See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
Yet where is Jund lately? im sure many out there want it to do well and know it intimately. BUT, if a meta is too hostile to a certain archetype or deck it will fail/underperform no matter how hard you prepare.
funny how some say pros words mean nothing, all the way up until one says something that matches their rhetoric.
there are many factors to a deck doing well. skill and preparation with your deck is big, but I would argue in a huuge playing field its only half the story, especially in modern.
of course I blame this on maindeckable better answers to the vast amount of linear POWERFUL strategies that exist in this format.
it simply doesn't make sense in this game to play fair( for the most part), and its the reason my lgs has faded into pokemon.
and the: "leave things be" attitude wizards has is not helping confidence of some players. unfortunately there are even more players who enjoy this kind of format as it currently is. I don't get it, but to each there own I guess.
Jund has no right to always be a Tier 1 deck.
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
What is the complaint here? That there needs to be a correlation between cost and playability? Because I'd prefer if good decks weren't massive expensive. I can barely afford this game as it!
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
Umm...no. I am literally asking you the point you are trying to prove with the data you have given me. I am not dismissing anything. In fact I am giving you the opportunity to better explain your point so that it is heard and understood.
Now who is putting words is whose mouth?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
What is the complaint here? That there needs to be a correlation between cost and playability? Because I'd prefer if good decks weren't massive expensive. I can barely afford this game as it!
It would seem that sisicat is under the impression that the follow is true:
Expensive cards = Best cards = Best Win/Loss Ratio
When he is proven to be wrong, it upset him.
It doesn't even matter that Wizards doesn't even take the secondary market into account at all, so his argument is moot.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
It's just that your argument isn't very sound. You're posting links to examples of people winning bad MU's in other formats like that doesn't happen regularly in modern. You're showing examples of people doing well regularly in formats, again, as if that doesn't happen in modern. Pros have by and large chosen not to focus on modern because it is easier to predict more well known meta's (like in standard and legacy where significantly less decks are viable). However, we've seen repeatedly that players who make an effort to understand modern (todd stevens, BBD, burkhardt) can consistently do well.
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
Umm...no. I am literally asking you the point you are trying to prove with the data you have given me. I am not dismissing anything. In fact I am giving you the opportunity to better explain your point so that it is heard and understood.
Now who is putting words is whose mouth?
Well I am trying to prove that no one is replicating their success on the GP level in Modern. Since now that we've established according to you that I'm presenting the fact that GPs are harder than SCGs. You're bending the argument to make me look stupid because of your forum favoritism. Just watch, your comment about me won't get warned because of calling me a spoiled child. I'm so sure of it because of forum favoritism.
I'm done arguing with you. Seriously, it's worse than dealing with children, and I used to volunteer to deal with 5-8 year olds.
Anyway, in other news...
Melissa DeTora in her article on the Mothership today mentioned that we'll be seeing WotC's promise of better removal come to release of Ixalan. Does this mean we're going to be getting more Fatal Push level removal? I think we could more easily argue that they'd give us Abrade level, but Abrade in my opinion is very close to being Modern playable. A bit more of a push in power level and we could get another Modern all-star card.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks: UBG Lantern Control GBU BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
Umm...no. I am literally asking you the point you are trying to prove with the data you have given me. I am not dismissing anything. In fact I am giving you the opportunity to better explain your point so that it is heard and understood.
Now who is putting words is whose mouth?
Well I am trying to prove that no one is replicating their success on the GP level in Modern. Since now that we've established according to you that I'm presenting the fact that GPs are harder than SCGs. You're bending the argument to make me look stupid because of your forum favoritism. Just watch, your comment about me won't get warned because of calling me a spoiled child. I'm so sure of it because of forum favoritism.
If you're trying to prove GP's are harder than SCG's, a poor way of demonstrating that is to show people consistently top 8'ing GP's. Your argument really looks to be that modern is more difficult than legacy and standard, which it very well may be. Formats shouldn't be nerfed to suit the needs of the incredibly vocal minority.
All you are doing is format bashing. Which IIRC, is against forum rules. If anyone is receiving favoritism, it's you and the length of leash you've been given to continually de-rail discussions.
