Do not ban to NERF, Nerfing does not exist in a physical game. Only in league of legends.
The entire notion of banning Kitchen Finks is a NERF. The Bloodbraid Elf, Golgari Grave-Troll, Sword of the Meek, and Ancestral Vision were all NERF bans - either by preconception or during the Modern evolution.
Wild Nacatl and Green Sun's Zenith were also NERFS, and those bans were highly debated since day one, and only one so far has been rectified.
NERFING does not work.
It depends. Storm was nerfed many times and still emerged as a playable deck. Affinity lost the artifact lands and Skullclamp but is still tier 1. Splinter Twin lost Ponder and Preordain yet it is still viable. BGx lost Deathrite Shaman and it is still viable. Similarily, I have often argued that if Emrakul, Eye of Ugin, or Primeval Titan was banned, Cloudpost could have lived. Nerfing does happen in Modern and it has been successful.
There is a difference in reasoning. Your card selections were basically adjustments to the entire format. Where mine were hand-selected because of specific decks.
Some of mine affected more of the format than a single creature in Pod being banned would, but Seething Song was banned with Storm being the only top tier deck that played it. While it hit many tier 3 decks, it mostly only hurt Storm. While I don't necessarily think that it was the correct ban because of those tier 3 decks, it certainly achieved its goal. The same goes for the artifact lands being banned to hurt Affinity.
lets be honest here, pod works, delver with cruise works, were seeing decks adapt its just slow.
ps I do run burn, but I also own pod, and junk. I think people just need to adapt, which most arn't good at.
but it is still an insanely powerful engine that can tutor for almost any problem-solving effect you might want, given a turn or two.
This is why I believe Kitchen Finks must be banned.
Without Kitchen Finks, Burn (either Patriot or Mardu) can consistently beat Pod and having three bad match-ups is fair, specially for a deck that's so hard to sideboard against. Right now Pod only suffers against RGTron which is at it's lowest popularity ever, and Scapeshift. Losing to Burn lets Pod get all the crazy 4-5cmc creatures it wants (and it will get them because midrange bombs are the lifeblood of T2) but stay unbanned because there is a popular and inexpensive deck with a moderate learning curve ready to block it from taking a larger % of the meta.
Someone please explain to me how thought processes like this happen? What happens in your magic life that makes you think that banning Kitchen Finks is actually reasonable? Of all the cards in Pod that are good you actually think that Kitchen Finks is what's pushing it over the top...? Do you play Burn? I'm gonna take a shot in the dark here and say you play burn. Okay, cool. It's a consistent budget deck that's competitive. Now, I want you to sit down and think about why burn should be a deck that is in the top % of the format. You didn't mention Siege Rhino or Dragon's Claw at all which are the two cards that just shut the entire deck down. You instead mention the banning of an Ouphe that gains you life. Why?
Pod having a bad matchup vs Scapeshift is HUGE, btw. That is one of the best decks in Modern and shouldn't be thrown out as an after thought.
Also wtf does a learning curve have to do with anything? Are you talking about burn? Burn has the same learning curve as fast food.
[quote from="HomelandZecurity »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/565050-current-modern-banlist-discussion-9-22-2014-update?comment=6449"]but it is still an insanely powerful engine that can tutor for almost any problem-solving effect you might want, given a turn or two.
This is why I believe Kitchen Finks must be banned.
Without Kitchen Finks, Burn (either Patriot or Mardu) can consistently beat Pod and having three bad match-ups is fair, specially for a deck that's so hard to sideboard against. Right now Pod only suffers against RGTron which is at it's lowest popularity ever, and Scapeshift. Losing to Burn lets Pod get all the crazy 4-5cmc creatures it wants (and it will get them because midrange bombs are the lifeblood of T2) but stay unbanned because there is a popular and inexpensive deck with a moderate learning curve ready to block it from taking a larger % of the meta.[/quote
Someone please explain to me how thought processes like this happen? What happens in your magic life that makes you think that banning Kitchen Finks is actually reasonable? Of all the cards in Pod that are good you actually think that Kitchen Finks is what's pushing it over the top...? Do you play Burn? I'm gonna take a shot in the dark here and say you play burn. Okay, cool. It's a consistent budget deck that's competitive. Now, I want you to sit down and think about why burn should be a deck that is in the top % of the format. You didn't mention Siege Rhino or Dragon's Claw at all which are the two cards that just shut the entire deck down. You instead mention the banning of an Ouphe that gains you life. Why?
Pod having a bad matchup vs Scapeshift is HUGE, btw. That is one of the best decks in Modern and shouldn't be thrown out as an after thought.
Also wtf does a learning curve have to do with anything? Are you talking about burn? Burn has the same learning curve as fast food.
I've complained about TC in the past but never Delver. See, there you go, just making wild assumptions. TC will get a restrict in Vintage, should be banned in modern eventually if the meta can't adapt. Same goes for Legacy. Never have I ever said that TC should be banned because of my own person bias and my feelings. That's you with Burn. See why your argument is destroyed? Creep my post history a little more and read 10 pages back to see me making any kind of statement against TC all you want. I'm not the one saying outlandish, down right silly statements like Kitchen Finks should be banned because burn isn't viable. Here's a news flash for you. Burn isn't viable because it's an extremely narrow and simple deck that has no way to fight through hate due to it's nature and is flat out garbage in a format where 4 drops helix you on resolution. But, you know, TC is fine to you because you play Burn and Burn is better with TC. Isn't it funny how adding steam vents and TC makes burn better? I clearly have no grounds for such assumptions and am blinded by my own personal bias :].
I'm seriously sick of you bashing Burn. What do you have against this deck? It's inexpensive to build, fun to play and nowhere near oppressive while still being a solid competitive deck.
If you like, we can play on Cockatrice some time, so I can show you how "not viable" Burn is.
And here's a tip: Being such an arrogant prick won't gain you many friends. Just saying.
And as far as Treasure Cruise is concerned: This card is nowhere near broken. Fillimg your graveyard to seven is so much harder than one would imagine. I've played a lot of Patriot Burn and UR Delver in the past months, and Cruise was much worse in Burn than I had expected. In Delver, on the other hand, it was mainly good with Thought Scour, which is a really bad card by itself.
I've recently gone back to RWg Lavamancer Burn and I prefer this version a lot to the Cruise builds. As for Delver, the deck IS strong with Cruise, it's probably tier 1 strong, but it has always, always felt like playing a fair deck to me. I also don't see what's wrong with having Delver at Tier 1. It's a skill-intensive and highly-interactive deck that can relatively easily be hated out (I'm looking at you, Volcanic Fallout and Chalice). Delver is also the only deck that really abuses TC. Just give it a shot yourself and you'll see: TC is really not worth banning. Delver was incredibly hyped post Khans. It's also a cheap deck, so many people built it, possibly just to try how it went. I'd compare the now slowly settling down Delver hype to what happened after the Bitterblossom unban: Tons of people were playing Faeries after this unban, trying to make the deck tier 1. Look at the statistics now: Faeries is pretty close to 0% of the meta. This, although not necessarily as extremely, is what'll happen to Delver as well. People will realize it's not the super good deck it was promoted at and go back to their old Twin, Control, whatever builds.
And as far as Treasure Cruise is concerned: This card is nowhere near broken. Fillimg your graveyard to seven is so much harder than one would imagine. I've played a lot of Patriot Burn and UR Delver in the past months, and Cruise was much worse in Burn than I had expected. In Delver, on the other hand, it was mainly good with Thought Scour, which is a really bad card by itself.
I've recently gone back to RWg Lavamancer Burn and I prefer this version a lot to the Cruise builds. As for Delver, the deck IS strong with Cruise, it's probably tier 1 strong, but it has always, always felt like playing a fair deck to me. I also don't see what's wrong with having Delver at Tier 1. It's a skill-intensive and highly-interactive deck that can relatively easily be hated out (I'm looking at you, Volcanic Fallout and Chalice). Delver is also the only deck that really abuses TC. Just give it a shot yourself and you'll see: TC is really not worth banning. Delver was incredibly hyped post Khans. It's also a cheap deck, so many people built it, possibly just to try how it went. I'd compare the now slowly settling down Delver hype to what happened after the Bitterblossom unban: Tons of people were playing Faeries after this unban, trying to make the deck tier 1. Look at the statistics now: Faeries is pretty close to 0% of the meta. This, although not necessarily as extremely, is what'll happen to Delver as well. People will realize it's not the super good deck it was promoted at and go back to their old Twin, Control, whatever builds.
Faeries was never anywhere close to Delver popularity or the amount of success that it has been having. Zoo had a lot of players and then went back down, but that was after a Pro Tour and a Grand Prix with none in the top 16s. Delver has gotten 1 in each top 8 so far and has made top 16s.
I've complained about TC in the past but never Delver. See, there you go, just making wild assumptions. TC will get a restrict in Vintage, should be banned in modern eventually if the meta can't adapt. Same goes for Legacy. Never have I ever said that TC should be banned because of my own person bias and my feelings. That's you with Burn. See why your argument is destroyed? Creep my post history a little more and read 10 pages back to see me making any kind of statement against TC all you want. I'm not the one saying outlandish, down right silly statements like Kitchen Finks should be banned because burn isn't viable. Here's a news flash for you. Burn isn't viable because it's an extremely narrow and simple deck that has no way to fight through hate due to it's nature and is flat out garbage in a format where 4 drops helix you on resolution. But, you know, TC is fine to you because you play Burn and Burn is better with TC. Isn't it funny how adding steam vents and TC makes burn better? I clearly have no grounds for such assumptions and am blinded by my own personal bias :].
Implying wanting Pod to get a ban because it is 15% of the meta is somehow less valid because one of the decks I play has a difficult match with it.
Implying complaining because Pod has 15% if the meta is a personal bias, but the last few pages of people complaining because All Delver had 23% for two weeks before stagnating at 11% isn't reactionary hysterics.
Implying wanting Pod to have more bad matches because constant 2Pod-2Junk-2Combo-1Delver-1Burn/Tron/Affinity top8s are stale as **** is wrong.
Implying Pod hasn't been the shadow king of the format for 2 years.
Implying Treasure Cruise being opressive in Vintage means it's anywhere near OP in Modern (lol, let's preemptively ban Tezzeret too he's better than Lily and Jace together but nobody notices).
This thread really has no head or tails. Delver got crazy because apparently a lot of people want to play fresh decks and have some success because we're tired of the BGx Midrange family, Pod included, being nearly 25% of the meta. The Delver fad died, Pod is still king. Happy new year!
Next you'll be complaining about Ugin or some crazy ***** when TC gets banned and people take up Tron to have a strong chance against the deck to beat.
I've complained about TC in the past but never Delver. See, there you go, just making wild assumptions. TC will get a restrict in Vintage, should be banned in modern eventually if the meta can't adapt. Same goes for Legacy. Never have I ever said that TC should be banned because of my own person bias and my feelings. That's you with Burn. See why your argument is destroyed? Creep my post history a little more and read 10 pages back to see me making any kind of statement against TC all you want. I'm not the one saying outlandish, down right silly statements like Kitchen Finks should be banned because burn isn't viable. Here's a news flash for you. Burn isn't viable because it's an extremely narrow and simple deck that has no way to fight through hate due to it's nature and is flat out garbage in a format where 4 drops helix you on resolution. But, you know, TC is fine to you because you play Burn and Burn is better with TC. Isn't it funny how adding steam vents and TC makes burn better? I clearly have no grounds for such assumptions and am blinded by my own personal bias :].
Implying wanting Pod to get a ban because it is 15% of the meta is somehow less valid because one of the decks I play has a difficult match with it.
Implying complaining because Pod has 15% if the meta is a personal bias, but the last few pages of people complaining because All Delver had 23% for two weeks before stagnating at 11% isn't reactionary hysterics.
Implying wanting Pod to have more bad matches because constant 2Pod-2Junk-2Combo-1Delver-1Burn/Tron/Affinity top8s are stale as **** is wrong.
Implying Pod hasn't been the shadow king of the format for 2 years.
Implying Treasure Cruise being opressive in Vintage means it's anywhere near OP in Modern (lol, let's preemptively ban Tezzeret too he's better than Lily and Jace together but nobody notices).
This thread really has no head or tails. Delver got crazy because apparently a lot of people want to play fresh decks and have some success because we're tired of the BGx Midrange family, Pod included, being nearly 25% of the meta. The Delver fad died, Pod is still king. Happy new year!
Next you'll be complaining about Ugin or some crazy ***** when TC gets banned and people take up Tron to have a strong chance against the deck to beat.
not modding but can we stay on topic, I really like this thread and its turned into a bashing thread easily.
-MH
This thread turned into bashing thread in its first place, mostly bashing Pod and that without any reasonable arguments. Some people here are bahaving like little kids who start complaining and crying when other kid steals them a toy. It should be in a more constructive way of how to beat some deck and/or strategy not how you can beat it.
The only people here who are literally behaving like little kids whose favourite toy is about to get taken away from them are the Pod players. Yes, of course you like your deck when you have like a 80% matchup against all archetypes. It's just not fun for those of us who are not playing pod. Printing Pod was a mistake in the first place. This card is an abomination.
My verdict: Ban Pod and Kitchen Finks so that we are rid of this disgusting deck once and for all. Unban Ancestral Visions and Grave-Troll.
Are you being serious? Do you think Delver "getting crazy" had to do more with people being bored of BGx than the printing of TC?
>Look at this new awesome card!
-Is it one more midrange creature for BGx?
>No, it's actually blue and fits in that tier 2 URDelver shell.
-Cool, let's try it!
One doesn't negate the other, in fact getting new cards tends to precede decks other than the 2 year old metagame seeing some play.
This thread has been taken over by a bunch of trolls, people who don't know much about the format, and people with personal bias.
"Yeah let's keep complaining about how Delver doesn't desserve to show up on Pod's turf. Even if we have a good match against it (but hey, we have a good match against everything), let's complain about how their new toy is utterly unfair and not just -U: Draw tree cantrips- most of the time".
It's like CAW Blade players complaining about Splinter Twin.
not modding but can we stay on topic, I really like this thread and its turned into a bashing thread easily.
-MH
This thread turned into bashing thread in its first place, mostly bashing Pod and that without any reasonable arguments. Some people here are bahaving like little kids who start complaining and crying when other kid steals them a toy. It should be in a more constructive way of how to beat some deck and/or strategy not how you can beat it.
"It is unreasonable to want Pod not to be the deck to beat with 15% of the metagame to itself and up to 24% for the BGx family. Let's keep complaining about how Delver is unfair at 11%"
Actually it reminds me more of people bull*****ting themselves about Zur not being broken in Duel Commander.
Just adding a bit to the discussion (not the bashing).
Disclaimer: These are some of my conclusions regarding Modern's recent additions, rise and fall of some decks/archetypes and the banlist issue (therefore, everything IMHO)
URx Delver with Treasure Cruise is not as oppressive as I thought it would be a couple months ago. After checking some results, we can both consider that Delver's popularity is more related to its lower cost than to its effectiveness. Birthing Pod proceeds to achieve great results due to its ability to adapt against the current metagame, whereas its bad matchups have disappeared.
Dig Through Time, while adding a lot of consistency to a number of combo decks (namely Scapeshift and Splinter Twin), had smaller impact on the current meta than Treasure Cruise. It doesn't mean the card is weaker - it's actually pretty strong. The card itself is able to add more power to UWR Control/Midrange strategies, and could even make RUG/Esper-Control/Midrange viable. It's good, but not too good.
Jeskai Ascendancy Combo is tricky. While the 4C version (with mana dorks) certainly behaves like a glass cannon/all-in combo, with a set of vulnerabilities, whilst breaking the "turn 4 rule", the UWR version behaves more like a control-combo shell such as a controllish Splinter Twin or Scapeshift, which is fine. Regarding the 4C version, I like to compare it to Bloom Titan (godhand Turn 1 kill; consistent turn 3-4 goldfish combo), as both decks have the potential to present completely busted openings, but have a much better chance of going off by accumulating advantages through the board (multiple Amulet of Vigor, Jeskai Ascendancy, mana dorks, etc). So... I think it's fine?
I believe the current metagame share problem (URx Delver/BGx Pod/BGx Midrange) should be addressed not as a perpetual bashing between "ban card from Delver/ban card from BGx", but as a better vision of the whole. If "Pod is efficient against Delver; which is efficient against everything else", I believe the solution lies within enabling varied archetypes that could fight both Delver or Pod, at least with some consistence. The known bad-matchup against Pod is Tron, while against Delver, I could go with either Pod or anything running efficient disruption at the early stages of the game. What I really like is the idea of playing Volcanic Fallout, or even adding new sideboard techs against it. There are a lot of overlooked cards here and there.
Jund has been gone for quite some time, and I believe a deck that could play both Volcanic Fallout/Pyroclasm and Abrupt Decay could have some good results against Delver. Even the manabase has gotten better with the addition of KTK's fetchlands. The thing is Thoughtseize is now quite bad, and Liliana of the Veil is not very effective against neither Pod nor Delver. So, old Jund is gone - enter new Jund? Redder Jund?
Siege Rhino is a major powerhouse, much like Bloodbraid Elf was on the old days of Extended Jund. Jund mirrors were reduced to "who cascades better" as much as Abzan mirrors are a mix of "who draws the most Rhinos" and "who has more removal". Therefore, I think ubanning the Elf could be benefical to the format as a whole, since it adds significant power to RG/Jund/Temur/Naya-colored decks. Deathrite Shaman, on the other hand, should stay banned - since it'd power BGx shell as a whole - including Pod and current Abzan Midrange.
Punishing Fire would be too oppressive, IMO. I agree with pretty much everything that has been said against the card so far. Furthermore, this unban would (probably) wipe URx Delver from existence. And (while I hate it), I can't see it as something benefical to the format.
Sword of the Meek might be able to fuel some new archetypes...? I don't the like the sight of it, but it could work. Over the last years artifact removal has gotten better, as well as answers to graveyard recursion, lifegain and whatnot. What I don't like is the possibility of infinite turns using Time Sieve, but Johnnies gotta be Johnnies.
Ancestral Vision is a much slower Treasure Cruise that relies on your game plan being able to delay your opponent's victory. Unless if it's suspended on Turn 1. I could live with that - the whole "Draw three cards" thing should not be banalized, but I think having a small variety for such an effect should add more diversity.
Golgari Grave-Troll is an awesome card, and it didn't belong to the banned list - but I don't think it should be unbanned just yet. It might make Delve even better - which is a shame, the Troll is a fantastic dredger. But I suppose having both Troll and Stinkweed Imp could be... bad?
As for Delver, the deck IS strong with Cruise, it's probably tier 1 strong, but it has always, always felt like playing a fair deck to me. I also don't see what's wrong with having Delver at Tier 1. It's a skill-intensive and highly-interactive deck that can relatively easily be hated out (I'm looking at you, Volcanic Fallout and Chalice). Delver is also the only deck that really abuses TC. Just give it a shot yourself and you'll see: TC is really not worth banning.
1. Volcanic Fallout is not as good as you think. Delver does not need to cast ALL of their creatures. Just use one or two creatures. If you do not use Volcanic Fallout, those creatures are enough to kill you. If you use Volcanic Fallout, TC will bring Delver decks new threats (creatures). How many copies of Volcanic Fallout you can use in a deck?
2. Chalice indeed stops delver completely, however, how many decks can MB/SB Chalice? As a result, the diversity of META is reduced, which is bad.
You should think again more deeply. Because of TC, delver (tempo) can get more card advantage than american control (and then beat it down). This is ridiculous!!!
Hi everyone
I just read the last 10 pages (this thread is so long...), and what i've understand is pod players (in general) want some bans to Delver decks (TC) and delver players (and others) want pod banned... I have both decks, and dont want any ban. Instead i want what is missing in modern... Modern has aggro, has combo, has midrange... But lacks control atm (uwr is not tier1 since PT born of gods). So i rather have jace unbanned and see if control decks can fight equally against the current tier 1 decks... The only problem i see is that scapeshift would become much stronger...
I was always under the impression that Delver decks initially got there spike out of fear from the NEW 4 JAC decks that we we're just now hearing about.
Both Delver and Burn have pretty good matchups because of the clock it can put the deck on and the lack of interaction that Ascendancy has for these decks.
So the numbers now rise because of its preformance in evenyts, cost to build and consistency of which the deck preforms.Not to mentioned the soft counters delver uses to get under the combo.
So both decks start to rise in popularity and why not with the constant push that Modern is here to stay and a surge of new players obviously theses are decks they'll look to. So burn and delver are up while holding the numbers of Ascendency down.
Now after all that what is the rest of the meta to do?
Pod says hey if we if we add a little more life gain and drop our slower combo we should be good. Cryptic becomes a little to slow in this new meta and now Scapeshift is down and UWR control now becomes a burn/aggro deck.I'm assuming this is true for Twin, with a deck that pressures early and gets under your combo then players will be deterred for playing these kind of decks. Hell even Robots is now playing chalice Main Board.
So I don't think cruise needs a ban or dig but i do think they should ban Ascendancy or unban BBE.I think this will correct some of the numbers.
As a primarily GR Tron Player I enjoy the current enviroment, nothing say hello to the meta better then a turn three Wurmcoil.
This thread has been taken over by a bunch of trolls, people who don't know much about the format, and people with personal bias.
Welcome to the banlist discussion thread! Who thinks Skullclamp can be unbanned???
Regarding the whole "ban pod" business, I'm not going to speak much to the deck's prevalence; you can find that information in my signature or in 3-4 posts I have already made in this thread. But I will speak to the issue of Pod and Modern popularity. When banning cards, Wizards is clearly trying to make the format either more popular ("we've unbanned Valakut! Come play Scapeshift!"), or to make it less unpopular if not adding players directly ("we've banned DRS! You no longer need to play BGx!"). If tournament attendance drops, that's a sign that bans might be needed. If players complain about the format a lot, that's also a sign that bans could be needed. Of course, with Modern this is always tricky; people have been endlessly complaining about this format since the beginning, which is about 60% the fault of Wizards who discussed and launched it in one of the most contentious ways possible, and 40% the fault of players and pros who eschew critical analysis for clickbait alarmism.
How does this relate to Pod? There is definitely some point where Pod becomes too much for the format to handle. Prevalence-wise, we definitely aren't there yet; the deck was 2%-3% of the metagame just 2 months ago and is enjoying a spike that may or may not be temporary. Popularity-wise, we also probably aren't there yet; tournament attendance seems fairly high across the board. The past two Modern GPs had lower attendance, but this was primarily a function of venue space. MTGO dailies have had lower attendance, but this is overwhelmingly a function of a *****ty client. But the midsize and regional tournaments are going strong, especially the increasingly successful SCG opens.
Does Wizards really want to ban Pod in this environment? That's an iconic deck in the format, no matter how you feel about it. Do people who played Pod switch decks? Or do they stop playing the format and switch to a more stable format that is less ban-happy, like Legacy? Do people who play Modern as a whole feel the same? Do people who might want to play Modern want to jump in a format with these kinds of serious ban threats? A big barrier to entry in Modern, even if it was mostly a perceived barrier and not an actual barrier, is instability in the banlist. No one wants to commit to a deck only to see its cards banned in a few months. Think of how Pod will play into that picture.
How does the relative format improvement from the loss of Pod (e.g. more deck diversity) compare to the relative format harm from the loss of Pod (e.g. players leave/avoid the format)?
In Delver, on the other hand, it was mainly good with Thought Scour, which is a really bad card by itself.
This is not true. We (my testing group) have been playing UR/RUG Delver most of the time with just one Thought scour or none, and it still can reliably cast TC.
Thought Scour is not needed, is not like you have to play "bad cards" like Thoght Scour and Probe to play TC, no.
1. Those are not bad cards, you are not playing Ardent Pleas or whatever, you are playing one mana cantrips.
2. You play them because they have also sinergy with Swiftspear and YP, not only because of TC.
Thought Scour is a bad card by itself. 1 mana do nothing but draw a card is bad. Without TC you would never play Thought Scour.
I was always under the impression that Delver decks initially got there spike out of fear from the NEW 4 JAC decks that we we're just now hearing about.
Both Delver and Burn have pretty good matchups because of the clock it can put the deck on and the lack of interaction that Ascendancy has for these decks.
So the numbers now rise because of its preformance in evenyts, cost to build and consistency of which the deck preforms.Not to mentioned the soft counters delver uses to get under the combo.
So both decks start to rise in popularity and why not with the constant push that Modern is here to stay and a surge of new players obviously theses are decks they'll look to. So burn and delver are up while holding the numbers of Ascendency down.
Now after all that what is the rest of the meta to do?
Pod says hey if we if we add a little more life gain and drop our slower combo we should be good. Cryptic becomes a little to slow in this new meta and now Scapeshift is down and UWR control now becomes a burn/aggro deck.I'm assuming this is true for Twin, with a deck that pressures early and gets under your combo then players will be deterred for playing these kind of decks. Hell even Robots is now playing chalice Main Board.
So I don't think cruise needs a ban or dig but i do think they should ban Ascendancy or unban BBE.I think this will correct some of the numbers.
As a primarily GR Tron Player I enjoy the current enviroment, nothing say hello to the meta better then a turn three Wurmcoil.
Karn will be Liberated
Yeah but Tron does bad vs Afinity, which is now on the rise, Delver and Burn. Pod can fair well vs any of those
I'm really hoping that the next announcement results in unbannings. AV and BBE aren't overpowered and would add diversity to the meta. Unbannings are always more fun than bannings! It lets is try something new.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
The problem with Pod is it's only going to get better and better due to Wizard's current design direction. If they stick to their current thinking we'll never see Counterspell or another four mana Wrath of God effect, but we're sure to see a constant influx of very strong creatures. It's in a similar position to Burn: eventually the deck will hit a critical mass and take over the metagame. We already saw that happen with Burn and decks like Pod and Junk rose from the ashes to fight it with Seige Rhino. Now Pod is likely the deck to beat and we're all thinking of ways to deal with our new overlord. This is not necessarily a bad thing; a cyclical metagame is bound to appear in a somewhat stable format. The danger is when the deck hits that critical mass and the other decks can't fight it back down. Pod will get to that point. The questions are how and when do you address it?
The card isn't at ban-levels of danger right now, but should we nip the problem at the bud before more people get invested in the deck? Or do we wait until it's truly dominant then alienate 20-25% of the metagame with a ban? Do we ban Birthing Pod itself and destroy the archetype as a whole? Or do we make band-aid fixes and ban every new toy it gets to prevent it from taking over?
Pod is a dangerous card not because it's currently dominant, but because it almost certainly will be due to design direction. This issue has arisen before: Stoneforge Mystic had to bite the bullet to open up Equipment design space. Will Birthing Pod go the direction of the lithomancer?
To all the people defending Kitchen Finks and calling a ban of it ridiculous: Let me show you what this seemingly innocent little Ouphe actually is.
Kitchen Finks looks like a very balanced card at first glance. A 3/2 for 3 with a sudden board impact, however small, and a second ability? Seems fair.
The problem lies in the mentioned second ability. What does persist actually make out of the Finks? Yes, you got it: This card is actually a 5/4 for 3 mana that gains you 4 life. This is comparable to Siege Rhino. Or Thragtusk. The deal is just that Finks costs significantly less mana than the latter and unlike both of them, it can be slammes down on turn 2 with a dork.
Now, is Finks still a balanced card to you? I think this card's power level literally screams for a ban.
To all the people defending Kitchen Finks and calling a ban of it ridiculous: Let me show you what this seemingly innocent little Ouphe actually is.
Kitchen Finks looks like a very balanced card at first glance. A 3/2 for 3 with a sudden board impact, however small, and a second ability? Seems fair.
The problem lies in the mentioned second ability. What does persist actually make out of the Finks? Yes, you got it: This card is actually a 5/4 for 3 mana that gains you 4 life. This is comparable to Siege Rhino. Or Thragtusk. The deal is just that Finks costs significantly less mana than the latter and unlike both of them, it can be slammes down on turn 2 with a dork.
Now, is Finks still a balanced card to you? I think this card's power level literally screams for a ban.
This is some of the worst analysis on a card I have ever seen. Kitchen finks is never a "5/4 for 3 mana that gains you 4 life". You gloss over the difference between having two creatures (3/2, 2/1) that can never coexist in any given board state, and one 5/4 creature (to which you seem to have added a point of toughness because math).
Moreover, even if it was comparable to siege rhino and thragtusk, that is hardly a reason for a ban.
Seriously, stop talking about banning kitchen finks. That is completely ridiculous.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Some of mine affected more of the format than a single creature in Pod being banned would, but Seething Song was banned with Storm being the only top tier deck that played it. While it hit many tier 3 decks, it mostly only hurt Storm. While I don't necessarily think that it was the correct ban because of those tier 3 decks, it certainly achieved its goal. The same goes for the artifact lands being banned to hurt Affinity.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
ps I do run burn, but I also own pod, and junk. I think people just need to adapt, which most arn't good at.
just my Opinion take it how you wish.
my fave tourny was this one
http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=8779&f=MO
had alot of good decks and yes 2 pod and 2 delver, as well as a burn
-MH
Modern
BUGLantern ControlBUG
I'm seriously sick of you bashing Burn. What do you have against this deck? It's inexpensive to build, fun to play and nowhere near oppressive while still being a solid competitive deck.
If you like, we can play on Cockatrice some time, so I can show you how "not viable" Burn is.
And here's a tip: Being such an arrogant prick won't gain you many friends. Just saying.
-MH
Modern
BUGLantern ControlBUG
I've recently gone back to RWg Lavamancer Burn and I prefer this version a lot to the Cruise builds. As for Delver, the deck IS strong with Cruise, it's probably tier 1 strong, but it has always, always felt like playing a fair deck to me. I also don't see what's wrong with having Delver at Tier 1. It's a skill-intensive and highly-interactive deck that can relatively easily be hated out (I'm looking at you, Volcanic Fallout and Chalice). Delver is also the only deck that really abuses TC. Just give it a shot yourself and you'll see: TC is really not worth banning. Delver was incredibly hyped post Khans. It's also a cheap deck, so many people built it, possibly just to try how it went. I'd compare the now slowly settling down Delver hype to what happened after the Bitterblossom unban: Tons of people were playing Faeries after this unban, trying to make the deck tier 1. Look at the statistics now: Faeries is pretty close to 0% of the meta. This, although not necessarily as extremely, is what'll happen to Delver as well. People will realize it's not the super good deck it was promoted at and go back to their old Twin, Control, whatever builds.
Faeries was never anywhere close to Delver popularity or the amount of success that it has been having. Zoo had a lot of players and then went back down, but that was after a Pro Tour and a Grand Prix with none in the top 16s. Delver has gotten 1 in each top 8 so far and has made top 16s.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Implying wanting Pod to get a ban because it is 15% of the meta is somehow less valid because one of the decks I play has a difficult match with it.
Implying complaining because Pod has 15% if the meta is a personal bias, but the last few pages of people complaining because All Delver had 23% for two weeks before stagnating at 11% isn't reactionary hysterics.
Implying wanting Pod to have more bad matches because constant 2Pod-2Junk-2Combo-1Delver-1Burn/Tron/Affinity top8s are stale as **** is wrong.
Implying Pod hasn't been the shadow king of the format for 2 years.
Implying Treasure Cruise being opressive in Vintage means it's anywhere near OP in Modern (lol, let's preemptively ban Tezzeret too he's better than Lily and Jace together but nobody notices).
This thread really has no head or tails. Delver got crazy because apparently a lot of people want to play fresh decks and have some success because we're tired of the BGx Midrange family, Pod included, being nearly 25% of the meta. The Delver fad died, Pod is still king. Happy new year!
Next you'll be complaining about Ugin or some crazy ***** when TC gets banned and people take up Tron to have a strong chance against the deck to beat.
Amen brother.
U Tron
GW Bogles
RG Loam
UR Blue Breach
RBU Grixis Goryo
BRU Grixis Delver
GBR Jund
GBW Junk
Active Legacy Decks
BR Reanimator
Taken over by people with personal bias? It started with people with personal bias and will end with people with personal bias.
My verdict: Ban Pod and Kitchen Finks so that we are rid of this disgusting deck once and for all. Unban Ancestral Visions and Grave-Troll.
>Look at this new awesome card!
-Is it one more midrange creature for BGx?
>No, it's actually blue and fits in that tier 2 URDelver shell.
-Cool, let's try it!
One doesn't negate the other, in fact getting new cards tends to precede decks other than the 2 year old metagame seeing some play.
"Yeah let's keep complaining about how Delver doesn't desserve to show up on Pod's turf. Even if we have a good match against it (but hey, we have a good match against everything), let's complain about how their new toy is utterly unfair and not just -U: Draw tree cantrips- most of the time".
It's like CAW Blade players complaining about Splinter Twin.
"It is unreasonable to want Pod not to be the deck to beat with 15% of the metagame to itself and up to 24% for the BGx family. Let's keep complaining about how Delver is unfair at 11%"
Actually it reminds me more of people bull*****ting themselves about Zur not being broken in Duel Commander.
This, really.
This thread is a bunch of egotists wanting the meta to be easier for their pet deck and harder for every other deck.
Disclaimer: These are some of my conclusions regarding Modern's recent additions, rise and fall of some decks/archetypes and the banlist issue (therefore, everything IMHO)
So, what I think that could be done:
Unban:
Ancestral Vision
Bloodbraid Elf
Sword of the Meek (mayyyyybe)
Ban:
Nothing
1. Volcanic Fallout is not as good as you think. Delver does not need to cast ALL of their creatures. Just use one or two creatures. If you do not use Volcanic Fallout, those creatures are enough to kill you. If you use Volcanic Fallout, TC will bring Delver decks new threats (creatures). How many copies of Volcanic Fallout you can use in a deck?
2. Chalice indeed stops delver completely, however, how many decks can MB/SB Chalice? As a result, the diversity of META is reduced, which is bad.
You should think again more deeply. Because of TC, delver (tempo) can get more card advantage than american control (and then beat it down). This is ridiculous!!!
Anything, but nothing at the moment...
Modern:
WUBRGAmulet Titan, WUBRGHuman
WUBRAd Nauseam, WBRGDeath Shadow, UBRGScapeshift, UBRGDredge
WURJeskai Nahiri, WURCheeri0s, WBGCounter Company, WRGBurn, UBRMadcap Moon, BRGJund Midrange
UBTurn,BRGriselbrand Reanimator, WGKnight Company, RGRG Tron, RGRG Ponza, XAffinity, XEldrazi Tron
I just read the last 10 pages (this thread is so long...), and what i've understand is pod players (in general) want some bans to Delver decks (TC) and delver players (and others) want pod banned... I have both decks, and dont want any ban. Instead i want what is missing in modern... Modern has aggro, has combo, has midrange... But lacks control atm (uwr is not tier1 since PT born of gods). So i rather have jace unbanned and see if control decks can fight equally against the current tier 1 decks... The only problem i see is that scapeshift would become much stronger...
UR TwinLegacy
UWR MiraclesBoth Delver and Burn have pretty good matchups because of the clock it can put the deck on and the lack of interaction that Ascendancy has for these decks.
So the numbers now rise because of its preformance in evenyts, cost to build and consistency of which the deck preforms.Not to mentioned the soft counters delver uses to get under the combo.
So both decks start to rise in popularity and why not with the constant push that Modern is here to stay and a surge of new players obviously theses are decks they'll look to. So burn and delver are up while holding the numbers of Ascendency down.
Now after all that what is the rest of the meta to do?
Pod says hey if we if we add a little more life gain and drop our slower combo we should be good. Cryptic becomes a little to slow in this new meta and now Scapeshift is down and UWR control now becomes a burn/aggro deck.I'm assuming this is true for Twin, with a deck that pressures early and gets under your combo then players will be deterred for playing these kind of decks. Hell even Robots is now playing chalice Main Board.
So I don't think cruise needs a ban or dig but i do think they should ban Ascendancy or unban BBE.I think this will correct some of the numbers.
As a primarily GR Tron Player I enjoy the current enviroment, nothing say hello to the meta better then a turn three Wurmcoil.
Karn will be Liberated
Welcome to the banlist discussion thread! Who thinks Skullclamp can be unbanned???
Regarding the whole "ban pod" business, I'm not going to speak much to the deck's prevalence; you can find that information in my signature or in 3-4 posts I have already made in this thread. But I will speak to the issue of Pod and Modern popularity. When banning cards, Wizards is clearly trying to make the format either more popular ("we've unbanned Valakut! Come play Scapeshift!"), or to make it less unpopular if not adding players directly ("we've banned DRS! You no longer need to play BGx!"). If tournament attendance drops, that's a sign that bans might be needed. If players complain about the format a lot, that's also a sign that bans could be needed. Of course, with Modern this is always tricky; people have been endlessly complaining about this format since the beginning, which is about 60% the fault of Wizards who discussed and launched it in one of the most contentious ways possible, and 40% the fault of players and pros who eschew critical analysis for clickbait alarmism.
How does this relate to Pod? There is definitely some point where Pod becomes too much for the format to handle. Prevalence-wise, we definitely aren't there yet; the deck was 2%-3% of the metagame just 2 months ago and is enjoying a spike that may or may not be temporary. Popularity-wise, we also probably aren't there yet; tournament attendance seems fairly high across the board. The past two Modern GPs had lower attendance, but this was primarily a function of venue space. MTGO dailies have had lower attendance, but this is overwhelmingly a function of a *****ty client. But the midsize and regional tournaments are going strong, especially the increasingly successful SCG opens.
Does Wizards really want to ban Pod in this environment? That's an iconic deck in the format, no matter how you feel about it. Do people who played Pod switch decks? Or do they stop playing the format and switch to a more stable format that is less ban-happy, like Legacy? Do people who play Modern as a whole feel the same? Do people who might want to play Modern want to jump in a format with these kinds of serious ban threats? A big barrier to entry in Modern, even if it was mostly a perceived barrier and not an actual barrier, is instability in the banlist. No one wants to commit to a deck only to see its cards banned in a few months. Think of how Pod will play into that picture.
How does the relative format improvement from the loss of Pod (e.g. more deck diversity) compare to the relative format harm from the loss of Pod (e.g. players leave/avoid the format)?
Thought Scour is a bad card by itself. 1 mana do nothing but draw a card is bad. Without TC you would never play Thought Scour.
Yeah but Tron does bad vs Afinity, which is now on the rise, Delver and Burn. Pod can fair well vs any of those
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
The card isn't at ban-levels of danger right now, but should we nip the problem at the bud before more people get invested in the deck? Or do we wait until it's truly dominant then alienate 20-25% of the metagame with a ban? Do we ban Birthing Pod itself and destroy the archetype as a whole? Or do we make band-aid fixes and ban every new toy it gets to prevent it from taking over?
Pod is a dangerous card not because it's currently dominant, but because it almost certainly will be due to design direction. This issue has arisen before: Stoneforge Mystic had to bite the bullet to open up Equipment design space. Will Birthing Pod go the direction of the lithomancer?
'78 CB750F, '09 CBR600RR
Kitchen Finks looks like a very balanced card at first glance. A 3/2 for 3 with a sudden board impact, however small, and a second ability? Seems fair.
The problem lies in the mentioned second ability. What does persist actually make out of the Finks? Yes, you got it: This card is actually a 5/4 for 3 mana that gains you 4 life. This is comparable to Siege Rhino. Or Thragtusk. The deal is just that Finks costs significantly less mana than the latter and unlike both of them, it can be slammes down on turn 2 with a dork.
Now, is Finks still a balanced card to you? I think this card's power level literally screams for a ban.
This is some of the worst analysis on a card I have ever seen. Kitchen finks is never a "5/4 for 3 mana that gains you 4 life". You gloss over the difference between having two creatures (3/2, 2/1) that can never coexist in any given board state, and one 5/4 creature (to which you seem to have added a point of toughness because math).
Moreover, even if it was comparable to siege rhino and thragtusk, that is hardly a reason for a ban.
Seriously, stop talking about banning kitchen finks. That is completely ridiculous.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG