I'm not terribly sure what I expected when I opened this thread.
The end of the format, this is not. They slowed a deck down by one turn and made it a little more susceptible to lightning bolt. If this is the thing that makes you stop playing a card game that's intended for recreation, then good riddance. The magic community online is shockingly pessimistic.
I don't think this is the end of the format, but I do think this is an extremely disappointing ban list update for a plethora of reasons. They not only banned a top tier deck with an entirely reasonable metagame share, but they banned one of the format's foremost police decks (with EXTREMELY shoddy reasoning, Twin was the last thing keeping control down) without even unbanning one of several innocuous options to compensate. I think there is definitely overreaction but the ban list update this cycle seems incredibly off base on multiple levels. We do now have a pretty big precedent that any deck that does well enough for long enough will just get banned, and that is definitely not the kind of ban list management that inspires confidence in WotC or this format.
"This is not why the ban is happening. It [the PT] is dictating when, not why" -Aaron Forsythe
I know you're angry, but you are the one who consistently explains to people that the turn 4 rule is not a one part deal. It consists of various factors. Well, the twin ban is not a one part deal, it consists of various factors that were explained in the announcement. I hope as the salt levels in the magic community drop back to normal people will start to comprehend the ban.
I won't speak for others, but I totally understand the ban and know where it comes from. I'm just saying that the implications of this ban are very problematic because a) it ensures ban mania remains high and b) it shows that top-tier decks are very unsafe. All of this pushes players away from investing in the format.
In my opinion, despite what most people think, this was the best move Wizards could do for the format. Believe me when I say the bus doesn't stop here. The banning of Twin, in my opinion, is one huge shakeup in modern. Like I've read people say; "They just shot the Sheriff." The didn't just take a leg out from this police deck, they straight up murdered it. Despite the rage of people, and I understand their anger with losing their deck or don't approve of this deck's removal, but I quite love it. Twin has always been a deck that has kept blue cards from the format due to its "it'll just overpower Twin" statements that people have said. This deck, as people know, acts much like Pod in the sense that it can switch up its play-style, attacking from multiple angles and making the entire format conform to its existence. Now, do not get me wrong, I never mentioned that Twin should be banned and I have never disliked the deck, but I understand Wizards reasoning here. Despite how that reasoning seems to appear vague and guillotine-like. Just top 8s and the pro-tour lead to Twin's banning? No, I think that's the best, concise answer they felt like giving and they got away with it. Well, "got away with it" is arguable as clearly the community is a bunch of snails right now.
I'm happy with the banning, and in my opinion, they could've gone further, and will do so. People say, "Oh, but your deck will be next." Bring it on. I don't like the "artificial rotation", but it's not disturbing me - and I wouldn't really call it that. I like that they're aggressively de-powering the format. I could go into a whole rant about Vintage, Legacy, Extended, and the problems(outside of the reserve list) they couldn't fix with some of these formats and how they're finally figuring it out with Modern, but I'm not going to just yet. I came to Modern having played MtG since '95, knowing exactly what I wanted of this format, and Wizards has shown again and again they're actually taking involvement. This isn't Legacy, folks, so if you think your deck is safe, I suggest that you clearly don't know the format you've gotten yourself into. Now, I'm not suggesting they should go trigger-happy and ban everything until we're pretty much playing pauper, and I laugh at people thinking that there's complete mayhem in the streets of Modern. This is very dangerous for Wizards, but this is their last attempt at focusing heavily on eternal-like formats. So if people think this is the end, I'll argue it isn't. It won't be the end until Wizards kills off Modern. If they kill off Modern then good luck playing anything ever outside of Standard.
People say this states an ugly precedence of "your deck will be banned if it's good", and I agree that this is quite the negativity that we don't truly need for the format, but it isn't necessarily a bad thing. People, in my opinion, are looking at this the wrong way. Will your deck be banned if it's baring other cards from entering or staying in the format because of its dominance for quite some time? That should be a "yes". Will Tron push other colorless big spells out because it'll go right into Tron(excluding the Eldrazi)? Yes. Will it be banned because of such as it starts to put up numbers and always has? Oh, hell yes. Will something like Snapcaster Mage be next? Probably. I welcome diversity immensely, and will continue to welcome it.
What about another precedence that this states? Should I as a player continue to horde all the Modern cards I don't play with, helping only to inflate the price of cards? No. Will this type of banning wave scare the hell out of players to unload and help bring down the prices? I surely hope so. It surely is a possibility.
I'm not terribly sure what I expected when I opened this thread.
The end of the format, this is not. They slowed a deck down by one turn and made it a little more susceptible to lightning bolt. If this is the thing that makes you stop playing a card game that's intended for recreation, then good riddance. The magic community online is shockingly pessimistic.
I don't think this is the end of the format, but I do think this is an extremely disappointing ban list update for a plethora of reasons. They not only banned a top tier deck with an entirely reasonable metagame share, but they banned one of the format's foremost police decks (with EXTREMELY shoddy reasoning, Twin was the last thing keeping control down) without even unbanning one of several innocuous options to compensate. I think there is definitely overreaction but the ban list update this cycle seems incredibly off base on multiple levels. We do now have a pretty big precedent that any deck that does well enough for long enough will just get banned, and that is definitely not the kind of ban list management that inspires confidence in WotC or this format.
Wizards does not want anything close to a solved format or deck for the pro tour. Period. We either have a modern pro tour, or the 'best' deck(s) at the time of the pro tour will get nerfed to encourage format readjustment. Lapille said ALL of this in February and when anyone brought it up they were mocked because of pillar reasoning. MANY here said they don't want legacy, and we now have the clearest delineation of what that actually means. I'm making no subjective statements here, I just cannot stand pitchforks. It doesn't solve anything. People on Reddit are calling for players to buy Chinese proxies to screw with WOTC and etc. Screw that. What an awful attitude. Use your words like a grownup and get a petition going or something.
This has been THE best day reading in this forum. So MUCH salt.
I will support Wotc on this one, and I will ofc watch the PT more extatic than before. (Mind you I never watch Standard PT/GP or what have you).
There are tons of things to say on why Twin getting banned could possibly reinvigorate the format, allow design space and unban possibilities for Blue oriented control decks, AND, enforce control brewing. In my world, the I only play Control a world, there hasn't been a good reason to play draw-go or midrange control, since there was Twin. In the dawn of the new era, things WILL BE tougher possibly for control decks; BUT, I fear not, they will find their way.
Also, I would like to bring forth a twitter quote from Sam Black, one which I believe encapsulates the ban list reasoning, and furthermore, adresses an issue no-one, blinded from the twin ban and fear-mongering, has discussed:
i.e. The case of affinity:
"affinity wins, but it's success is capped. The hate against it works, and it doesn't win while targeted."
I believe this contributed to banning Splinter Twin. The deck could attack from different angles, and it was "really hard" to hate out. If they abide by this principle, and judging by the bannings so far they do, I am all for it.
This has been THE best day reading in this forum. So MUCH salt.
I will support Wotc on this one, and I will ofc watch the PT more extatic than before. (Mind you I never watch Standard PT/GP or what have you).
There are tons of things to say on why Twin getting banned could possibly reinvigorate the format, allow design space and unban possibilities for Blue oriented control decks, AND, enforce control brewing. In my world, the I only play Control a world, there hasn't been a good reason to play draw-go or midrange control, since there was Twin. In the dawn of the new era, things WILL BE tougher possibly for control decks; BUT, I fear not, they will find their way.
Also, I would like to bring forth a twitter quote from Sam Black, one which I believe encapsulates the ban list reasoning, and furthermore, adresses an issue no-one, blinded from the twin ban and fear-mongering, has discussed:
i.e. The case of affinity:
"affinity wins, but it's success is capped. The hate against it works, and it doesn't win while targeted."
I believe this contributed to banning Splinter Twin. The deck could attack from different angles, and it was "really hard" to hate out. If they abide by this principle, and judging by the bannings so far they do, I am all for it.
Except the reason control wasn't good wasn't because twin existed. Control has typically GOOD twin matchups. Control's problems are a lack of good generic answers or real inevitability. Counter magic is weak, the finishers aren't powerful enough to justify going to turn 8+ when things like RG Tron exist at near 10% of the metashare (likely to go up in the absence of twin police which was a bad matchup), and the new eldrazi decks will prove problematic for control for the same reasons. Twin not being around gives control one less good matchup and gives points to all the matchups control already struggled with. There were already other U based control decks and they did best when twin did best. They fell out because they weren't good enough on their own and had a subpar cardpool that lined up poorly against the metagame.
Well those that wanted a weaker format should be pleased. I, personally dislike combo decks very much, however I hate when WotC feels the need to drive folks away from the format. I can only surmise that with the advent of the new eldrazi decks, they thought it would be a good time to eliminate a couple entry level competitive decks and push the player base back towards standard. People are arguing that the bans were done in order to shake up the format for the coming pro tour. I think, if that was the primary goal, an unban or two would have made enough waves and emboldened the Modern player base. Instead, they crippled two of the most popular decks in the format, that by and by are also two of the more entry level decks. Don't be deceived, what WotC did is raise the entry fee into modern. Simultaneously, for those that lost their deck, they present a new interesting option, which, by the way is currently entering into standard. Coincidence? Maybe, but WotC is a pretty shrewd business and they know how to manipulate the player base. Modern has always been and will always be a spillover for standard and when modern is a little to full and standard is a little light, don't be surprised to see WoTC tip the overflow back into standard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
b) Preordain and Ponder are just too powerful. They just make blue decks so much better than other colours for consistency it's unfair. Serum Visions is a good, playable, strong card and I like that modern has its own blue cantrip. Preordain and Ponder should stay in Legacy, a blue-dominated format.
I disagree with this statement, right now there is no "real Blue" in modern. Counters are not counters if you have 3 or more mana, or you're forced to let them reuse the card a turn later. And add that to suboptimal cantrip/draw cards. I mean that's what this color is supposed to do.
I don't get why green is allowed to choose among the first 5 cards for 1 mana with stirrings;
Because no deck gets to choose among the first 5 cards. Even the decks where it's at its most powerful play some cards that you can't get with Ancient Stirrings.
Even ignoring that, Ancient Stirrings only works in very specific decks. Try tossing it into Jund and see how far it gets you. Ponder and Preordain aren't limited in that way.
Given that almost everyone claim counterspell as too powerful for modern i would be glad to see some serious card selection at least.
I'm pretty sure that almost everyone agrees Counterspell would be fine in Modern. The sticking point is getting it through Standard.
So they banned Twin to make more space for blue spells without worrying about making Twin better. That's why they unbanned AV and JTMS right?
Oh wait, they didn't.
It also makes no sense to ban Twin to make Ux decks more playable. Twin was a good matchup for these decks and kept decks like Tron (awful matchups for most fair decks) in check. So you ban a deck that actually helped the other Ux decks to make they more playable... ok?
Decks like Scapeshift, Gifts, UWR Control/Geist just all got *worse*, not better. They lost a good matchup + the bad matchups got a bump. I really don't get the rationale.
I never mentioned that Control was brought down because of Twin's MU, in fact Twin was a relatively GOOD MU for control. I said however that one didn't really have any serious reason to innovate, brew, and play control, because he could play Twin.
Because every Control deck without a combo sucks in Golfishing.format? The tier 1 is Tron, Affinity, Burn and Infect. It's not that you could play the Twin combo in these decks, the issue is that you can't beat these decks consistently without a combo.
So, I'm assuming it's a very bad time to buy into modern and any deck atm. From a standard player looking to get into modern (had tron, dumped it because it was redundant in it's gameplay), it doesn't seem safe to buy into a "competitive deck". That sucks, and what's the point? I know this is a hobby but I do enjoy competitive play. Banning a deck year after (or decks I should say) doesn't lure players in. Money may be an issue for some, and rightly so, buying a deck is expensive and if gets nerfed because of power levels I don't see a way to attract players into a format that constantly has their "iconic" cards and "decks" neutered. To be clear, money isn't an issue for me, but throwing away a few hundred bucks to the wind is the epitime of stupid and reckless.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard Arena: Eh? Gruul or Die
Modern: Decks I'm playing right now: G Mono Green Tron (34-10-3 paper record, only SCG/Regionals/PPTQ record) C Eldrazi Tron (9-5) UG Infect RW Burn
I'm not terribly sure what I expected when I opened this thread.
The end of the format, this is not. They slowed a deck down by one turn and made it a little more susceptible to lightning bolt. If this is the thing that makes you stop playing a card game that's intended for recreation, then good riddance. The magic community online is shockingly pessimistic.
I don't think this is the end of the format, but I do think this is an extremely disappointing ban list update for a plethora of reasons. They not only banned a top tier deck with an entirely reasonable metagame share, but they banned one of the format's foremost police decks (with EXTREMELY shoddy reasoning, Twin was the last thing keeping control down) without even unbanning one of several innocuous options to compensate. I think there is definitely overreaction but the ban list update this cycle seems incredibly off base on multiple levels. We do now have a pretty big precedent that any deck that does well enough for long enough will just get banned, and that is definitely not the kind of ban list management that inspires confidence in WotC or this format.
Wizards does not want anything close to a solved format or deck for the pro tour. Period. We either have a modern pro tour, or the 'best' deck(s) at the time of the pro tour will get nerfed to encourage format readjustment. Lapille said ALL of this in February and when anyone brought it up they were mocked because of pillar reasoning. MANY here said they don't want legacy, and we now have the clearest delineation of what that actually means. I'm making no subjective statements here, I just cannot stand pitchforks. It doesn't solve anything. People on Reddit are calling for players to buy Chinese proxies to screw with WOTC and etc. Screw that. What an awful attitude. Use your words like a grownup and get a petition going or something.
I agree with you regarding all of those sentiments at the end being entirely inappropriate responses. And I can understand why they might be taking the approach they did, but I maintain that even so it was a bad move that only really hurts the format by hurting its diversity and by shaking the player base's faith in the format for various reasons.
I think the tension of being a PT format is something we as a community should definitely address and wrestle with. I don't really believe this format is "solved" with Twin around (there are currently new decks cropping up in the absence of ban list changes), or that it is less solved with it gone. But even if I am wrong about that this is a move that is extremely unpopular with the community. If they don't want to show a "solved" format to appeal to PT viewer interest, doesn't it seem counterintuitive and wrong headed to alienate a massive portion of the player base by removing a deck that was arguably promoting meta diversity as well as breaking 0 format guidelines? Not only this, do they stand to gain more by leaving such a deck alone and letting the format rotate, regulate, and grow according to natural cycles, or by forcing artificial ban rotations that screw with the secondary market, players' investments, and actively infuriate a wide base that now have a reason to precisely not watch the PT? At what point does "shaking up the meta" actually hurt their bottom line more than letting the meta sort itself out? It's a move that seems very difficult to justify even if you take all of their concerns and considerations at entirely face value.
The thing that gets me is that they just reprinted twin in MM2015, so this really feels like theres no metric by which we can judge what they'll do to "shake things up". Also, as a someone who just finished building Pod before the ban, you all have my sympathies, it sucks.
Wizards does not want anything close to a solved format or deck for the pro tour. Period. We either have a modern pro tour, or the 'best' deck(s) at the time of the pro tour will get nerfed to encourage format readjustment. Lapille said ALL of this in February and when anyone brought it up they were mocked because of pillar reasoning. MANY here said they don't want legacy, and we now have the clearest delineation of what that actually means.
Well said, though I must say that I'm not looking forward to Modern's identity of being an eternal format that fundamentally redefines itself on a yearly basis by subjugating itself to a form of "breast ironing". That being said, viewer numbers shouldn't be a criteria determining bans in any format.
I, personally, would prefer it if the power level of the format was high(er) but would still support stable ban criteria as higher priority, almost no matter how strict they are. Heck, even if having a 5% metagame share was a ban worthy offense would have been acceptable as long as it was clearly outlined as such. The Splinter Twin ban clearly came out of nowhere and wasn't based on any of the criteria they established at the format's inception and that's my main grief with this announcement. What's the point of making promises about ban criteria if you aren't going to own up to them?
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
I'm not terribly sure what I expected when I opened this thread.
The end of the format, this is not. They slowed a deck down by one turn and made it a little more susceptible to lightning bolt. If this is the thing that makes you stop playing a card game that's intended for recreation, then good riddance. The magic community online is shockingly pessimistic.
I don't think this is the end of the format, but I do think this is an extremely disappointing ban list update for a plethora of reasons. They not only banned a top tier deck with an entirely reasonable metagame share, but they banned one of the format's foremost police decks (with EXTREMELY shoddy reasoning, Twin was the last thing keeping control down) without even unbanning one of several innocuous options to compensate. I think there is definitely overreaction but the ban list update this cycle seems incredibly off base on multiple levels. We do now have a pretty big precedent that any deck that does well enough for long enough will just get banned, and that is definitely not the kind of ban list management that inspires confidence in WotC or this format.
Wizards does not want anything close to a solved format or deck for the pro tour. Period. We either have a modern pro tour, or the 'best' deck(s) at the time of the pro tour will get nerfed to encourage format readjustment. Lapille said ALL of this in February and when anyone brought it up they were mocked because of pillar reasoning. MANY here said they don't want legacy, and we now have the clearest delineation of what that actually means. I'm making no subjective statements here, I just cannot stand pitchforks. It doesn't solve anything. People on Reddit are calling for players to buy Chinese proxies to screw with WOTC and etc. Screw that. What an awful attitude. Use your words like a grownup and get a petition going or something.
I agree with you regarding all of those sentiments at the end being entirely inappropriate responses. And I can understand why they might be taking the approach they did, but I maintain that even so it was a bad move that only really hurts the format by hurting its diversity and by shaking the player base's faith in the format for various reasons.
I think the tension of being a PT format is something we as a community should definitely address and wrestle with. I don't really believe this format is "solved" with Twin around (there are currently new decks cropping up in the absence of ban list changes), or that it is less solved with it gone. But even if I am wrong about that this is a move that is extremely unpopular with the community. If they don't want to show a "solved" format to appeal to PT viewer interest, doesn't it seem counterintuitive and wrong headed to alienate a massive portion of the player base by removing a deck that was arguably promoting meta diversity as well as breaking 0 format guidelines? Not only this, do they stand to gain more by leaving such a deck alone and letting the format rotate, regulate, and grow according to natural cycles, or by forcing artificial ban rotations that screw with the secondary market, players' investments, and actively infuriate a wide base that now have a reason to precisely not watch the PT? At what point does "shaking up the meta" actually hurt their bottom line more than letting the meta sort itself out? It's a move that seems very difficult to justify even if you take all of their concerns and considerations at entirely face value.
Serious question - can a completely non rotating ever actually be healthy? The current precedent of virtually no bans lead people to horde cards and speculate in droves and the price of the format is skyrocketing because of it.
I'm not terribly sure what I expected when I opened this thread.
The end of the format, this is not. They slowed a deck down by one turn and made it a little more susceptible to lightning bolt. If this is the thing that makes you stop playing a card game that's intended for recreation, then good riddance. The magic community online is shockingly pessimistic.
I don't think this is the end of the format, but I do think this is an extremely disappointing ban list update for a plethora of reasons. They not only banned a top tier deck with an entirely reasonable metagame share, but they banned one of the format's foremost police decks (with EXTREMELY shoddy reasoning, Twin was the last thing keeping control down) without even unbanning one of several innocuous options to compensate. I think there is definitely overreaction but the ban list update this cycle seems incredibly off base on multiple levels. We do now have a pretty big precedent that any deck that does well enough for long enough will just get banned, and that is definitely not the kind of ban list management that inspires confidence in WotC or this format.
Wizards does not want anything close to a solved format or deck for the pro tour. Period. We either have a modern pro tour, or the 'best' deck(s) at the time of the pro tour will get nerfed to encourage format readjustment. Lapille said ALL of this in February and when anyone brought it up they were mocked because of pillar reasoning. MANY here said they don't want legacy, and we now have the clearest delineation of what that actually means. I'm making no subjective statements here, I just cannot stand pitchforks. It doesn't solve anything. People on Reddit are calling for players to buy Chinese proxies to screw with WOTC and etc. Screw that. What an awful attitude. Use your words like a grownup and get a petition going or something.
I agree with you regarding all of those sentiments at the end being entirely inappropriate responses. And I can understand why they might be taking the approach they did, but I maintain that even so it was a bad move that only really hurts the format by hurting its diversity and by shaking the player base's faith in the format for various reasons.
I think the tension of being a PT format is something we as a community should definitely address and wrestle with. I don't really believe this format is "solved" with Twin around (there are currently new decks cropping up in the absence of ban list changes), or that it is less solved with it gone. But even if I am wrong about that this is a move that is extremely unpopular with the community. If they don't want to show a "solved" format to appeal to PT viewer interest, doesn't it seem counterintuitive and wrong headed to alienate a massive portion of the player base by removing a deck that was arguably promoting meta diversity as well as breaking 0 format guidelines? Not only this, do they stand to gain more by leaving such a deck alone and letting the format rotate, regulate, and grow according to natural cycles, or by forcing artificial ban rotations that screw with the secondary market, players' investments, and actively infuriate a wide base that now have a reason to precisely not watch the PT? At what point does "shaking up the meta" actually hurt their bottom line more than letting the meta sort itself out? It's a move that seems very difficult to justify even if you take all of their concerns and considerations at entirely face value.
Serious question - can a completely non rotating ever actually be healthy? The current precedent of virtually no bans lead people to horde cards and speculate in droves and the price of the format is skyrocketing because of it.
I guess it depends on what you mean by healthy, but I'd be willing to commit to arguing that the answer to this question is yes. Especially if the alternative is that we will eventually being seeing Affinity, Tron, etc. banned off of the top tables just for being at the top tables. There will always be a best deck so I don't really see how this ban approach is sustainable.
You can hate out affinity or burn quite easily. Even tron can die to blood moon, or well placed land destruction. Twin pretty much just had rending volley, because it could counter everything else. In fact, more often than not, when brewing, people would bring up twin to see if a deck archetype was viable. If it wasn't, then that deck archetype would die pretty much on the spot. Removing the question "What about twin?" means more decks can bubble to the surface. Buy your ghost quarters and tech edges asap, those are bound to increase in price very soon.
While I would have rather seen Twin crushed by a snapcaster mage ban, I am happy to see it out of the format. It always dictated sideboards and the meta warped around it in ways that I found annoying (like most "fair" decks just getting wrecked by twin without discard).
I can see nothing but positives here from a metagame perspective. Deck kept a lot of really fun archetypes down.
I think the short term will probably be kinda ugly with fast aggro (burn, affinity, infect, primarily) but things'll adapt.
I put this in the twin forum but i thought id leave it here too,
Hey guys just wanna say that this ban really isnt as bad for you former twin players as a lot of you are making it out to be. Because of the ban you now have 10 or so cards that are now useless garbage (4 twin, 4 deciever, 2 pestermite), but all the money cards and the core power of the deck is still legal and in tact. Perhaps the best method to deal with this ban is to construct a U/R/X tempo/control deck, as twin decks often just turn into this type of strategy after game 1 anyways against certain matchups/ At the end of the day you still have snapcasters, lightning bolts and other amazing cards that are capable of becoming a tier 1 strategy, its just gonna take some adaptation to fill the empty slots that the combo left. I mean the power behind the splinter twin deck was never just the combo in my personal opinion but instead the strong tempo plays that the deck was capable of doing.
I would expect Tron and Affinity to be dominating for a while, time to brew some decks with built in hate for these two opposite end of the spectrum decks ugh..
People saying they can expect more diversity, control being a thing, really alarm me, you guys must be new to the modern format
Hyper-linear aggro/combo will rule the format
I don't know how people suddenly think the format will be diverse
From the bottom of my heart, I hope RG Tron, Burn, Affinity, Infect and Bogles win an unusual amount of tournaments
I'm pretty frustrated, I had a UR Twin deck, but the ban in turn now hurts my GBx deck, which sucks, because I wanted more interactive games in the modern format. I own Affinity too, and I'm far from happy about all of these changes
In fact, more often than not, when brewing, people would bring up twin to see if a deck archetype was viable. If it wasn't, then that deck archetype would die pretty much on the spot. Removing the question "What about twin?" means more decks can bubble to the surface. Buy your ghost quarters and tech edges asap, those are bound to increase in price very soon.
This makes no sense. You always have to keep the best decks in mind while brewing or building your SB. You just replace "what about Twin" with "what about <next best deck>"?. This is not reason to ban a deck, otherwise you'd just ban deck after deck since people would have to play cards to beat it.
I often found myself struggling to brew any deck with blue and/or red because after a while I would just tell myself "I can't beat twin with this... Might as well just add it to the deck". It pigeon holes the two most popular colors in the format into one deck type.
I'm sure this has been mentioned a lot already but:
What the hell is up with no unbans. If they were worried about AV, JtMS or even ponder/preordain finding a home in twin how have they not been able to justify not unbanning even 1 of those now that twin is gone.
Blue needs some serious powerups to compete with what modern is going to be shortly.
UWx has a decent matchup against twin in my opinion. It was also pretty decent against GBx while miserable against tron. If twin goes tron should increase and GBx should decrease therefore making the meta even more hostile to control?
I often found myself struggling to brew any deck with blue and/or red because after a while I would just tell myself "I can't beat twin with this... Might as well just add it to the deck". It pigeon holes the two most popular colors in the format into one deck type.
In what way? URx decks tend to actually be pretty darn good against Twin. Delver and Grixis "Control," for example, have positive matchups against it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't think this is the end of the format, but I do think this is an extremely disappointing ban list update for a plethora of reasons. They not only banned a top tier deck with an entirely reasonable metagame share, but they banned one of the format's foremost police decks (with EXTREMELY shoddy reasoning, Twin was the last thing keeping control down) without even unbanning one of several innocuous options to compensate. I think there is definitely overreaction but the ban list update this cycle seems incredibly off base on multiple levels. We do now have a pretty big precedent that any deck that does well enough for long enough will just get banned, and that is definitely not the kind of ban list management that inspires confidence in WotC or this format.
I won't speak for others, but I totally understand the ban and know where it comes from. I'm just saying that the implications of this ban are very problematic because a) it ensures ban mania remains high and b) it shows that top-tier decks are very unsafe. All of this pushes players away from investing in the format.
I'm happy with the banning, and in my opinion, they could've gone further, and will do so. People say, "Oh, but your deck will be next." Bring it on. I don't like the "artificial rotation", but it's not disturbing me - and I wouldn't really call it that. I like that they're aggressively de-powering the format. I could go into a whole rant about Vintage, Legacy, Extended, and the problems(outside of the reserve list) they couldn't fix with some of these formats and how they're finally figuring it out with Modern, but I'm not going to just yet. I came to Modern having played MtG since '95, knowing exactly what I wanted of this format, and Wizards has shown again and again they're actually taking involvement. This isn't Legacy, folks, so if you think your deck is safe, I suggest that you clearly don't know the format you've gotten yourself into. Now, I'm not suggesting they should go trigger-happy and ban everything until we're pretty much playing pauper, and I laugh at people thinking that there's complete mayhem in the streets of Modern. This is very dangerous for Wizards, but this is their last attempt at focusing heavily on eternal-like formats. So if people think this is the end, I'll argue it isn't. It won't be the end until Wizards kills off Modern. If they kill off Modern then good luck playing anything ever outside of Standard.
People say this states an ugly precedence of "your deck will be banned if it's good", and I agree that this is quite the negativity that we don't truly need for the format, but it isn't necessarily a bad thing. People, in my opinion, are looking at this the wrong way. Will your deck be banned if it's baring other cards from entering or staying in the format because of its dominance for quite some time? That should be a "yes". Will Tron push other colorless big spells out because it'll go right into Tron(excluding the Eldrazi)? Yes. Will it be banned because of such as it starts to put up numbers and always has? Oh, hell yes. Will something like Snapcaster Mage be next? Probably. I welcome diversity immensely, and will continue to welcome it.
What about another precedence that this states? Should I as a player continue to horde all the Modern cards I don't play with, helping only to inflate the price of cards? No. Will this type of banning wave scare the hell out of players to unload and help bring down the prices? I surely hope so. It surely is a possibility.
My suspicion of the next ban targets:
Ancient Stirrings
Goryo's Vengeance
Eldrazi Temple
Wizards does not want anything close to a solved format or deck for the pro tour. Period. We either have a modern pro tour, or the 'best' deck(s) at the time of the pro tour will get nerfed to encourage format readjustment. Lapille said ALL of this in February and when anyone brought it up they were mocked because of pillar reasoning. MANY here said they don't want legacy, and we now have the clearest delineation of what that actually means. I'm making no subjective statements here, I just cannot stand pitchforks. It doesn't solve anything. People on Reddit are calling for players to buy Chinese proxies to screw with WOTC and etc. Screw that. What an awful attitude. Use your words like a grownup and get a petition going or something.
So Burn is on it's way out? Atarka's Command, Skullcrack, Thought Hemorrhage, Destructive Revalry all make the deck impossible to hate out.
Except the reason control wasn't good wasn't because twin existed. Control has typically GOOD twin matchups. Control's problems are a lack of good generic answers or real inevitability. Counter magic is weak, the finishers aren't powerful enough to justify going to turn 8+ when things like RG Tron exist at near 10% of the metashare (likely to go up in the absence of twin police which was a bad matchup), and the new eldrazi decks will prove problematic for control for the same reasons. Twin not being around gives control one less good matchup and gives points to all the matchups control already struggled with. There were already other U based control decks and they did best when twin did best. They fell out because they weren't good enough on their own and had a subpar cardpool that lined up poorly against the metagame.
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Even ignoring that, Ancient Stirrings only works in very specific decks. Try tossing it into Jund and see how far it gets you. Ponder and Preordain aren't limited in that way.
I'm pretty sure that almost everyone agrees Counterspell would be fine in Modern. The sticking point is getting it through Standard.
Oh wait, they didn't.
It also makes no sense to ban Twin to make Ux decks more playable. Twin was a good matchup for these decks and kept decks like Tron (awful matchups for most fair decks) in check. So you ban a deck that actually helped the other Ux decks to make they more playable... ok?
Decks like Scapeshift, Gifts, UWR Control/Geist just all got *worse*, not better. They lost a good matchup + the bad matchups got a bump. I really don't get the rationale.
Because every Control deck without a combo sucks in Golfishing.format? The tier 1 is Tron, Affinity, Burn and Infect. It's not that you could play the Twin combo in these decks, the issue is that you can't beat these decks consistently without a combo.
Modern: Decks I'm playing right now:
G Mono Green Tron (34-10-3 paper record, only SCG/Regionals/PPTQ record)
C Eldrazi Tron (9-5)
UG Infect
RW Burn
I agree with you regarding all of those sentiments at the end being entirely inappropriate responses. And I can understand why they might be taking the approach they did, but I maintain that even so it was a bad move that only really hurts the format by hurting its diversity and by shaking the player base's faith in the format for various reasons.
I think the tension of being a PT format is something we as a community should definitely address and wrestle with. I don't really believe this format is "solved" with Twin around (there are currently new decks cropping up in the absence of ban list changes), or that it is less solved with it gone. But even if I am wrong about that this is a move that is extremely unpopular with the community. If they don't want to show a "solved" format to appeal to PT viewer interest, doesn't it seem counterintuitive and wrong headed to alienate a massive portion of the player base by removing a deck that was arguably promoting meta diversity as well as breaking 0 format guidelines? Not only this, do they stand to gain more by leaving such a deck alone and letting the format rotate, regulate, and grow according to natural cycles, or by forcing artificial ban rotations that screw with the secondary market, players' investments, and actively infuriate a wide base that now have a reason to precisely not watch the PT? At what point does "shaking up the meta" actually hurt their bottom line more than letting the meta sort itself out? It's a move that seems very difficult to justify even if you take all of their concerns and considerations at entirely face value.
Well said, though I must say that I'm not looking forward to Modern's identity of being an eternal format that fundamentally redefines itself on a yearly basis by subjugating itself to a form of "breast ironing". That being said, viewer numbers shouldn't be a criteria determining bans in any format.
I, personally, would prefer it if the power level of the format was high(er) but would still support stable ban criteria as higher priority, almost no matter how strict they are. Heck, even if having a 5% metagame share was a ban worthy offense would have been acceptable as long as it was clearly outlined as such. The Splinter Twin ban clearly came out of nowhere and wasn't based on any of the criteria they established at the format's inception and that's my main grief with this announcement. What's the point of making promises about ban criteria if you aren't going to own up to them?
Boycott PT OGW.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
Serious question - can a completely non rotating ever actually be healthy? The current precedent of virtually no bans lead people to horde cards and speculate in droves and the price of the format is skyrocketing because of it.
I guess it depends on what you mean by healthy, but I'd be willing to commit to arguing that the answer to this question is yes. Especially if the alternative is that we will eventually being seeing Affinity, Tron, etc. banned off of the top tables just for being at the top tables. There will always be a best deck so I don't really see how this ban approach is sustainable.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
I can see nothing but positives here from a metagame perspective. Deck kept a lot of really fun archetypes down.
I think the short term will probably be kinda ugly with fast aggro (burn, affinity, infect, primarily) but things'll adapt.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Hey guys just wanna say that this ban really isnt as bad for you former twin players as a lot of you are making it out to be. Because of the ban you now have 10 or so cards that are now useless garbage (4 twin, 4 deciever, 2 pestermite), but all the money cards and the core power of the deck is still legal and in tact. Perhaps the best method to deal with this ban is to construct a U/R/X tempo/control deck, as twin decks often just turn into this type of strategy after game 1 anyways against certain matchups/ At the end of the day you still have snapcasters, lightning bolts and other amazing cards that are capable of becoming a tier 1 strategy, its just gonna take some adaptation to fill the empty slots that the combo left. I mean the power behind the splinter twin deck was never just the combo in my personal opinion but instead the strong tempo plays that the deck was capable of doing.
UR storm
U merfolk
RUBW Affinity
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
Hyper-linear aggro/combo will rule the format
I don't know how people suddenly think the format will be diverse
From the bottom of my heart, I hope RG Tron, Burn, Affinity, Infect and Bogles win an unusual amount of tournaments
I'm pretty frustrated, I had a UR Twin deck, but the ban in turn now hurts my GBx deck, which sucks, because I wanted more interactive games in the modern format. I own Affinity too, and I'm far from happy about all of these changes
This makes no sense. You always have to keep the best decks in mind while brewing or building your SB. You just replace "what about Twin" with "what about <next best deck>"?. This is not reason to ban a deck, otherwise you'd just ban deck after deck since people would have to play cards to beat it.
What the hell is up with no unbans. If they were worried about AV, JtMS or even ponder/preordain finding a home in twin how have they not been able to justify not unbanning even 1 of those now that twin is gone.
Blue needs some serious powerups to compete with what modern is going to be shortly.
UWx has a decent matchup against twin in my opinion. It was also pretty decent against GBx while miserable against tron. If twin goes tron should increase and GBx should decrease therefore making the meta even more hostile to control?
Wizards what have you done