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
It's just that your argument isn't very sound. You're posting links to examples of people winning bad MU's in other formats like that doesn't happen regularly in modern. You're showing examples of people doing well regularly in formats, again, as if that doesn't happen in modern. Pros have by and large chosen not to focus on modern because it is easier to predict more well known meta's (like in standard and legacy where significantly less decks are viable). However, we've seen repeatedly that players who make an effort to understand modern (todd stevens, BBD, burkhardt) can consistently do well.
It doesn't happen at a level that is visible enough to recognize, no one remembers people's top 16s at a Pro Tour. I can only remember Todd Steven's finishes because it's very visible and hard to ignore. Less people generally care about 9th-16th finishes.
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
Umm...no. I am literally asking you the point you are trying to prove with the data you have given me. I am not dismissing anything. In fact I am giving you the opportunity to better explain your point so that it is heard and understood.
Now who is putting words is whose mouth?
Well I am trying to prove that no one is replicating their success on the GP level in Modern. Since now that we've established according to you that I'm presenting the fact that GPs are harder than SCGs. You're bending the argument to make me look stupid because of your forum favoritism. Just watch, your comment about me won't get warned because of calling me a spoiled child. I'm so sure of it because of forum favoritism.
If you're trying to prove GP's are harder than SCG's, a poor way of demonstrating that is to show people consistently top 8'ing GP's. Your argument really looks to be that modern is more difficult than legacy and standard, which it very well may be. Formats shouldn't be nerfed to suit the needs of the incredibly vocal minority.
All you are doing is format bashing. Which IIRC, is against forum rules. If anyone is receiving favoritism, it's you and the length of leash you've been given to continually de-rail discussions.
Ok, well how do you present my perceived problem with Modern without being negative and putting the point across? Under these rules, you cannot. If you sound optimistic about a problem with Modern, you will get brushed off as it's not a problem. The only discussion allowed under the current rules, is praising how good Modern is (it's not for me) and how awesome it is. The moment you bring up anything resembling a problem with Modern, you get a warning for format bashing. So you might as well ban the discussion of resembling anything negative about the format altogether. I think Modern has problem of not having a pay to win option in a best deck that beats all, I present that argument and all I get is spoiled child, entitled brat etc and there is no reprocussion for them to say that. Which leads me to believe forum favoritism is in effect.
Yet where is Jund lately? im sure many out there want it to do well and know it intimately. BUT, if a meta is too hostile to a certain archetype or deck it will fail/underperform no matter how hard you prepare.
funny how some say pros words mean nothing, all the way up until one says something that matches their rhetoric.
there are many factors to a deck doing well. skill and preparation with your deck is big, but I would argue in a huuge playing field its only half the story, especially in modern.
of course I blame this on maindeckable better answers to the vast amount of linear POWERFUL strategies that exist in this format.
it simply doesn't make sense in this game to play fair( for the most part), and its the reason my lgs has faded into pokemon.
and the: "leave things be" attitude wizards has is not helping confidence of some players. unfortunately there are even more players who enjoy this kind of format as it currently is. I don't get it, but to each there own I guess.
Jund has no right to always be a Tier 1 deck.
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
This is nonsense. A deck's cost doesn't entitle the player to anything. At all. Ever.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WoTC, thank you for finally announcing the Modern format, an eternal format where everyone can participate.
Maybe sisicat is going about it the wrong way, but there's no doubt in my mind that it's easier to be more consistent in other formats than Modern. Modern does take a lot of work and sometimes it's not going to be your day.
This really has hit home for me recently with my current PPTQ grind with Titan Shift. I've now played in 7 PPTQs this season, the last one ending when a Judge made a horrible call in the top 4, allowing my opponent to go back at Comp REL to not put in his Hallowed Fountain untapped after he had already put a spell on the stack after the land drop. The finals would have been a great matchup for me (there's that word that is SO important in Modern); matchup) in Knightfall. Now, I know a Judge call doesn't have any bearing on the difficulty of Modern, but after previously winning 3 PPTQs fairly easily in 3 other seasons, I've fallen on hard times. It's been pretty rough because even though I am playing a Tier 1 deck, know the deck inside and out, and have played thousands of matches with it (and previous Standard and Extended versions), I can't leverage play skill to win one of these PPTQs. So far, there have been no PPTQs that I've been afraid of any player, other than just being afraid of certain matchups.
Now, I do think that sisicat is overexaggerating. A lot of people ADORE, just LOVE Modern because of its diversity. But there is no doubt in my mind that the matchup roulette is a big part of Modern. Ask anyone trying to do Midrange or Control in a Tron meta.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I'm done arguing with you. Seriously, it's worse than dealing with children, and I used to volunteer to deal with 5-8 year olds.
Anyway, in other news...
Melissa DeTora in her article on the Mothership today mentioned that we'll be seeing WotC's promise of better removal come to release of Ixalan. Does this mean we're going to be getting more Fatal Push level removal? I think we could more easily argue that they'd give us Abrade level, but Abrade in my opinion is very close to being Modern playable. A bit more of a push in power level and we could get another Modern all-star card.
This is one of the more interesting comments posted in this thread in quite some time. Good find! I will have to read this article to confirm, but news like this is always great to hear.
Then again, I see a 5 mana 4 damage burn spell and I lose hope
This is one of the more interesting comments posted in this thread in quite some time. Good find! I will have to read this article to confirm, but news like this is always great to hear.
Then again, I see a 5 mana 4 damage burn spell and I lose hope
The first thing we're trying to do is print more answers. This is something we have said for a while. We work a year in advance, and you guys won't truly see the results of that statement until Ixalan and beyond, but we were able to get a few of these "answers" into Hour of Devastation, one of them being Abrade. Before Abrade, it was too difficult to interact with artifacts without a dedicated answer. We wanted something that was more main-deckable, and Abrade was born.
I do not see anything that will be quite a cross-format all-star as Fatal Push yet, but I am holding onto hope. There are still many cards left to spoil, and so far we have seen mostly rares. A lot of the utilitarian answer cards tend to be printed in uncommon these days, which is great as we have yet to see most of the uncommons from Ixilan.
LOL. You think that a format should have a best deck, able to beat all, and that it should be the most expensive deck? Dude I'm struggling to not troll you right now, because THIS IS A GAME! It's a game, it is a hobby, it is not a sport, it is not an e-sport, it is not a way to make a living. If you are trying to play this game as some sort of investment, like win consistently to win product and cash to help support yourself financially, then you are barking up the wrong tree! There are maybe a hundred people on earth who do that on a regular basis, and maybe five or six are good and active enough to rely solely on this game for that.
Maybe sisicat is going about it the wrong way, but there's no doubt in my mind that it's easier to be more consistent in other formats than Modern. Modern does take a lot of work and sometimes it's not going to be your day.
This really has hit home for me recently with my current PPTQ grind with Titan Shift. I've now played in 7 PPTQs this season, the last one ending when a Judge made a horrible call in the top 4, allowing my opponent to go back at Comp REL to not put in his Hallowed Fountain untapped after he had already put a spell on the stack after the land drop. The finals would have been a great matchup for me (there's that word that is SO important in Modern); matchup) in Knightfall. Now, I know a Judge call doesn't have any bearing on the difficulty of Modern, but after previously winning 3 PPTQs fairly easily in 3 other seasons, I've fallen on hard times. It's been pretty rough because even though I am playing a Tier 1 deck, know the deck inside and out, and have played thousands of matches with it (and previous Standard and Extended versions), I can't leverage play skill to win one of these PPTQs. So far, there have been no PPTQs that I've been afraid of any player, other than just being afraid of certain matchups.
Now, I do think that sisicat is overexaggerating. A lot of people ADORE, just LOVE Modern because of its diversity. But there is no doubt in my mind that the matchup roulette is a big part of Modern. Ask anyone trying to do Midrange or Control in a Tron meta.
That's my point and why I want unbans. Some matchups like jund might be better suited to fight if they had BBE, I don't play jund but I want strategies to be better overall because I still think modern could be better.
Maybe sisicat is going about it the wrong way, but there's no doubt in my mind that it's easier to be more consistent in other formats than Modern. Modern does take a lot of work and sometimes it's not going to be your day.
This really has hit home for me recently with my current PPTQ grind with Titan Shift. I've now played in 7 PPTQs this season, the last one ending when a Judge made a horrible call in the top 4, allowing my opponent to go back at Comp REL to not put in his Hallowed Fountain untapped after he had already put a spell on the stack after the land drop. The finals would have been a great matchup for me (there's that word that is SO important in Modern); matchup) in Knightfall. Now, I know a Judge call doesn't have any bearing on the difficulty of Modern, but after previously winning 3 PPTQs fairly easily in 3 other seasons, I've fallen on hard times. It's been pretty rough because even though I am playing a Tier 1 deck, know the deck inside and out, and have played thousands of matches with it (and previous Standard and Extended versions), I can't leverage play skill to win one of these PPTQs. So far, there have been no PPTQs that I've been afraid of any player, other than just being afraid of certain matchups.
