suddenly go from a crappy glass cannon deck into tier 1 status because of a single ENCHANTMENT.
Come on, guys. We're seriously discussing this?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Mhjames: mtgsalvation: I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CARD IS GOOD. I KNOW PATRICK CHAPIN USED IT AND WENT 8-0, BUT THAT WAS A SMALL TOURNAMENT. THE CARD IS TOO SLOW. YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THE OPPONENT HAS A SPELL IN THE GRAVEYARD
There's also the fact that as soon as it starts posting results, you know that a bunch of people are going to to start playing melira pod and go lol wut.
Also in regards to rancor, the thought of being swung at for 5 in something not named affinity is somewhat unappealing, so I'm all for nactal staying put for now.
Infect isn't just suddenly go from a crappy glass cannon deck into tier 1 status because of a single ENCHANTMENT.
Come on, guys. We're seriously discussing this?
Idk man, Rancor and Berserk were the two focal points of X-Land Stompy when it was in Legacy; i'm not sure if you're familiar with the deck so excuse me if this sounds uh, condescending? that's not my intention at all. It was an all in aggro strat that made sure to push damage through with Rancor/Pump Spells on T2 and T3 (similar to what Infect would try to do); this was in a Format with Lightning Bolt and STP (like Modern), and it still had it's day as a deck to be reckoned with; i think you undervalue how good Rancor is in Infect; before you could either remove the creature or chump block until you drew into removal, now you have to have removal right then and there, and if you don't you didn't cost they any value because they didn't lose the Rancor.
Essentially you're boned if you don't have removal the turn they Rancor.
Just the opposite was true for the Channelfireball crew, which is arguably who WoTC pays the most attention to. They instantly decided they weren't going to play Zoo, except for Kibler. While they were testing decks Kibler just kept winning, so then they all switched to Zoo.
Anyway, WoTC's explination to why they banned Nacatl is to make cards like Treefolk Harbringer playable. Seeing as these cards are just as awful as they were pre banning, WoTC's justification for banning Nacatl failed. If they want to go ahead and explain why it's still on the banned list, and give more reasons, sure, but from their reasoning, their banning of Nacatl isn't valid.
Of course if you are the kind of player that was saying that nacatl was just a bit better than loam lion and that nothing would change after its ban, I can understand.
T: 1 Temple Garden, Nacatal go
T2: Noble Hierarch, Nacatal, swing 4
T:3 Lightning Bolt you, swing 6
T:4 Very likely you lose.
Or you're chump blocking your board just to not die. Which means you're losing anyway.
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Dont know how I missed this post.
Rancor is going to cause some problems in Modern and I can see it being banned if infect gets TOO good. My first impression is rancor in Modern will be a mistake.
I see a lot of players say 'I want 'X' card from before the cut off reprinted so Modern can use it. I dont want older cards in Modern, we have other formats that play those. I dont want it to come to the point where you can port Legacy decks straight into Modern. All I want is reprints of staples in the format now for availability issues.
It'll be good, sure, but "good" as in "as good" as any enchantment since you run the risk of your opponent 2-for-1ing you with ALL the efficient removal in this format unless you play hexproof creatures. There are no Hexproof creatures with Infect to my knowledge.
I mean, sure okay Bant-Enchantment-Hexproof Party or whatever you wanna' call it is a viable deck concept for Modern, I guess. But i'd still rather just play Bant with a few swords.
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
It's turn 2 and turn 3 kills they want to avoid, not turn 4 kills. UR storm can get a turn 4 kill very easily. Wild Nacatl was banned because it stifled creativity. A 3/3 for G is a powerhouse turns 1-3, and it forced all zoo decks to be base naya. Now that it's gone, zoo decks have a wider range of options and are 1-1.5 turns slower.
Whats the difference between an "exploit" and a combo?
Most combos are found / made without wizards prior knowledge, and are "exploited" by the players.
Melira combo is a very fair combo, that isn't even close to ban worthy.
However, the problem is I see an inconsistency in what wizards has set as the precedence for eternal formats. The other two eternal formats always have their "pillars" that people cling to even though they may be "bad decks" at the time.
Legacy for example has storm, zoo, merfolk, goblins, ect. that comprise a diverse metagame even though they may be at one time or another not positioned well in the meta.
Vintage is the same deal with stax, tezz, oath, ect (I'm obviously not as well versed in vintage so I'm less attune to their format excuse me if there are any glaring omissions...) to the same effect.
Now Modern is trying to find that same balance. I've played with and against nacatl many times and I agree that it is a great card but it is still just a vanilla creature with no evasion. Without it, zoo has taken a pretty big hit.
Seriously, it is weird when I see this thing on the banned list and then look at tarmogoyf, another "vanilla 3/3+."In fact, I feel like goyf is a good wall against nacatl.
It's not like zoo didn't already have bad matchups, and maybe I am underestimating the removal in the format but these are the reasons why I see wild nacatl and scratch my head. Though, let me be clear that I am glad they (Wizards) are being careful with the format, I just think nacatl could come off eventually.
Thanks to Rivenor @ //forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=329663"/"> Miraculous Recovery for the Sig!
Not sure if it warrants taking a look at, but I feel like it will be a top contender for as long as its legal anyway. It looks to have an answer to anything.
When you have infect decks winning turn 3 in a turn 4 format, its going to cause problems. I think you underestimate what cheap trample and recursion will cause.
yeah, i'm probably going to jump on this train. it seems really strong with the ability to blink snapcaster or v.clique. plus the whole deck is instant speed minus the swords if they want to run them or geist.
O.k. no sense in arguing it, we will see. This isnt Legacy.
If seems like another level of broken then other combos. I dont mind it, i just have to use up more sb slots for torp orb
I think you over value Rancor in a card pool this large. Agree to disagree, moving on.
That U/W mid range blink deck looks really strong. Def' better than Caw-blade is.
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
And what I'm saying is I'd rather have Nacatl unbanned than no aggro deck at all. Because right now, there isn't one.
What exactly do you think most versions of RUG Delver are? Cheap efficient beaters and a lot of burn spells is close enough to what Zoo was. Delver just has blue in it so it's more versatile and can shift to tempo at any given time. Oh, and there's also Ravager Affinity still. I don't care what you call it; that is an aggro deck. There is also Bant which in many lists do not run any form of disruption. Just 8 mana dorks and a bunch of efficient beaters. This is not a format that is lacking on deck's that turn dude's sideways.
Modern is achieving a diversity that is near on par with Legacy. If it keeps going this way Modern may not completely suck one day.
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Like Wild Nacatl and Cranial Plating can't catapult their respective homes into T1 greatness? Single cards DO make decks happen. Rancor could potentially singlehandedly make Infect something you're going to have to worry about.
Fixed Inappropriate Quote t_c
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube
Nothing needs to happen to it for a long time now.
Indeed, very true. But if infect becomes a deck it probably won't warp the meta too badly. I personaly would love to see an infect deck make into tier 1.5 status in modern.
WURDelver
[/MANA]MANA]R[/MANA]GTron
WDeath and Taxes
WSoul Sisters
RWG Pod Combo
URSplinter Twin
URStorm
RBurn
No it can't and it won't. >_>
Infect isn't just suddenly go from a crappy glass cannon deck into tier 1 status because of a single ENCHANTMENT.
Come on, guys. We're seriously discussing this?
By: ol MISAKA lo
Cockatrice: Infallible
Also in regards to rancor, the thought of being swung at for 5 in something not named affinity is somewhat unappealing, so I'm all for nactal staying put for now.
UWRasputin DreamweaverUW
UWBSen TripletsUWB
Idk man, Rancor and Berserk were the two focal points of X-Land Stompy when it was in Legacy; i'm not sure if you're familiar with the deck so excuse me if this sounds uh, condescending? that's not my intention at all. It was an all in aggro strat that made sure to push damage through with Rancor/Pump Spells on T2 and T3 (similar to what Infect would try to do); this was in a Format with Lightning Bolt and STP (like Modern), and it still had it's day as a deck to be reckoned with; i think you undervalue how good Rancor is in Infect; before you could either remove the creature or chump block until you drew into removal, now you have to have removal right then and there, and if you don't you didn't cost they any value because they didn't lose the Rancor.
Essentially you're boned if you don't have removal the turn they Rancor.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube