Maybe I'm a little naive, but this thread seems rather pointless for the time being. We have two topics of potential "discussion." The first one being the disccussion of BBE and SS. This, first off cannot be accurately addressed given how new the changes are and that we have no hard data on their metagame impact. Not that it would matter, given that they happened, they will not un-happen no matter how much huffing and puffing goes on. And will just lead to the same stubborn infighting over and over.
And the other potential topic is the next banning/unbanning cycle. Which again, without data on what has happened from this, i cant see anything new coming of it. All the current cards coming off have been discussed to death, and all the potential additions are unknown until the dust settles.
Oh yes, I forgot that there's no such thing as decks that maindeck hand disruption, counters, or any hatebears.
The most notable deck to maindeck hand disruptions is...(Jund)
Hatebears is a fringe T2 deck
and Counters are all but dead in Modern atm. The reason why control is a flailing archtype.
And even with disruption, Epex storm has a 20% chance to T3 win. Which is horribly in violation of the rule.(Given they can over 50% without disruption)
It's been said hundreds if not thousands of times...and it's fact.
Jund > Combo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything else. According to all tournament results. All numbers. All data. All statistics. This is fact.
Storm rarely if ever won turn 3 game 2, Leyline of sanctity is heavily sideboarded. And even though most people have forgotten it, Mindbreak Trap is still a card, and it wrecks storm.
So you're saying we should concede that they get a free win game1, and game 2 every single deck in the format needs to sideboard in 8 cards and mulligan until they get them in their opening hand...to set storm back a turn. This seems fair and balanced and totally non-biased.
If it was this simple, Storm wouldn't be so heavily winning. But it is. And with Jund being one of its worst matchups(T1 seize is strongest counter to storm), it would only be stronger with BBE gone(less Jund).
You know why Jund was dominant? WotC BANNED EVERYTHING ELSE!!!
They banned Jace and Stonefore so that Caw Blade wouldn't be relevant.
They banned Bitterblossom so Fae wouldn't be playable again.
They banned Sensei's Divining Top so Counterbalance wouldn't be relevant. (and time issues)
They banned GGT/Dread Return so dredge wouldn't be relevant.
They banned Cloudpost so 12-post wouldn't be relevant. Everyone moved over to Tron.
Now they ban BBE/SS so that Jund and Storm won't be relevant.
In April when Tron, Infect, and Pod are the top decks, Birthing Pod, Karn/Emrakul, and Glistener Elf will be banned.
Aside from Dread Return (which is pretty broken) all of those cards could be un-banned and the format would be healthy. You know why? Because ALL THE DECKS will be relevant again.
I'd much rather have a ton of good decks be tournament worthy and fighting for the top spot rather than for WotC to keep banning whatever's winning at the time.
Out of all those cards listed, you think Dread Return is the most broken? Really? 3 creatures in exchange for 4 mana(the normal cost of a reanimate effect). Ignoring Bridge this is a perfectly reasonable tradeoff.
But as been stated before, if you want the "good decks" to all be turn 1 and 2 wins, go play Legacy. Because the turn 3 rule is why Storm was banned, not because it was the "top." Not much point to rules if they go unenforced.
Because Infect and Eggs can be interacted with a typical fair deck. They have permanents that can be exploded. Sometimes they have creatures that can be blocked.
Storm is very non-interactive(on top of being far more consistent). It casts spells, and then it casts more spells, and then it casts more spells. The only real interaction(outside of a select few creatures like Thalia and Cannonist), is counterspells. But they cast enough, that one or two counters, even on key spells, they will just keep casting like it didn't even matter. And most decks don't run counterspells to begin with, because control in Modern is...meh.
I saw there was no GGT unban...and I cried a little. *sigh*
And I was so sure of it too. Guess I can take a little solace in there being less yard hate...maybe.
Do you think that the changes aren't even worth testing?
The "dies to removal" argument has a little more weight when you're talking about lands.
Can you think of another change to make to the deck so that it is better instead of what we did? There are a lot of paths to take!
No, I don't think the changes are worth testing. Is it worth testing emrakul in RDW? Maybe by some sheer dumb luck it would work, but at that point I wouldn't be calling the deck RDW. But hey, you guys are running through the breech and emrakul here as well so...
And the dies to removal argument wasn't talking about lands. I was talking about your reliance on winning with creatures, in a deck that only has 12 of them. With no way to protect them, no innate survivability, no disruption, and telegraphing that they are coming.
I did suggest a change. Charbelcher. And it's been working wonders. I have yet to actually lose with the deck I build. Playing against Jund, Storm, etc.