Now, I do think that sisicat is overexaggerating. A lot of people ADORE, just LOVE Modern because of its diversity. But there is no doubt in my mind that the matchup roulette is a big part of Modern. Ask anyone trying to do Midrange or Control in a Tron meta.
That's my point and why I want unbans. Some matchups like jund might be better suited to fight if they had BBE, I don't play jund but I want strategies to be better overall because I still think modern could be better.
See I think this is more or less the pinnacle of deck diversity. Even the previous boogieman of Grixis Shadow has more or less been dealt with. My fear is that bans, or unbans, will invalidate far more decks than it creates or boosts. I have been a big fan of modern nexus testing cards for unbans for that reason.
Maybe sisicat is going about it the wrong way, but there's no doubt in my mind that it's easier to be more consistent in other formats than Modern. Modern does take a lot of work and sometimes it's not going to be your day.
This really has hit home for me recently with my current PPTQ grind with Titan Shift. I've now played in 7 PPTQs this season, the last one ending when a Judge made a horrible call in the top 4, allowing my opponent to go back at Comp REL to not put in his Hallowed Fountain untapped after he had already put a spell on the stack after the land drop. The finals would have been a great matchup for me (there's that word that is SO important in Modern); matchup) in Knightfall. Now, I know a Judge call doesn't have any bearing on the difficulty of Modern, but after previously winning 3 PPTQs fairly easily in 3 other seasons, I've fallen on hard times. It's been pretty rough because even though I am playing a Tier 1 deck, know the deck inside and out, and have played thousands of matches with it (and previous Standard and Extended versions), I can't leverage play skill to win one of these PPTQs. So far, there have been no PPTQs that I've been afraid of any player, other than just being afraid of certain matchups.
Now, I do think that sisicat is overexaggerating. A lot of people ADORE, just LOVE Modern because of its diversity. But there is no doubt in my mind that the matchup roulette is a big part of Modern. Ask anyone trying to do Midrange or Control in a Tron meta.
Matchup roulette is a part of any format ever though. Not sure what you're getting at with this post. You made it to top 4 and lost from a judge call, don't see how that is the fault of matchups. And winning 3 PPTQs in 3 seasons could've just been a good streak, now followed by a not so good one in this season. After all, I'm sure there are other players nearly or more prepared than you are in attendance also. You can't all win first place.
Maybe sisicat is going about it the wrong way, but there's no doubt in my mind that it's easier to be more consistent in other formats than Modern. Modern does take a lot of work and sometimes it's not going to be your day.
This really has hit home for me recently with my current PPTQ grind with Titan Shift. I've now played in 7 PPTQs this season, the last one ending when a Judge made a horrible call in the top 4, allowing my opponent to go back at Comp REL to not put in his Hallowed Fountain untapped after he had already put a spell on the stack after the land drop. The finals would have been a great matchup for me (there's that word that is SO important in Modern); matchup) in Knightfall. Now, I know a Judge call doesn't have any bearing on the difficulty of Modern, but after previously winning 3 PPTQs fairly easily in 3 other seasons, I've fallen on hard times. It's been pretty rough because even though I am playing a Tier 1 deck, know the deck inside and out, and have played thousands of matches with it (and previous Standard and Extended versions), I can't leverage play skill to win one of these PPTQs. So far, there have been no PPTQs that I've been afraid of any player, other than just being afraid of certain matchups.
Now, I do think that sisicat is overexaggerating. A lot of people ADORE, just LOVE Modern because of its diversity. But there is no doubt in my mind that the matchup roulette is a big part of Modern. Ask anyone trying to do Midrange or Control in a Tron meta.
Matchup roulette is a part of any format ever though. Not sure what you're getting at with this post. You made it to top 4 and lost from a judge call, don't see how that is the fault of matchups. And winning 3 PPTQs in 3 seasons could've just been a good streak, now followed by a not so good one in this season. After all, I'm sure there are other players nearly or more prepared than you are in attendance also. You can't all win first place.
Matchup roulette is part of all formats, yes. But not to the extent that Modern has, in Legacy you have access to the entire cardpool, but you don't need to build your deck with redundancy because you get very good card selection, something Modern loves to actively ban as soon as it becomes oppressive. In Modern, you have to play more copies of a card to draw it to increase your chances of finding it, which is why you mulligan a lot in Modern for sideboard cards as opposed to relying on card selection tools to find them. That coupled with the fact that there are more viable decks in Modern than there are in both Standard and Legacy combined, you have a formula where whatever deck you choose to register, you are automatically at the mercy of a certain subset of decks that just beat you because you hit the 1% of the field matchup you don't want to face. That's how you get a metagame where goldfishing past your opponent is better than trying to interact with all your opponents, you simply cannot interact with every deck and still pull out wins consistently.
Where did I say that SCG Opens are not as competitive as GP? I only said SCG Opens are not harder than GP. You're putting words in my mouth just like the rest of this forum loves to do. We're just going to have to agree to disagree because you're just going to employ your forum favoritism to get me banned because what I say does not fit your narrative.
I mean...when most people say an event isn't as difficult, I take that as them meaning it isn't as competitive. Like FNMs are not as hard as PPTQs.
Also why do you flip off the handle every time is able to confront your argument with this wonderful thing called facts?
Knowing your deck, and knowing the field aren't the only skills required for Modern. No one is putting that forward. They are however two very important skills required to do well.
A lot of Jund's fallout has to do with the fact that Lightning Bolt just isn't the format staple it used to be. The meta has evolved past the point where you can control the board for the first 1-3 turns of the game with Bolts and discard.
Like seriously, to both of you (more sisicat right now) if you hate Modern so much, then why are you spending hours online arguing about it? Why not focus on something else you actually give a ***** about?
lightning bolt not being the staple is because of the big mana. If bolt decks had better hate jund wouldn't be tier 3.
This is my frustration. Why does every other linear hard to interact with deck, have hosers that crush it when played in a fair deck yet there are none quite as effective for big mana/ramp?
And for those that think better hate vs big mana would make midrange unbeatable and kill big mana. just look at burn and affinity and dredge.. they both do quite well dispite all the hate, and actually fair well (50/50ish) vs midrange and control.
Matchup roulette is a part of any format ever though. Not sure what you're getting at with this post. You made it to top 4 and lost from a judge call, don't see how that is the fault of matchups. And winning 3 PPTQs in 3 seasons could've just been a good streak, now followed by a not so good one in this season. After all, I'm sure there are other players nearly or more prepared than you are in attendance also. You can't all win first place.
My point is that it is amplified in Modern. No, nobody can always win first place, but there are players who win a PPTQ every season. Many probably play in more GPs and try to stay on the train. I'm probably not good enough to do that, but I still have super high expectations for myself. I'll be more specific then. Players who have beaten me at the PPTQs are players that I have beaten at least a little bit in the past. Don't get me wrong. They've practiced a bunch too and have probably improved their play skill much more than I have in that time, but I still feel that I have the skill advantage quite often. Yet, it doesn't matter quite as much in Modern.
My point mainly is that people are quick to dismiss what sisicat is saying. Nothing is Black and White. There is a lot of truth to what he's getting at. Now, I don't think that something drastic or dramatic should happen. But I do think letting consistency tools back into the format like Preordain and Green Sun's Zenith can alleviate a little bit of it without shaking the boat much.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Matchup roulette is a part of any format ever though. Not sure what you're getting at with this post. You made it to top 4 and lost from a judge call, don't see how that is the fault of matchups. And winning 3 PPTQs in 3 seasons could've just been a good streak, now followed by a not so good one in this season. After all, I'm sure there are other players nearly or more prepared than you are in attendance also. You can't all win first place.
My point is that it is amplified in Modern. No, nobody can always win first place, but there are players who win a PPTQ every season. Many probably play in more GPs and try to stay on the train. I'm probably not good enough to do that, but I still have super high expectations for myself. I'll be more specific then. Players who have beaten me at the PPTQs are players that I have beaten at least a little bit in the past. Don't get me wrong. They've practiced a bunch too and have probably improved their play skill much more than I have in that time, but I still feel that I have the skill advantage quite often. Yet, it doesn't matter quite as much in Modern.
My point mainly is that people are quick to dismiss what sisicat is saying. Nothing is Black and White. There is a lot of truth to what he's getting at. Now, I don't think that something drastic or dramatic should happen. But I do think letting consistency tools back into the format like Preordain and Green Sun's Zenith can alleviate a little bit of it without shaking the boat much.
