I'm not convinced there is an answer for a Dredge, KCI, Tron meta.
Is Spirits it? Maybe? Infect?
Those 3 decks though are a real issue to me, in how polarizing they can be to play against.
All of them simply say 'go under'.
Infect or Burn would give you 50% or better against all of those.
Burn is poop against Dredge, plus you're not really painting a rosy picture of the format if the answer to the all ready far over-representation of ships passing by each other in the night is another ship passing deck.
Burn is poop against Dredge, plus you're not really painting a rosy picture of the format if the answer to the all ready far over-representation of ships passing by each other in the night is another ship passing deck.
This is what I was thinking. I don't know about Burn vs. Dredge now, but before with Golgari Grave-Troll, Burn was a fairly easy matchup. (60/40 at worst, but probably slightly better) I'm only assuming that Creeping Chill made it better...
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)
Which does more: unbanning twin or banning ancient stirrings?
Like multiple people said before, the Stirrings decks dont warp the format
So you build your main decks and sideboards without considering Tron, KCI, or Affinity?
I'd argue you are conflating metagaming with format-warping. By that account, taking ANY particular deck into consideration in card selection makes that deck format-warping.
I'd argue I'm not. ANY deck which influences the choices you make in designing your sideboard (or especially main deck) is warping. Nearly every top deck in every format is warping, unless you're playing some hyper-linear strategy that intends to ignore or play through the opponent.
While I'd argue on the same side as you w/r/t Stirrings being warping, I disagree with your statement that, "ANY deck which influences the choices you make in designing your sideboard (or especially main deck) is warping."
When Dredge is high and all decks pack extra grave hate, yes. That's warping. But when you're Jund and you pack extra Tron hate, that's a concession to a bad matchup. That may be a bad example since a large percentage of Jund players think you should just give up that matchup, but I think the point is clear enough. Sideboarding is done to flesh out your full 75 (thinking of a complete 75 rather than main and side), making concessions to your specific deck's bad matchups, taking into account the top of the metagame, and yes, sometimes accounting for warping decks/cards. But just because you're thinking of a specific deck when making a SB choice doesn't mean that deck is warping.
i think it just comes down to scale. its the whole reason such a strong emotive word is used. 'warp' instead of shape, bend, define, whatever. it also expresses permanence, as in some format shift that will remain indefinitely.
dredge went from a good deck to one of the better in the format. the process of any deck rising in the ranks will demand attention. i dont consider that to be warping.
what i DO consider to be warping is the rise of multiple decks or instances of a particular gameplay element (ie some card/interaction/mechanic).
this last year had the rise of 3 GY aggro decks, 2 vial + cavern of souls aggro decks, 2.5 artifact decks (lantern is the 0.5 lol). in comparison the decks that rose up to meet them were jund, UWx control, and mardu pyromancer. of those three id claim that UWx control did the best (especially miracles), because its toolset is best suited to ignore any and all text boxes.
a long while ago i mentioned that i thought modern was too diverse, and i still stand by that opinion. when a format is being stretched too thin, it favors those doing the stretching. THAT is what i consider to be warping, because i dont see any way back. decks are growing in power, but not consistency (creeping chill is the perfect example of this); which in turn translates to players being discontent without having something on paper to explain why because winrates remain reasonable given enough data to smooth it out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
i just realized the UW control player who got 2nd in the last challenge was running 3 RIP main with no snap in the 75. smh
damn kids these days
This is what we call "warping" lol.
Yes, that is definitely a sign of warping. UW is a deck that historically does not maindeck GY hate (unlike, say Gx Tron which sometimes runs Relics). Adding 3 MD RiP is a bad sign.
I tried to operationalize the "battle of sideboards" last year by comparing anti-GY and anti-artifact hate around the time of the GGT ban, specifically MTGO data from 12/2016. This was a period where GGT was out of control on MTGO (fun fact; GGT had zero copies in proximate GP T8s) and ultimately ate the "battle of sidebards" ban. But anti-artifact cards were also played in SBs at the time, and no artifact deck ate a similar ban. Based on this, I looked for differences in the distribution of anti-GY and anti-artifact hate across Modern SBs in 12/2016.
Interestingly, the difference wasn't that stark. In the sample of about 270 5-0 MTGO decks (admittedly, a curated sample courtesy of Wizards), I found that decks averaged 2.5 anti-artifact cards in the SB and 2.7 anti-GY cards in the SB. This obviously isn't a big difference. The spread was a little more interesting, with about the same percentage of decks running 0 hate cards of each (11% for GY, 12% for artifact), but 58% of lists running 3+ anti-GY options in the SB vs. 47% for anti-artifact cards. The most common anti-artifact package of 0-6 cards was 2 cards in the SB (32% of decks chose this configuration). For anti-GY cards, however, the most common choice was 3 cards in the SB (29% of decks). We also saw 29% of decks run 4+ anti-GY SB cards, compared with only 23% for 4+ anti-artifact SB choices. Overall, this represented a slight uptick from the "average" 2 card package of anti-artifact cards to the above average 3 card package for anti-GY cards.
Ultimately, I didn't find this very helpful because the difference was fairly small. I don't actually know how best to operationalize what makes something "warping" and what is merely adaptation. Or at least, I don't have the dataset to properly test measurements. I do think the late-2016 period is a good time to focus on, as that is when we saw a definitive answer of a warping deck (Dredge) eat a ban while other allegedly warping decks (big mana, Opal, etc.) were untouched. I'd be curious to see how other people are trying to make this a more objective measure, as it could be a useful way to gauge format health.
i just realized the UW control player who got 2nd in the last challenge was running 3 RIP main with no snap in the 75. smh
damn kids these days
This is what we call "warping" lol.
Yes, that is definitely a sign of warping. UW is a deck that historically does not maindeck GY hate (unlike, say Gx Tron which sometimes runs Relics). Adding 3 MD RiP is a bad sign.
I tried to operationalize the "battle of sideboards" last year by comparing anti-GY and anti-artifact hate around the time of the GGT ban, specifically MTGO data from 12/2016. This was a period where GGT was out of control on MTGO (fun fact; GGT had zero copies in proximate GP T8s) and ultimately ate the "battle of sidebards" ban. But anti-artifact cards were also played in SBs at the time, and no artifact deck ate a similar ban. Based on this, I looked for differences in the distribution of anti-GY and anti-artifact hate across Modern SBs in 12/2016.
Interestingly, the difference wasn't that stark. In the sample of about 270 5-0 MTGO decks (admittedly, a curated sample courtesy of Wizards), I found that decks averaged 2.5 anti-artifact cards in the SB and 2.7 anti-GY cards in the SB. This obviously isn't a big difference. The spread was a little more interesting, with about the same percentage of decks running 0 hate cards of each (11% for GY, 12% for artifact), but 58% of lists running 3+ anti-GY options in the SB vs. 47% for anti-artifact cards. The most common anti-artifact package of 0-6 cards was 2 cards in the SB (32% of decks chose this configuration). For anti-GY cards, however, the most common choice was 3 cards in the SB (29% of decks). We also saw 29% of decks run 4+ anti-GY SB cards, compared with only 23% for 4+ anti-artifact SB choices. Overall, this represented a slight uptick from the "average" 2 card package of anti-artifact cards to the above average 3 card package for anti-GY cards.
Ultimately, I didn't find this very helpful because the difference was fairly small. I don't actually know how best to operationalize what makes something "warping" and what is merely adaptation. Or at least, I don't have the dataset to properly test measurements. I do think the late-2016 period is a good time to focus on, as that is when we saw a definitive answer of a warping deck (Dredge) eat a ban while other allegedly warping decks (big mana, Opal, etc.) were untouched. I'd be curious to see how other people are trying to make this a more objective measure, as it could be a useful way to gauge format health.
I think this also must play in degrees towards how the games themselves actually fold out. No Jund deck is going to mulligan to 4 looking for Ancient Grudge. Meanwhile most players would definitely mull a decent 7 that does not include Leyline of the Void.
I feel that the artifact decks in general are more forgiving, allowing brief periods of meaningful interaction. While the counterpart of the Graveyard decks don't allow for such a thing.
I think this also must play in degrees towards how the games themselves actually fold out. No Jund deck is going to mulligan to 4 looking for Ancient Grudge. Meanwhile most players would definitely mull a decent 7 that does not include Leyline of the Void.
I feel that the artifact decks in general are more forgiving, allowing brief periods of meaningful interaction. While the counterpart of the Graveyard decks don't allow for such a thing.
i think this was more the case until kci and hardened scales showed up. like dredge, they ask the opponent to not only have interaction; but specific kinds of interaction - or at least a certain amount of it. otherwise its likely going to be insufficient.
that and GY hate is typically more powerful. i mean just compare the effects of leyline versus grudge. its like blood moon versus stone rain - the scope is just way different. stony silence is within the same league, but other than that you need to look to 'destroy all artifact' effects.
regardless, if people are saying that dredge is warping the format without it putting up results on a level to warrant a ban, i think that speaks of an issue that is more pervasive than just a single deck being too powerful.
for example fast forward to 3 months from now. what if dredge was still one of the best decks in the format? or THE best? and i mean best as in doing about as well as humans has for the last 6 months or so.
would there be something wrong with that? i would probably say yes. as much as people like to brush off 'subjectivity', its not as if all playstyle/play patterns are equally loved.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
yeah. granted i am speaking more about the long term health of the format. if however long passes and dredge is still a dominant deck (but not overly dominant); then yeah i think suffocating is a fine description. the thing is though, i am not sure it would dredge doing the suffocating; at least not on its own.
it would indicate that at no point could the format adequately hate it out. the only reason for this would be that so many other proactive/linear decks are pulling people in different directions, and dredge would never have a high enough share of the meta to warrant going all in on hate. banning dredge would be a bandaid fix at that point, because the format is showing itself to be firmly imbalanced in favor of the unfair or however you want to categorize them.
so yeah its hypotheticals and speculation, but it isnt an uncommon opinion already that fair decks are disadvantaged. a stable dredge presence might be a point of legitimate proof of that, even if indirectly.
to take it a step further, i dont think bannings would be a feasible solution. for one it would be crippling to the modern playerbase. alternative solutions would be giving fair decks more than unfair decks when designing standard sets; we see wizards sorta doing this already. or turning to the banlist for proven powerful cards. if we indeed ever get this possible state then cards like twin, sfm, or even punishing fire look more appealing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
I think this also must play in degrees towards how the games themselves actually fold out. No Jund deck is going to mulligan to 4 looking for Ancient Grudge. Meanwhile most players would definitely mull a decent 7 that does not include Leyline of the Void.
I feel that the artifact decks in general are more forgiving, allowing brief periods of meaningful interaction. While the counterpart of the Graveyard decks don't allow for such a thing.
i think this was more the case until kci and hardened scales showed up. like dredge, they ask the opponent to not only have interaction; but specific kinds of interaction - or at least a certain amount of it. otherwise its likely going to be insufficient.
that and GY hate is typically more powerful. i mean just compare the effects of leyline versus grudge. its like blood moon versus stone rain - the scope is just way different. stony silence is within the same league, but other than that you need to look to 'destroy all artifact' effects.
regardless, if people are saying that dredge is warping the format without it putting up results on a level to warrant a ban, i think that speaks of an issue that is more pervasive than just a single deck being too powerful.
for example fast forward to 3 months from now. what if dredge was still one of the best decks in the format? or THE best? and i mean best as in doing about as well as humans has for the last 6 months or so.
would there be something wrong with that? i would probably say yes. as much as people like to brush off 'subjectivity', its not as if all playstyle/play patterns are equally loved.
I agree. I think Humans being the top deck was a good thing. As much as I like combo and want diversity within the archetype, too many combo decks at the top is a very bad thing for any format and a deck like Humans alleviates this
No results = no ban. If they ban something in dredge even with no results, i think it will be unfair. Sideboardwars after such short time cant be the reason. Even gravehate Main. Most dont want a ban against humana because UW play now 4 terminus Main? They are good against more Decks like Rest in peace is good against a lot of Decks....mardu, kci, all midrange, storm,even unprepared other control and not only against dredge. Preparing against this is not warping
No results = no ban. If they ban something in dredge even with no results, i think it will be unfair. Sideboardwars after such short time cant be the reason. Even gravehate Main. Most dont want a ban against humana because UW play now 4 terminus Main? They are good against more Decks like Rest in peace is good against a lot of Decks....mardu, kci, all midrange, storm,even unprepared other control and not only against dredge. Preparing against this is not warping
Where is this notion that Dredge isn't putting up results? A deck doesnt need to first place every tournament to warp the format. Even with the format adjusting for ton of graveyard hate, its still putting up multiple copies in the top 16 of pretty much every tourey since Guilds of Ravnica release
Humans had more time, same "warping", more results and no banning. This is ok, we agree?but banning dredge with less time, Less results, same warping? I think it will be not fair against dredge players
Humans had more time, same "warping", more results and no banning. This is ok, we agree?but banning dredge with less time, Less results, same warping? I think it will be not fair against dredge players
See this is the problem with using a term like "warping." Most options that are good vs aggro is good vs humans. And some decks can beat humans without very specific countermeasures (tron). Dredge is immune to most basic disruption. You need exile type removal, to stop gy recursion, or you probably lose.
Imo the hate cards for artifact and GY strats are just lacking. ancient grudge isn't as punishing to decks like hardened scales affinity as anger of the gods can be for something like elves.
leyline of the void is great, but it creates the mulligan subgame. It's only useful against dredge typically if you open with it. So what happens is you get these awkward windows to use weaker hate cards then what other strats have to fight against.
cavern of souls and aether vial are great vs control - but cavern's first copy is great whenever you draw it. It poses a severe threat to counter heavy lists.
Another issue is that while aggro decks are deploying resources for 2-4 points of chip damage, combo decks are winning with the same volume of resources. Burn is about as aggressive as you can get and it still can't out pace certain combo decks.
I think a few modal cards that pose significant speed bumps for these decks would be good for the format. knight of autumn is a step in the right direction. It's flexible enough to stall out a few strats and can safely be mainboarded. It's not going to infinite loop you on t3 though. I want more cards like this in the format because you have more decisions during a game. My best mode match one may be my worst in match 3 - but it's still providing some benefit.
There's a few points about Humans being the #1 deck we have discussed a lot on this forum, but to be brief, its a lot different than Dredge. Dredge is a "must draw sideboard card" deck, Humans isn't.
Creature removal isn't a narrow interaction, while graveyard hate is
Imo the hate cards for artifact and GY strats are just lacking.
There was a period of time in Vintage where Workshop decks and Dredge were both Tier 1 decks. Other than maybe Energy Flux the answers that were used in Vintage all exist in Modern. Those answers were much better against Dredge than they were against Workshops. I think we have all we need in the Modern format to fight Dredge - people just need to respect it at the right times. There may be a case to be made about beefing up artifact hate in Modern, but decent answers exist in Red, Green, White already.
Humans had more time, same "warping", more results and no banning. This is ok, we agree?but banning dredge with less time, Less results, same warping? I think it will be not fair against dredge players
See this is the problem with using a term like "warping." Most options that are good vs aggro is good vs humans. And some decks can beat humans without very specific countermeasures (tron). Dredge is immune to most basic disruption. You need exile type removal, to stop gy recursion, or you probably lose.
terminus is good too vs dredge. So it is not only needing fast gravehate
There's a few points about Humans being the #1 deck we have discussed a lot on this forum, but to be brief, its a lot different than Dredge. Dredge is a "must draw sideboard card" deck, Humans isn't.
Creature removal isn't a narrow interaction, while graveyard hate is
in the past maybe, but not in modern modern. People still underestimate graves. Graveyarddecks are everywhere and a lot of new gravedecks coming each 2 months like bridgevine, Phoenix and other stuff. Wie should accept reality and each of us need more gravehate main
Imo the hate cards for artifact and GY strats are just lacking.
There was a period of time in Vintage where Workshop decks and Dredge were both Tier 1 decks. Other than maybe Energy Flux the answers that were used in Vintage all exist in Modern. Those answers were much better against Dredge than they were against Workshops. I think we have all we need in the Modern format to fight Dredge - people just need to respect it at the right times. There may be a case to be made about beefing up artifact hate in Modern, but decent answers exist in Red, Green, White already.
Yes, all narrow GY hate exiss in Vintage and Modern. However, Vintage has much more universal answer cards, mana denial cards, card advantage/draw engines, and fast mana. We've probably said this a bunch of times before in this forum, comparing other formats is never a good analogy/example
Imo the hate cards for artifact and GY strats are just lacking.
There was a period of time in Vintage where Workshop decks and Dredge were both Tier 1 decks. Other than maybe Energy Flux the answers that were used in Vintage all exist in Modern. Those answers were much better against Dredge than they were against Workshops. I think we have all we need in the Modern format to fight Dredge - people just need to respect it at the right times. There may be a case to be made about beefing up artifact hate in Modern, but decent answers exist in Red, Green, White already.
Yes, all narrow GY hate exiss in Vintage and Modern. However, Vintage has much more universal answer cards, mana denial cards, card advantage/draw engines, and fast mana. We've probably said this a bunch of times before in this forum, comparing other formats is never a good analogy/example
Dredge in Vintage is a much more powerful deck in relation to its format than Modern Dredge is in Modern. Those cards are enough to nullify it there. They are enough to nullify it in Modern too. People just need to respect it and it will die off - until nobody respects it again.
Regarding the other things you mentioned - card advantage/draw, better counters, and fast mana are pretty much meaningless against Vintage Dredge. It plays on an axis that ignores those. Strp/Waste on Bazaar is fine as long as you're on the play and drop it your first turn.
In limited cases making a comparison to another format is fine. This is one of those cases. The incredibly broad and powerful GY answers exist in Modern and are enough.
Imo the hate cards for artifact and GY strats are just lacking.
There was a period of time in Vintage where Workshop decks and Dredge were both Tier 1 decks. Other than maybe Energy Flux the answers that were used in Vintage all exist in Modern. Those answers were much better against Dredge than they were against Workshops. I think we have all we need in the Modern format to fight Dredge - people just need to respect it at the right times. There may be a case to be made about beefing up artifact hate in Modern, but decent answers exist in Red, Green, White already.
its too early to tell, but it might end up being that people cant give that much respect to dredge because of the nature of the format. these polarizing but equally powerful linear strategies rise up to protect eachother, all the while maintaining a low enough total representation to where its not optimal to dilute your sideboard.
i think this sort of give and take is normal, because decks are looking for openings in the meta all the time. however, those decks are typically on the outside looking in.
that is just my working hypothesis, and more time needs to pass to even see if it pans out. as you pointed out, the level of hate available isnt the issue. so what does it mean if dredge is floating around 7-10% representation 2 or 3 months from now? like what could explain a linear deck maintaining a top, but not oppressive, position when the answers to it are on the same level as legacy and vintage?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Burn is poop against Dredge, plus you're not really painting a rosy picture of the format if the answer to the all ready far over-representation of ships passing by each other in the night is another ship passing deck.
damn kids these days
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)This is what I was thinking. I don't know about Burn vs. Dredge now, but before with Golgari Grave-Troll, Burn was a fairly easy matchup. (60/40 at worst, but probably slightly better) I'm only assuming that Creeping Chill made it better...
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 what we call "warping" lol.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
When Dredge is high and all decks pack extra grave hate, yes. That's warping. But when you're Jund and you pack extra Tron hate, that's a concession to a bad matchup. That may be a bad example since a large percentage of Jund players think you should just give up that matchup, but I think the point is clear enough. Sideboarding is done to flesh out your full 75 (thinking of a complete 75 rather than main and side), making concessions to your specific deck's bad matchups, taking into account the top of the metagame, and yes, sometimes accounting for warping decks/cards. But just because you're thinking of a specific deck when making a SB choice doesn't mean that deck is warping.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
dredge went from a good deck to one of the better in the format. the process of any deck rising in the ranks will demand attention. i dont consider that to be warping.
what i DO consider to be warping is the rise of multiple decks or instances of a particular gameplay element (ie some card/interaction/mechanic).
this last year had the rise of 3 GY aggro decks, 2 vial + cavern of souls aggro decks, 2.5 artifact decks (lantern is the 0.5 lol). in comparison the decks that rose up to meet them were jund, UWx control, and mardu pyromancer. of those three id claim that UWx control did the best (especially miracles), because its toolset is best suited to ignore any and all text boxes.
a long while ago i mentioned that i thought modern was too diverse, and i still stand by that opinion. when a format is being stretched too thin, it favors those doing the stretching. THAT is what i consider to be warping, because i dont see any way back. decks are growing in power, but not consistency (creeping chill is the perfect example of this); which in turn translates to players being discontent without having something on paper to explain why because winrates remain reasonable given enough data to smooth it out.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)That's hilarious. RIP is an absurdly good card in the meta right now so this actually makes sense.
Yes, that is definitely a sign of warping. UW is a deck that historically does not maindeck GY hate (unlike, say Gx Tron which sometimes runs Relics). Adding 3 MD RiP is a bad sign.
I tried to operationalize the "battle of sideboards" last year by comparing anti-GY and anti-artifact hate around the time of the GGT ban, specifically MTGO data from 12/2016. This was a period where GGT was out of control on MTGO (fun fact; GGT had zero copies in proximate GP T8s) and ultimately ate the "battle of sidebards" ban. But anti-artifact cards were also played in SBs at the time, and no artifact deck ate a similar ban. Based on this, I looked for differences in the distribution of anti-GY and anti-artifact hate across Modern SBs in 12/2016.
Interestingly, the difference wasn't that stark. In the sample of about 270 5-0 MTGO decks (admittedly, a curated sample courtesy of Wizards), I found that decks averaged 2.5 anti-artifact cards in the SB and 2.7 anti-GY cards in the SB. This obviously isn't a big difference. The spread was a little more interesting, with about the same percentage of decks running 0 hate cards of each (11% for GY, 12% for artifact), but 58% of lists running 3+ anti-GY options in the SB vs. 47% for anti-artifact cards. The most common anti-artifact package of 0-6 cards was 2 cards in the SB (32% of decks chose this configuration). For anti-GY cards, however, the most common choice was 3 cards in the SB (29% of decks). We also saw 29% of decks run 4+ anti-GY SB cards, compared with only 23% for 4+ anti-artifact SB choices. Overall, this represented a slight uptick from the "average" 2 card package of anti-artifact cards to the above average 3 card package for anti-GY cards.
Ultimately, I didn't find this very helpful because the difference was fairly small. I don't actually know how best to operationalize what makes something "warping" and what is merely adaptation. Or at least, I don't have the dataset to properly test measurements. I do think the late-2016 period is a good time to focus on, as that is when we saw a definitive answer of a warping deck (Dredge) eat a ban while other allegedly warping decks (big mana, Opal, etc.) were untouched. I'd be curious to see how other people are trying to make this a more objective measure, as it could be a useful way to gauge format health.
I think this also must play in degrees towards how the games themselves actually fold out. No Jund deck is going to mulligan to 4 looking for Ancient Grudge. Meanwhile most players would definitely mull a decent 7 that does not include Leyline of the Void.
I feel that the artifact decks in general are more forgiving, allowing brief periods of meaningful interaction. While the counterpart of the Graveyard decks don't allow for such a thing.
i think this was more the case until kci and hardened scales showed up. like dredge, they ask the opponent to not only have interaction; but specific kinds of interaction - or at least a certain amount of it. otherwise its likely going to be insufficient.
that and GY hate is typically more powerful. i mean just compare the effects of leyline versus grudge. its like blood moon versus stone rain - the scope is just way different. stony silence is within the same league, but other than that you need to look to 'destroy all artifact' effects.
regardless, if people are saying that dredge is warping the format without it putting up results on a level to warrant a ban, i think that speaks of an issue that is more pervasive than just a single deck being too powerful.
