I kind of want to say more about Stoneforge Mystic, but there are at least 2 players at my LGS who don't believe Stoneforge Mystic will or should get unbanned. LO Freaking L.
You know...I can barely work up the desire to even care, but what is the actual argument against SFM? Literally someone spell it out for me because I dont get it.
I want to see the decklist of a SFM deck that would actually even dent this formats top players.
One of the guys said that it forces all White decks to play Stoneforge Mystic. He doesn't think it would break the format by any means. He thinks it would be put in ALL White decks. I brought up that Humans won't play it, but he believes it is a 4 of in Spirits.
The other guy thinks about the same thing. They think it makes Modern less diverse because of being "played" in all White decks. But this guy actually thinks that the card is pretty damn good. He thinks it pushes out certain strategies and could possibly make UW Stoneblade too good a deck.
*It's hard for me to refute such things when someone is caring all that much about Spirits and UW Control. Also, I'm a bit unsure about whether Teferi AND Stoneforge Mystic will be played in the same deck. They both say that the deck definitely will play both.
**"On another note," I mean there literally are players who bring up Modern Storm, yes Modern Storm, when talking about why a card should not be unbanned. Will Storm always have this monkey on its back until even Caleb Sherer stops playing it? Dammit!
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)
All decks 'push out' other decks. That is the nature of a meta. Like lets be real, as I gaze over at my twitter and see pro's dropping 'tier lists' for fun.
If you are not on Dredge, GDS, or Phoenix, you are PROBABLY doing it wrong. Shift is probably in there too, but personally I think thats because Shift beats up on the plebs that are not playing those other 3.
Its unceasingly frustrating, seeing people talk about the format when there are truth's about power level that are easily missed because people dont play whats best. They play what they own, or what they like.
THIS 100X!!! If you don't agree with this then there is no amount of logic that will ever convince you that good, non-oppressive, combos should be allowed. If you don't agree with it then just don't play this game, and you certainly shouldn't feel entitled to make any comment on ban lists ever.
Yeah, there are 30+ "competitive decks", but the top 4 or 5 are heads and shoulders above the rest. It's the same as it was back in the day with "5-6 top decks" and "the rest of the 20-30+ decks", but because of the data embargo, we have no concrete way of identifying it. So we tell ourselves somehow this is "better" and "more diverse." Sigh.
I mean 30 decks always exist. Cause plenty of people in Modern play what they love, which more power to them is great, play your pet deck. But what is winning at tournies is what should set balance. Right now its clear you abuse Looting Recursion with Phoenix or Dredge, you try GDS or you hope you get lucky. I think those three are the clear top of the field right now.
Also people get to tunneled on overall deck diversity. I am more concerned with archetype diversity, conversion rates and what is making the top 8 (and top 32 to a lesser degree). Basically percentages are what matter not absolute number of decks played. Right now UWx Control is looking pretty dead. Yeah Yeah Jace and Teferi kept it alive for awhile, Summer was great, but it needs help everywhere else on the curve at 1-3 CMC. And UB Control can only get anything done with one its best pilots so that is hardly a ringing endorsement.
If I had to guess why TitanShift decks work right is one no ones worry about them and two I say its because the main trouble decks have inevitability they will get you eventually unless you exile or terminus most of their creatures but they don't kill you fast. Whereas Shift can 100 or I guess 20 to 0.
Meanwhile Burn, Affinity, Amulet, and flavors of Lantern are all on the rise. Do you ever not speak entirely in hyperbole?
Not really, most people dont read past a few lines these days.
Burn will always exist, Affinity (Scaled or Frenzy) will always exist, Amulet is up there with Shift, and Whir decks are indeed growing, but they are not at the level of the top 3, either in power (Burn) or meta share (the rest).
Believe whatever you want about the meta, as it probably doesnt reflect in your local (or mine, or FoodChains, or whoever) because people play what they have/want to. /shrug
IdSurge's signature quote from Renegade Rallier stung so deep it made me post on mtgs for the first time in like a month
The difference in how people experience modern right now baffles me. Since the printing of phoenix and the rise (and fall) of KCI, to me, modern is the worst it has ever been sans eldrazi winter and maybe treasure cruise (and at least cruise decks were generally interactive). But somehow there are also people that experience current modern as being one of the best formats ever!
Modern has always had this double-edged sword of limitless variety where, since everyone plays yank they like, you can play the yank you like. But if you actually would try to max your win percentage to steal a big tournament, there are at most 5 decks you should seriously consider. Isn't it just common sense that if you have to submit to the matchup lottery, the winning strategy is to linear as hard as possible and steal at least game 1?
People sticking with decks they've played for years is also a big factor. I've played Jeskai Control since basically the inception of modern, and I still jam it at FNM because I love the deck. But I did buy into Grixis Death Shadow for big tournaments because honestly there is no reward to playing any form of control now. But if this "meta memory" didn't exist, if people's card collections and all memory of Modern would disappear over night, a massive portion of the decks people still to this day register at tournaments would never exist. Because why in the world would you buy into Jeskai Control, or BGx, or a CoCo deck, when there's so much linear nonsense to completely invalidate your deck game 1?
It has become incredibly frustrating to discuss changes in modern, where at the start of this increase in linearity I'm arguing with people that this plate of pasta would be much better if we removed the gravel from it, and people insisting the gravel is just fine. And now months later I see people happily devour an entire brick, and I see people likeminded to me also be baffled at these people eating bricks, but the brickpeople are discussing their favourite flavour of brick, telling me to adapt and take another plate of brick.
I wrote a lengthy rebuttal to your post just now, and decided to delete it because I'm almost positive you just kinda blurted out that comment without thinking it through. It's riddled with inconsistency, illogical or false assumptions and honestly I don't think it's worth even having a back-and-forth about. Just... Damn
I'm one of the people who think modern is fine -- just opinion. True that phoenix and Dredge are super strong right now... but time will come when they will just be regular competitive decks. The new cards coming in Modern Horizons should help level the playing field.
The banning of looting would cripple two of my decks, so I hope it does not happen.
It has become incredibly frustrating to discuss changes in modern, where at the start of this increase in linearity I'm arguing with people that this plate of pasta would be much better if we removed the gravel from it, and people insisting the gravel is just fine
Is this hyperbole also ?
When I look at the numbers, Modern is diverse and top decks were not always the same in 2018. Phoenix decks are super popular right now, shared by two distinct variants. MTGtop8 says 11% of the perfs. That's close to what Twin did before its ban, sure. In all of 2018, no deck was on average over 9%. Wouldn't some players whine a bit too much ?
Yes, some decks are a bit out of control for a moment, but Wizards did a good job about them right ? I feel like some players can't suffer an unfavorable meta for a month without neverendlessly whining. I think the format is pretty good because it's easy to figure out what goes wrong, react fast, and balance the meta again (thanks to the banlist and new printings, it's not only via "adapting" our lists to the meta).
Not to flame, but I feel like this topic is constantly fed by old tired Modern analysts. I'm curious whether we could raise the forum so players emotionally complain less and build more cold-blooded criticism, sharing the negative AND the positive in a reasonable manner.
But if you actually would try to max your win percentage to steal a big tournament, there are at most 5 decks you should seriously consider. Isn't it just common sense that if you have to submit to the matchup lottery, the winning strategy is to linear as hard as possible and steal at least game 1?
You don't steal a big tournament if you choose among the top tier decks. You steal it if you win with an underdog deck, that's what I call "steal".
Then, you play more post-SB games than G1s. It's part of Magic to concede G1 to linear strategies, like in Legacy & Vintage. This is where noone is wrong or right, you either choose to play a strong G1 deck, or a strong G2 deck. Not sure it has something to do with the idea linear decks make a format worse.
There's also the fact that if you want to win big tourneys, it implies you gotta spend money first, probably in several expensive decks. To be competitive, you don't complain about the meta, at first you complain about how much money you wasted in decks and trips. Only something stupid like the Eldrazi Winter (because you're tired losing the mirror at the top tables) can cause you to complain about the meta, really.
Is Modern "narrow" right now ? Maybe, but I don't care, I believe it's smart to see Modern in the long term, accept to lose money because of bannings, and accept to let go my pet deck for a better one from time to time. I was on Pod, then on Elves, then on Humans, now on Phoenix. I feel good.
At this point, this calling out modern as the worst since Eldrazi winter is just ridiculous in many levels and has been proven at several different points. The vast majority of people bashing it in this thread, have been doing so in literally EVERY point of its life.
I mean, we literally are going to have an INFLUX of playable cards and the first virtual "rotation" and people are still complaining. What's the point really? In a few months for all we know we might have a completely different modern landscape, with new powerful cards, new decks and a brand new mulligan rule which will make MORE games matter.
So why not tune down the bashing a bit, enjoy the March modern madness and the following mythic championship, and see what the spoiler season brings up.
Four people liking my post but not willing to comment whilst two people comment my post is "full of fallacies" and "ridiculous" mirrors exactly everything that quote from Renegade Rallier stirred up in me, lol.
As for Modern Horizons stirring things up; yes obviously, of course the new set specifically made for modern will change things. That doesn't change that current modern, to me, is a chore, and I wish Horizons came out yesterday to blow this format right open.
Depending on where you play, you will experience Modern differently. Similarly, depending on where you look at results, you can support almost any view of Modern health/unhealth that you hold. Want Modern to look diverse or interactive? Cite the GP Toronto T8 or the Strasbourg MCQ. Want it to look bad? Cite the GP LA T8 or a recent MTGO Challenge. Most people Will probably end up citing the picture closest to their personal experience, so if your MTGO or LGS experience is negative/positive with respect to Modern gameplay, you can find large events to support your Modern perspective.
Of course, the "true" Modern picture is somewhere in the middle. It's not as interactive as it has been in the past, and a few top decks (particularly less interactive ones) are better than many other so-called "viable" decks. But it's also nowhere close to Eldrazi Winter, interactive decks are demonstrably more viable than some critics suggest, and those hated linear decks are more vulnerable than we like to claim.
All of this is to say that Modern is probably just fine, with the potential small exception that Izzet Phoenix, for reasons I and others have explained, is probably the best deck by a margin that may approach (emphasis on May) KCI levels. That might be okay because it doesn't create the secondary KCI issues, but it is a reality to consider.
tbh i liked your post not because i completely agree with all of your assertions, but because it was emotive and had some insights into your personal perspective. sure there are the regular unfounded sweeping statements and some assumptions i think some wouldnt agree are a thing, but there is nothing wrong with a voice of dissent saying 'im really not enjoying modern right now, it seems like its been invariably moving in whatever direction for a while, and i cant understand how others do (like it that is)'. i also found your novel idea of the collective memory of modern up and vanishing and where and how it would pick up and form as an interesting thought experiment.
its mostly a lot of the same people discussing in this thread/sub-forum. as presumably people who likely care about modern more than the average person for a longer period of time its almost ingrained to come to the formats defense because of the historically negative stigma of being 'linear no skill garbage' or some variation. especially so in arenas where its just mobs of anonymous people whom you cant even be sure actually know anything or even play modern shouting their disdain into the wind.
however ive seen you on these forums for years, and apart from any sort of true swaying/convincing with 'arguments' that are mostly asinine and fruitless there is hearing/reading what other people think and reflecting on it. so yeah maybe there are biases, misunderstandings, or even logical inconsistencies; but if you say you dont like something and are frustrated and confused that is still a relevant piece of feedback. its not like we can logic you into enjoy something you clearly arent atm.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
A lot of things are playable and can (and do) win, and the format is diverse in that regard. That said, the type of deck and gameplay that is clearly a cut above (which does not guarantee victory, eh?), IMO, makes for very boring magic (the overwhelming majority of the time). Just boring. Not completely uninteractive (because it isn't), nor extremely linear (because there are interesting decisions to be made on the pilot side, at least some of the time), but mind numbingly boring to watch. I would rather poke my eyes out than watch another game of G Tron, Dredge or Phoenix vs anything. I've only dived into Standard through Arena recently, and frankly, it's just better to watch and more unpredictable to play, no contest. Oh yea, its also more fun, because there are no non-games where everyone is mulliganing for the one card on which their game plan is made or the opponent's broken.
Damn Bearscape! I don't think I've ever seen any post on mtgs get 9 likes and I'm 99.9% positive of it IN the State of Modern Thread. I've been around for a while now.
Anyway, how do people feel about the banning of KCI? Did it do much to influence the format? Did it make it better for you at your LGS? Did it make it better for those on the "big stage, ie. GPs?" Did it just take away a top deck to allow for other top decks to have less competition? What do you think?
Personally for me...
While I kind of think that it was necessary if Matt Nass and his cronies continue to play in GPs, I think it was unnecessary outside of that. I'm half surprised he and his didn't just pick up UR Phoenix and go smash down 4 spots in this top 8. Does anyone have any insight about why he, Sam Pardee, Eli Kassis, and more didn't attend this GP?
*I agree that people will play what they want to play at their local LGS. It doesn't affect much. The guy that had a deck tech with RW Enduring Ideal plays at my LGS usually. He has up and down results depending on his matchups, even if he has always smashed me in the mouth in matches. I always seem to be playing something that can't deal with turn 0 Leyline of Sanctity, Ghostly Prisons, and the good ole Phyrexian Unlife/Solemnity Combo. To be honest, I've had a tougher time with his Arbor Elf/Utopia Sprawl previous list. I probably won less than 10% vs. that while most others were 50/50 against it at worst. Even me, a Spike, may not put UR Phoenix or Dredge together for this FNM out of sheer laziness and the urge to just run what I like.
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)
Banning KCI did literally nothing but remove a single drop in the ocean that was objectively 'the best'. You now have 2 flavours of 'the best' depending on what you subscribe to, or perhaps thats just hyperbole reflected in stats, pro opinions, grinders, and so on...
It never had enough of a meaningful meta share to reflect meaningfully in most of our daily/weekly/whatever play but was clearly the best so had to get the axe.
It has become incredibly frustrating to discuss changes in modern, where at the start of this increase in linearity I'm arguing with people that this plate of pasta would be much better if we removed the gravel from it, and people insisting the gravel is just fine
Is this hyperbole also ?
When I look at the numbers, Modern is diverse and top decks were not always the same in 2018. Phoenix decks are super popular right now, shared by two distinct variants. MTGtop8 says 11% of the perfs. That's close to what Twin did before its ban, sure. In all of 2018, no deck was on average over 9%. Wouldn't some players whine a bit too much ?
Yes, some decks are a bit out of control for a moment, but Wizards did a good job about them right ? I feel like some players can't suffer an unfavorable meta for a month without neverendlessly whining. I think the format is pretty good because it's easy to figure out what goes wrong, react fast, and balance the meta again (thanks to the banlist and new printings, it's not only via "adapting" our lists to the meta).
Not to flame, but I feel like this topic is constantly fed by old tired Modern analysts. I'm curious whether we could raise the forum so players emotionally complain less and build more cold-blooded criticism, sharing the negative AND the positive in a reasonable manner.
But if you actually would try to max your win percentage to steal a big tournament, there are at most 5 decks you should seriously consider. Isn't it just common sense that if you have to submit to the matchup lottery, the winning strategy is to linear as hard as possible and steal at least game 1?
You don't steal a big tournament if you choose among the top tier decks. You steal it if you win with an underdog deck, that's what I call "steal".
Then, you play more post-SB games than G1s. It's part of Magic to concede G1 to linear strategies, like in Legacy & Vintage. This is where noone is wrong or right, you either choose to play a strong G1 deck, or a strong G2 deck. Not sure it has something to do with the idea linear decks make a format worse.
There's also the fact that if you want to win big tourneys, it implies you gotta spend money first, probably in several expensive decks. To be competitive, you don't complain about the meta, at first you complain about how much money you wasted in decks and trips. Only something stupid like the Eldrazi Winter (because you're tired losing the mirror at the top tables) can cause you to complain about the meta, really.
Is Modern "narrow" right now ? Maybe, but I don't care, I believe it's smart to see Modern in the long term, accept to lose money because of bannings, and accept to let go my pet deck for a better one from time to time. I was on Pod, then on Elves, then on Humans, now on Phoenix. I feel good.
I would say that for a decent chunk of people the meta of Modern is their issue with Modern. Not this or any particular meta but the prevailing meta (of which this one is a good example admittedly). No one is debating around the broken metas, as with the Eldrazi and such. What's there to debate about it? It was just garbage through and through.
The prevailing meta has been that the likes of Burn, Affinity, Infect (while good), G Tron, Dredge, and a small selection of midrange now DS - formerly Jund/Junk as the 'fair' deck representative of the format reign supreme for the greatest chunk of the format's existence. The archetypes have, barring a few select instances (that usually ended with a ban, when some or other combo deck gets out of whack) always been stacked. A lot of people don't like this, but can't afford Legacy (or Legacy is dead where they're from) - don't want to buy into Standard, so they're left with wishing that Modern was a different format. And they probably won't be happy until there's a consistent T1 deck in their archetype of choice, probably somewhere along the span of Combo-Control. Control has never been that, and Combo has never been allowed to stay that.
But can you blame them for that? Modern is the 'new' home of people who have Magic for a long time, and for most of them Modern is the only real choice to stay in the game and avoid the rat race. Expecting them not to have their own expectations of an eternal format is asking quite a lot, particularly as Modern has very consistently catered to other types of players.
T3 Karn was always 'fine', but JTMS was 'too strong for modern' for ages. T3 Karn is still fine and JTMS turned out to be far from overpowering. It just shows that there are preconceived notions that drive the format (which turn out to be plain wrong), but are really just groupthink and a desire to please on WotC's part masquerading as 'format management'.
I beg to differ that control has never been that, Jeskai at it's best has won a PT, a World Championship and several GPs and SCG Opens!
Indeed, some of the best periods of this format had UWR competing at or near the top. It now is a sub 50% win rate deck based on the last numbers I saw.
I've always been of the opinion that linear decks should not be as powerful as they are, and strong interaction should reign supreme. Reason being that the better the interaction is, the more incentive there is to play it, which means more games where people are actually having to out think and out play their opponent instead of just out drawing them.
Just my 2¢. Hopefully Modern Horizons will help us fair mages out...
I think the majority of posts that have ever had the word "Tron" in them in the past 10 years have commented on how BS Turn 3 Karn is, and as someone who started with Skred Red, I also mirrored that sentiment. Nowadays there is plenty of hate to run against Tron, and it doesn't put up backbreaking numbers; however, admittedly the group think of "WOW **** TRON" does still remain.
I've thought for quite a while now that Hollow One is as far linear as Modern should go, so I was very happy to see KCI go. Nowadays I look at the top decks and think, "Gee, Skred or Soul Sisters feels like it would crap all over 80% of these decks pretty hard..."
Unfortunately, Modern has cooled off for quite a while in my neck of the woods, and I'm the area's TO now as well as weekend shop manager, so I never get to play in anything!
Still, those kind of decks had Jace, Terminus, Field, opt, abrade, teferi and many other answers. Also, they are getting more in Modern horizons!
Just some nitpicking: When Jeskai was one of the pillars in Modern (and won those things), all those cards (sans Terminus) were either not printed or unbanned yet.
Greetings,
Kathal
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What I play or have:
Modern/Legacy
either funpolice (Delver, Deathcloud, UW Control) or the fun decks (especially those ft. Griselbrand)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
One of the guys said that it forces all White decks to play Stoneforge Mystic. He doesn't think it would break the format by any means. He thinks it would be put in ALL White decks. I brought up that Humans won't play it, but he believes it is a 4 of in Spirits.
The other guy thinks about the same thing. They think it makes Modern less diverse because of being "played" in all White decks. But this guy actually thinks that the card is pretty damn good. He thinks it pushes out certain strategies and could possibly make UW Stoneblade too good a deck.