But you are at least making a reasonable argument of a spikey nature. sisicat literally said he wants a pay to win option in modern, and that's worth a bit of laughter.
No, I don't agree completely with him. All I'm saying is that things are not Black and White. I agree with some of what he's saying. Some others are quick to dismiss everything he's saying because they don't agree with a part of it.
As an example of Black and White. I think Modern is in a pretty good place right now, diversity-wise. It still doesn't mean that I don't believe that it could get better via unbans. I do think that Modern can get better via unbans.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
lightning bolt not being the staple is because of the big mana. If bolt decks had better hate jund wouldn't be tier 3.
This is my frustration. Why does every other linear hard to interact with deck, have hosers that crush it when played in a fair deck yet there are none quite as effective for big mana/ramp?
And for those that think better hate vs big mana would make midrange unbeatable and kill big mana. just look at burn and affinity and dredge.. they both do quite well dispite all the hate, and actually fair well (50/50ish) vs midrange and control.
You're laying the blame here on big mana when that is only one of a number of factors.
First, the printing of Fatal Push. Push does polarize the format towards big mana decks, because your options are to go bigger than push can hit, to go under the tempo loss of having a >1 drop pushed with hyper efficient threats like Death's Shadow, to go wide to the point that pushing one creature will not be effective, or to simply not play any creatures at all.
Jund as a deck has been built around leveraging its discard and removal into threats that were more efficient than the removal in Modern could deal with. Unfortunately, we now have removal in Modern that's about as efficient as it will ever be that also happens to coincidentally hit all of Jund's major threats. As such, Jund has become tier 3 or so. Them's the breaks. If you still want to play BGx midrange, you can try one of the Shadow decks, which can go under and over Fatal Push, Abzan, which can go wider because Lingering Souls is a powerful card, or just straight BG which uses threats that gain tempo advantage even when they get pushed.
Your comment about there not being sufficient hate for big mana also confuses me, because there is. It's not specifically in B, G, and R, so Jund doesn't get to run it (unless they want to shift to a build that leverages the use of a Blood Moon to slow down big mana decks, which I have seen), but it is there. Aven Mindcensor can hose some big mana decks, Gaddock Teeg can as well, even Shadow of Doubt and Fulminator Mage can slow big mana decks down enough for midrange strategies to be able to beat them. Similarly, there are entire deck styles that big mana just straight up folds too, which are combo decks that can go off faster than they can get into a good position. Ad Nauseam ruins Titanshift and EldraziTron, as does Storm, and one of the upsides of Death's Shadow decks is that they can run faster than most big mana decks when they need too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Well, I can saw a woman in two, but you won't wanna look in the box when I'm through.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
See, that's what I'm talking about, you are dismissing my argument that Modern is high variance because it doesn't fit your narrative. You just proved it right there with your ignorant comment.
What is the complaint here? That there needs to be a correlation between cost and playability? Because I'd prefer if good decks weren't massive expensive. I can barely afford this game as it!
Umm...no. I am literally asking you the point you are trying to prove with the data you have given me. I am not dismissing anything. In fact I am giving you the opportunity to better explain your point so that it is heard and understood.
Now who is putting words is whose mouth?
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
It would seem that sisicat is under the impression that the follow is true:
Expensive cards = Best cards = Best Win/Loss Ratio
When he is proven to be wrong, it upset him.
It doesn't even matter that Wizards doesn't even take the secondary market into account at all, so his argument is moot.
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
It's just that your argument isn't very sound. You're posting links to examples of people winning bad MU's in other formats like that doesn't happen regularly in modern. You're showing examples of people doing well regularly in formats, again, as if that doesn't happen in modern. Pros have by and large chosen not to focus on modern because it is easier to predict more well known meta's (like in standard and legacy where significantly less decks are viable). However, we've seen repeatedly that players who make an effort to understand modern (todd stevens, BBD, burkhardt) can consistently do well.
Affinity
Death & Taxes
Mardu Nahiri
Forcing people to merge with twitch is stupid
Well I am trying to prove that no one is replicating their success on the GP level in Modern. Since now that we've established according to you that I'm presenting the fact that GPs are harder than SCGs. You're bending the argument to make me look stupid because of your forum favoritism. Just watch, your comment about me won't get warned because of calling me a spoiled child. I'm so sure of it because of forum favoritism.