for example fast forward to 3 months from now. what if dredge was still one of the best decks in the format? or THE best? and i mean best as in doing about as well as humans has for the last 6 months or so.
would there be something wrong with that? i would probably say yes. as much as people like to brush off 'subjectivity', its not as if all playstyle/play patterns are equally loved.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)it would indicate that at no point could the format adequately hate it out. the only reason for this would be that so many other proactive/linear decks are pulling people in different directions, and dredge would never have a high enough share of the meta to warrant going all in on hate. banning dredge would be a bandaid fix at that point, because the format is showing itself to be firmly imbalanced in favor of the unfair or however you want to categorize them.
so yeah its hypotheticals and speculation, but it isnt an uncommon opinion already that fair decks are disadvantaged. a stable dredge presence might be a point of legitimate proof of that, even if indirectly.
to take it a step further, i dont think bannings would be a feasible solution. for one it would be crippling to the modern playerbase. alternative solutions would be giving fair decks more than unfair decks when designing standard sets; we see wizards sorta doing this already. or turning to the banlist for proven powerful cards. if we indeed ever get this possible state then cards like twin, sfm, or even punishing fire look more appealing.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)I agree. I think Humans being the top deck was a good thing. As much as I like combo and want diversity within the archetype, too many combo decks at the top is a very bad thing for any format and a deck like Humans alleviates this
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
Where is this notion that Dredge isn't putting up results? A deck doesnt need to first place every tournament to warp the format. Even with the format adjusting for ton of graveyard hate, its still putting up multiple copies in the top 16 of pretty much every tourey since Guilds of Ravnica release
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
See this is the problem with using a term like "warping." Most options that are good vs aggro is good vs humans. And some decks can beat humans without very specific countermeasures (tron). Dredge is immune to most basic disruption. You need exile type removal, to stop gy recursion, or you probably lose.
leyline of the void is great, but it creates the mulligan subgame. It's only useful against dredge typically if you open with it. So what happens is you get these awkward windows to use weaker hate cards then what other strats have to fight against.
cavern of souls and aether vial are great vs control - but cavern's first copy is great whenever you draw it. It poses a severe threat to counter heavy lists.
Another issue is that while aggro decks are deploying resources for 2-4 points of chip damage, combo decks are winning with the same volume of resources. Burn is about as aggressive as you can get and it still can't out pace certain combo decks.
I think a few modal cards that pose significant speed bumps for these decks would be good for the format. knight of autumn is a step in the right direction. It's flexible enough to stall out a few strats and can safely be mainboarded. It's not going to infinite loop you on t3 though. I want more cards like this in the format because you have more decisions during a game. My best mode match one may be my worst in match 3 - but it's still providing some benefit.
Creature removal isn't a narrow interaction, while graveyard hate is
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
Yes, all narrow GY hate exiss in Vintage and Modern. However, Vintage has much more universal answer cards, mana denial cards, card advantage/draw engines, and fast mana. We've probably said this a bunch of times before in this forum, comparing other formats is never a good analogy/example
URStormRU
GRTitanshift[mana]RG/mana]
Regarding the other things you mentioned - card advantage/draw, better counters, and fast mana are pretty much meaningless against Vintage Dredge. It plays on an axis that ignores those. Strp/Waste on Bazaar is fine as long as you're on the play and drop it your first turn.
In limited cases making a comparison to another format is fine. This is one of those cases. The incredibly broad and powerful GY answers exist in Modern and are enough.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
its too early to tell, but it might end up being that people cant give that much respect to dredge because of the nature of the format. these polarizing but equally powerful linear strategies rise up to protect eachother, all the while maintaining a low enough total representation to where its not optimal to dilute your sideboard.
i think this sort of give and take is normal, because decks are looking for openings in the meta all the time. however, those decks are typically on the outside looking in.
that is just my working hypothesis, and more time needs to pass to even see if it pans out. as you pointed out, the level of hate available isnt the issue. so what does it mean if dredge is floating around 7-10% representation 2 or 3 months from now? like what could explain a linear deck maintaining a top, but not oppressive, position when the answers to it are on the same level as legacy and vintage?
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)