*It's hard for me to refute such things when someone is caring all that much about Spirits and UW Control. Also, I'm a bit unsure about whether Teferi AND Stoneforge Mystic will be played in the same deck. They both say that the deck definitely will play both.
**"On another note," I mean there literally are players who bring up Modern Storm, yes Modern Storm, when talking about why a card should not be unbanned. Will Storm always have this monkey on its back until even Caleb Sherer stops playing it? Dammit!
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)If you are not on Dredge, GDS, or Phoenix, you are PROBABLY doing it wrong. Shift is probably in there too, but personally I think thats because Shift beats up on the plebs that are not playing those other 3.
Its unceasingly frustrating, seeing people talk about the format when there are truth's about power level that are easily missed because people dont play whats best. They play what they own, or what they like.
Spirits
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Also people get to tunneled on overall deck diversity. I am more concerned with archetype diversity, conversion rates and what is making the top 8 (and top 32 to a lesser degree). Basically percentages are what matter not absolute number of decks played. Right now UWx Control is looking pretty dead. Yeah Yeah Jace and Teferi kept it alive for awhile, Summer was great, but it needs help everywhere else on the curve at 1-3 CMC. And UB Control can only get anything done with one its best pilots so that is hardly a ringing endorsement.
If I had to guess why TitanShift decks work right is one no ones worry about them and two I say its because the main trouble decks have inevitability they will get you eventually unless you exile or terminus most of their creatures but they don't kill you fast. Whereas Shift can 100 or I guess 20 to 0.
Not really, most people dont read past a few lines these days.
Burn will always exist, Affinity (Scaled or Frenzy) will always exist, Amulet is up there with Shift, and Whir decks are indeed growing, but they are not at the level of the top 3, either in power (Burn) or meta share (the rest).
Believe whatever you want about the meta, as it probably doesnt reflect in your local (or mine, or FoodChains, or whoever) because people play what they have/want to. /shrug
Spirits
Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki
The difference in how people experience modern right now baffles me. Since the printing of phoenix and the rise (and fall) of KCI, to me, modern is the worst it has ever been sans eldrazi winter and maybe treasure cruise (and at least cruise decks were generally interactive). But somehow there are also people that experience current modern as being one of the best formats ever!
Modern has always had this double-edged sword of limitless variety where, since everyone plays yank they like, you can play the yank you like. But if you actually would try to max your win percentage to steal a big tournament, there are at most 5 decks you should seriously consider. Isn't it just common sense that if you have to submit to the matchup lottery, the winning strategy is to linear as hard as possible and steal at least game 1?
People sticking with decks they've played for years is also a big factor. I've played Jeskai Control since basically the inception of modern, and I still jam it at FNM because I love the deck. But I did buy into Grixis Death Shadow for big tournaments because honestly there is no reward to playing any form of control now. But if this "meta memory" didn't exist, if people's card collections and all memory of Modern would disappear over night, a massive portion of the decks people still to this day register at tournaments would never exist. Because why in the world would you buy into Jeskai Control, or BGx, or a CoCo deck, when there's so much linear nonsense to completely invalidate your deck game 1?
It has become incredibly frustrating to discuss changes in modern, where at the start of this increase in linearity I'm arguing with people that this plate of pasta would be much better if we removed the gravel from it, and people insisting the gravel is just fine. And now months later I see people happily devour an entire brick, and I see people likeminded to me also be baffled at these people eating bricks, but the brickpeople are discussing their favourite flavour of brick, telling me to adapt and take another plate of brick.
The banning of looting would cripple two of my decks, so I hope it does not happen.
Nexus MTG News // Nexus - Magic Art Gallery // MTG Dual Land Color Ratios Analyzer // MTG Card Drawing Odds Calculator
Want to play a UW control deck in modern, but don't have jace or snaps?
Please come visit us at the Emeria Titan control thread
Is this hyperbole also ?
When I look at the numbers, Modern is diverse and top decks were not always the same in 2018. Phoenix decks are super popular right now, shared by two distinct variants. MTGtop8 says 11% of the perfs. That's close to what Twin did before its ban, sure. In all of 2018, no deck was on average over 9%. Wouldn't some players whine a bit too much ?