Anyway, in other news...
Melissa DeTora in her article on the Mothership today mentioned that we'll be seeing WotC's promise of better removal come to release of Ixalan. Does this mean we're going to be getting more Fatal Push level removal? I think we could more easily argue that they'd give us Abrade level, but Abrade in my opinion is very close to being Modern playable. A bit more of a push in power level and we could get another Modern all-star card.
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
If you're trying to prove GP's are harder than SCG's, a poor way of demonstrating that is to show people consistently top 8'ing GP's. Your argument really looks to be that modern is more difficult than legacy and standard, which it very well may be. Formats shouldn't be nerfed to suit the needs of the incredibly vocal minority.
All you are doing is format bashing. Which IIRC, is against forum rules. If anyone is receiving favoritism, it's you and the length of leash you've been given to continually de-rail discussions.
Affinity
Death & Taxes
Mardu Nahiri
Forcing people to merge with twitch is stupid
It doesn't happen at a level that is visible enough to recognize, no one remembers people's top 16s at a Pro Tour. I can only remember Todd Steven's finishes because it's very visible and hard to ignore. Less people generally care about 9th-16th finishes.
Ok, well how do you present my perceived problem with Modern without being negative and putting the point across? Under these rules, you cannot. If you sound optimistic about a problem with Modern, you will get brushed off as it's not a problem. The only discussion allowed under the current rules, is praising how good Modern is (it's not for me) and how awesome it is. The moment you bring up anything resembling a problem with Modern, you get a warning for format bashing. So you might as well ban the discussion of resembling anything negative about the format altogether. I think Modern has problem of not having a pay to win option in a best deck that beats all, I present that argument and all I get is spoiled child, entitled brat etc and there is no reprocussion for them to say that. Which leads me to believe forum favoritism is in effect.
This is nonsense. A deck's cost doesn't entitle the player to anything. At all. Ever.
This really has hit home for me recently with my current PPTQ grind with Titan Shift. I've now played in 7 PPTQs this season, the last one ending when a Judge made a horrible call in the top 4, allowing my opponent to go back at Comp REL to not put in his Hallowed Fountain untapped after he had already put a spell on the stack after the land drop. The finals would have been a great matchup for me (there's that word that is SO important in Modern); matchup) in Knightfall. Now, I know a Judge call doesn't have any bearing on the difficulty of Modern, but after previously winning 3 PPTQs fairly easily in 3 other seasons, I've fallen on hard times. It's been pretty rough because even though I am playing a Tier 1 deck, know the deck inside and out, and have played thousands of matches with it (and previous Standard and Extended versions), I can't leverage play skill to win one of these PPTQs. So far, there have been no PPTQs that I've been afraid of any player, other than just being afraid of certain matchups.
Now, I do think that sisicat is overexaggerating. A lot of people ADORE, just LOVE Modern because of its diversity. But there is no doubt in my mind that the matchup roulette is a big part of Modern. Ask anyone trying to do Midrange or Control in a Tron meta.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)This is one of the more interesting comments posted in this thread in quite some time. Good find! I will have to read this article to confirm, but news like this is always great to hear.
Then again, I see a 5 mana 4 damage burn spell and I lose hope
To quote it exactly:
Modern Decks:
UBG Lantern Control GBU
BRG Bridge-Vine GRB
Commander Decks
UBG Muldrotha, Value Elemental GBU
BRG Windgrace Real-Estate Ltd. GRB
#PayThePros
I do not see anything that will be quite a cross-format all-star as Fatal Push yet, but I am holding onto hope. There are still many cards left to spoil, and so far we have seen mostly rares. A lot of the utilitarian answer cards tend to be printed in uncommon these days, which is great as we have yet to see most of the uncommons from Ixilan.
Hopefully they've realized that Revolutionary Rebuff and Open Fire are too low of power levels, whereas Counterspell and Lightning Bolt and perhaps too efficient. I'm expecting a middle ground to be reached here.
This is a game first.
That's my point and why I want unbans. Some matchups like jund might be better suited to fight if they had BBE, I don't play jund but I want strategies to be better overall because I still think modern could be better.
See I think this is more or less the pinnacle of deck diversity. Even the previous boogieman of Grixis Shadow has more or less been dealt with. My fear is that bans, or unbans, will invalidate far more decks than it creates or boosts. I have been a big fan of modern nexus testing cards for unbans for that reason.