Yes, some decks are a bit out of control for a moment, but Wizards did a good job about them right ? I feel like some players can't suffer an unfavorable meta for a month without neverendlessly whining. I think the format is pretty good because it's easy to figure out what goes wrong, react fast, and balance the meta again (thanks to the banlist and new printings, it's not only via "adapting" our lists to the meta).
Not to flame, but I feel like this topic is constantly fed by old tired Modern analysts. I'm curious whether we could raise the forum so players emotionally complain less and build more cold-blooded criticism, sharing the negative AND the positive in a reasonable manner.
You don't steal a big tournament if you choose among the top tier decks. You steal it if you win with an underdog deck, that's what I call "steal".
Then, you play more post-SB games than G1s. It's part of Magic to concede G1 to linear strategies, like in Legacy & Vintage. This is where noone is wrong or right, you either choose to play a strong G1 deck, or a strong G2 deck. Not sure it has something to do with the idea linear decks make a format worse.
There's also the fact that if you want to win big tourneys, it implies you gotta spend money first, probably in several expensive decks. To be competitive, you don't complain about the meta, at first you complain about how much money you wasted in decks and trips. Only something stupid like the Eldrazi Winter (because you're tired losing the mirror at the top tables) can cause you to complain about the meta, really.
Is Modern "narrow" right now ? Maybe, but I don't care, I believe it's smart to see Modern in the long term, accept to lose money because of bannings, and accept to let go my pet deck for a better one from time to time. I was on Pod, then on Elves, then on Humans, now on Phoenix. I feel good.
I mean, we literally are going to have an INFLUX of playable cards and the first virtual "rotation" and people are still complaining. What's the point really? In a few months for all we know we might have a completely different modern landscape, with new powerful cards, new decks and a brand new mulligan rule which will make MORE games matter.
So why not tune down the bashing a bit, enjoy the March modern madness and the following mythic championship, and see what the spoiler season brings up.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
As for Modern Horizons stirring things up; yes obviously, of course the new set specifically made for modern will change things. That doesn't change that current modern, to me, is a chore, and I wish Horizons came out yesterday to blow this format right open.
Of course, the "true" Modern picture is somewhere in the middle. It's not as interactive as it has been in the past, and a few top decks (particularly less interactive ones) are better than many other so-called "viable" decks. But it's also nowhere close to Eldrazi Winter, interactive decks are demonstrably more viable than some critics suggest, and those hated linear decks are more vulnerable than we like to claim.
All of this is to say that Modern is probably just fine, with the potential small exception that Izzet Phoenix, for reasons I and others have explained, is probably the best deck by a margin that may approach (emphasis on May) KCI levels. That might be okay because it doesn't create the secondary KCI issues, but it is a reality to consider.
its mostly a lot of the same people discussing in this thread/sub-forum. as presumably people who likely care about modern more than the average person for a longer period of time its almost ingrained to come to the formats defense because of the historically negative stigma of being 'linear no skill garbage' or some variation. especially so in arenas where its just mobs of anonymous people whom you cant even be sure actually know anything or even play modern shouting their disdain into the wind.
however ive seen you on these forums for years, and apart from any sort of true swaying/convincing with 'arguments' that are mostly asinine and fruitless there is hearing/reading what other people think and reflecting on it. so yeah maybe there are biases, misunderstandings, or even logical inconsistencies; but if you say you dont like something and are frustrated and confused that is still a relevant piece of feedback. its not like we can logic you into enjoy something you clearly arent atm.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)A lot of things are playable and can (and do) win, and the format is diverse in that regard. That said, the type of deck and gameplay that is clearly a cut above (which does not guarantee victory, eh?), IMO, makes for very boring magic (the overwhelming majority of the time). Just boring. Not completely uninteractive (because it isn't), nor extremely linear (because there are interesting decisions to be made on the pilot side, at least some of the time), but mind numbingly boring to watch. I would rather poke my eyes out than watch another game of G Tron, Dredge or Phoenix vs anything. I've only dived into Standard through Arena recently, and frankly, it's just better to watch and more unpredictable to play, no contest. Oh yea, its also more fun, because there are no non-games where everyone is mulliganing for the one card on which their game plan is made or the opponent's broken.
Anyway, how do people feel about the banning of KCI? Did it do much to influence the format? Did it make it better for you at your LGS? Did it make it better for those on the "big stage, ie. GPs?" Did it just take away a top deck to allow for other top decks to have less competition? What do you think?
Personally for me...
*I agree that people will play what they want to play at their local LGS. It doesn't affect much. The guy that had a deck tech with RW Enduring Ideal plays at my LGS usually. He has up and down results depending on his matchups, even if he has always smashed me in the mouth in matches. I always seem to be playing something that can't deal with turn 0 Leyline of Sanctity, Ghostly Prisons, and the good ole Phyrexian Unlife/Solemnity Combo. To be honest, I've had a tougher time with his Arbor Elf/Utopia Sprawl previous list. I probably won less than 10% vs. that while most others were 50/50 against it at worst. Even me, a Spike, may not put UR Phoenix or Dredge together for this FNM out of sheer laziness and the urge to just run what I like.
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)It never had enough of a meaningful meta share to reflect meaningfully in most of our daily/weekly/whatever play but was clearly the best so had to get the axe.
Spirits
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
I would say that for a decent chunk of people the meta of Modern is their issue with Modern. Not this or any particular meta but the prevailing meta (of which this one is a good example admittedly). No one is debating around the broken metas, as with the Eldrazi and such. What's there to debate about it? It was just garbage through and through.
The prevailing meta has been that the likes of Burn, Affinity, Infect (while good), G Tron, Dredge, and a small selection of midrange now DS - formerly Jund/Junk as the 'fair' deck representative of the format reign supreme for the greatest chunk of the format's existence. The archetypes have, barring a few select instances (that usually ended with a ban, when some or other combo deck gets out of whack) always been stacked. A lot of people don't like this, but can't afford Legacy (or Legacy is dead where they're from) - don't want to buy into Standard, so they're left with wishing that Modern was a different format. And they probably won't be happy until there's a consistent T1 deck in their archetype of choice, probably somewhere along the span of Combo-Control. Control has never been that, and Combo has never been allowed to stay that.
But can you blame them for that? Modern is the 'new' home of people who have Magic for a long time, and for most of them Modern is the only real choice to stay in the game and avoid the rat race. Expecting them not to have their own expectations of an eternal format is asking quite a lot, particularly as Modern has very consistently catered to other types of players.
T3 Karn was always 'fine', but JTMS was 'too strong for modern' for ages. T3 Karn is still fine and JTMS turned out to be far from overpowering. It just shows that there are preconceived notions that drive the format (which turn out to be plain wrong), but are really just groupthink and a desire to please on WotC's part masquerading as 'format management'.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
Indeed, some of the best periods of this format had UWR competing at or near the top. It now is a sub 50% win rate deck based on the last numbers I saw.
Spirits
I've always been of the opinion that linear decks should not be as powerful as they are, and strong interaction should reign supreme. Reason being that the better the interaction is, the more incentive there is to play it, which means more games where people are actually having to out think and out play their opponent instead of just out drawing them.
Just my 2¢. Hopefully Modern Horizons will help us fair mages out...
I've thought for quite a while now that Hollow One is as far linear as Modern should go, so I was very happy to see KCI go. Nowadays I look at the top decks and think, "Gee, Skred or Soul Sisters feels like it would crap all over 80% of these decks pretty hard..."
Unfortunately, Modern has cooled off for quite a while in my neck of the woods, and I'm the area's TO now as well as weekend shop manager, so I never get to play in anything!
Just some nitpicking: When Jeskai was one of the pillars in Modern (and won those things), all those cards (sans Terminus) were either not printed or unbanned yet.
Greetings,
Kathal
Modern/Legacy
either funpolice (Delver, Deathcloud, UW Control) or the fun decks (especially those ft. Griselbrand)