Matchup roulette is a part of any format ever though. Not sure what you're getting at with this post. You made it to top 4 and lost from a judge call, don't see how that is the fault of matchups. And winning 3 PPTQs in 3 seasons could've just been a good streak, now followed by a not so good one in this season. After all, I'm sure there are other players nearly or more prepared than you are in attendance also. You can't all win first place.
Matchup roulette is part of all formats, yes. But not to the extent that Modern has, in Legacy you have access to the entire cardpool, but you don't need to build your deck with redundancy because you get very good card selection, something Modern loves to actively ban as soon as it becomes oppressive. In Modern, you have to play more copies of a card to draw it to increase your chances of finding it, which is why you mulligan a lot in Modern for sideboard cards as opposed to relying on card selection tools to find them. That coupled with the fact that there are more viable decks in Modern than there are in both Standard and Legacy combined, you have a formula where whatever deck you choose to register, you are automatically at the mercy of a certain subset of decks that just beat you because you hit the 1% of the field matchup you don't want to face. That's how you get a metagame where goldfishing past your opponent is better than trying to interact with all your opponents, you simply cannot interact with every deck and still pull out wins consistently.
This is my frustration. Why does every other linear hard to interact with deck, have hosers that crush it when played in a fair deck yet there are none quite as effective for big mana/ramp?
And for those that think better hate vs big mana would make midrange unbeatable and kill big mana. just look at burn and affinity and dredge.. they both do quite well dispite all the hate, and actually fair well (50/50ish) vs midrange and control.
decks playing:
none
My point is that it is amplified in Modern. No, nobody can always win first place, but there are players who win a PPTQ every season. Many probably play in more GPs and try to stay on the train. I'm probably not good enough to do that, but I still have super high expectations for myself. I'll be more specific then. Players who have beaten me at the PPTQs are players that I have beaten at least a little bit in the past. Don't get me wrong. They've practiced a bunch too and have probably improved their play skill much more than I have in that time, but I still feel that I have the skill advantage quite often. Yet, it doesn't matter quite as much in Modern.
My point mainly is that people are quick to dismiss what sisicat is saying. Nothing is Black and White. There is a lot of truth to what he's getting at. Now, I don't think that something drastic or dramatic should happen. But I do think letting consistency tools back into the format like Preordain and Green Sun's Zenith can alleviate a little bit of it without shaking the boat much.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)But you are at least making a reasonable argument of a spikey nature. sisicat literally said he wants a pay to win option in modern, and that's worth a bit of laughter.
As an example of Black and White. I think Modern is in a pretty good place right now, diversity-wise. It still doesn't mean that I don't believe that it could get better via unbans. I do think that Modern can get better via unbans.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)You're laying the blame here on big mana when that is only one of a number of factors.
First, the printing of Fatal Push. Push does polarize the format towards big mana decks, because your options are to go bigger than push can hit, to go under the tempo loss of having a >1 drop pushed with hyper efficient threats like Death's Shadow, to go wide to the point that pushing one creature will not be effective, or to simply not play any creatures at all.
Jund as a deck has been built around leveraging its discard and removal into threats that were more efficient than the removal in Modern could deal with. Unfortunately, we now have removal in Modern that's about as efficient as it will ever be that also happens to coincidentally hit all of Jund's major threats. As such, Jund has become tier 3 or so. Them's the breaks. If you still want to play BGx midrange, you can try one of the Shadow decks, which can go under and over Fatal Push, Abzan, which can go wider because Lingering Souls is a powerful card, or just straight BG which uses threats that gain tempo advantage even when they get pushed.
Your comment about there not being sufficient hate for big mana also confuses me, because there is. It's not specifically in B, G, and R, so Jund doesn't get to run it (unless they want to shift to a build that leverages the use of a Blood Moon to slow down big mana decks, which I have seen), but it is there. Aven Mindcensor can hose some big mana decks, Gaddock Teeg can as well, even Shadow of Doubt and Fulminator Mage can slow big mana decks down enough for midrange strategies to be able to beat them. Similarly, there are entire deck styles that big mana just straight up folds too, which are combo decks that can go off faster than they can get into a good position. Ad Nauseam ruins Titanshift and EldraziTron, as does Storm, and one of the upsides of Death's Shadow decks is that they can run faster than most big mana decks when they need too.