But I go back to my original question. Which you have still not answered. And I doubt you will ever answer, given this is my fourth or fifth time asking with no response. "Why are you using balance?" It seems like you're trying to gimmick it. You have a reasonably sized hand, and a full mana base. Balance is nothing more than a wrath at this point. And it's a lot of limits, restrictions, and card slots to devote towards a gimmicky and easily hated out(cannonist, thalia, etc) wrath effect.
"Jund" may be dead. But the legacy BG rock shell where 99% of its power lay is still alive and kicking. Just like any other goodstuff deck(Wait, isn't that the definition of "rock"...weird). They could ban 2/3 of the deck, and the shell would survive because it's a solid color combo and every card in it is a star in its own right. I highly doubt there are any legitimate former "Jund" players who are going to sell off their playsets of goyfs, bobs, lillies, seizes, Deathrites. They are gonna keep them in their sleeves, adjust the manabase to their color preference, and keep playing.
DRS is a very flexible card that might see play i other decks. BBE see play only on jund. Huting a lot of potential decks in the process of making jund weaker don't seems a smart way to increase the diversity. BBE ban only hurts jund.
The word that strikes me as odd here is "might." DRS is already being slotted into every non-combo black and/or green deck that it can be. And some are splashing just for it.
Jund is not the reason this card should have been banned. It needed to be banned in its own right. In fact, being a requirement in every deck is a reason for certain bannings in the first place(looking at mox and top). The fact that it hurt Jund to lose it should have been irrelevant to the card ban, but the ban would in fact have hurt Jund and might have allowed BBE to stay.
Sometimes banning a card that only hurts a specific deck is the way to go. Others, banning the card that every deck is using is better. In this case, I think a lot of people would have opted for the latter(Or perhaps both, time will tell if that's the right choice).
DRS is a very flexible card that might see play i other decks. BBE see play only on jund. Huting a lot of potential decks in the process of making jund weaker don't seems a smart way to increase the diversity. BBE ban only hurts jund.
The word that strikes me as odd here is "might." DRS is already being slotted into every non-combo black and/or green deck that it can be. And some are splashing just for it.
Jund is not the reason this card should have been banned. It needed to be banned in its own right. In fact, being a requirement in every deck is a reason for certain bannings in the first place(looking at mox and top). The fact that it hurt Jund to lose it should have been irrelevant to the card ban, but the ban would in fact have hurt Jund and might have allowed BBE to stay.
Sometimes banning a card that only hurts a specific deck is the way to go. Others, banning the card that every deck is using is better. In this case, I think a lot of people would have opted for the latter(Or perhaps both, time will tell if that's the right choice).
Counterspells stop it pretty handily too. Oh, and their win percentage post board is terrible if people are packing hate. Storm was a glass cannon that won a ton of game 1s.
First off, what top tier decks are using counterspells? Jund? No.
Pod? No.
Affinity? No.
SoulSisters? No.
Infect? No.
And even if you did, every spell of theirs is copied when put on the stack, most of their spells are superfluous, and you can't counter their win-con because it's repeating. Besides, "counters" as their name implies "counter" things. And while should be considered in balance, the "it can be countered" argument is kinda silly, just like the "dies to removal." If they made a 2cmc burn that deals 25 damage, would it be balanced because it "can be countered"? No.
Their percentage post board WAS terrible when their field of view was narrow. When they relied on the graveyard to win. But at the moment, storm is so resilient, that for every strategy to board against them, they have multiple backup strategies. Take out their yard, they epic experiment and don't need it.
Basically the deck was nigh unbeatable game 1. And games 2 and 3 were still very winnable despite massive hate aimed at them, because of their resilience. The numbers Wizards quoted weren't out of thin air, they may not have been the biggest part of the field, but they were a strong showing for winnings.
From the beginning, I said that aside from DRS(which still needs a ban imo), that the most likely thing to get hit would be something from storm. And you all thought I was crazy(shame on you).
Anyone who doesn't think Storm was dominant is as starry-eyed as they come. The deck was on the rise, and do you know the only thing that stops it? T1 black targetted discard. And do you know what deck is famous for those plays? Jund? And you know what other deck got knocked off the most-played list?(You can see how Wizards is planning ahead for the next few months, while most others just look at what we have now)
Storm was already a nearly 100% turn 3 win with the shift to Epic Experiment assuming no disruption(even without electromancer or ascension). And that's something that's not okay. Even if the deck wasn't among the most played(and it was).
Like everyone else, I am sad at the lack of GGT Unbans. But overall, I did hope for more bans over unbans. I'm with Wizards in not wanting legacy lite, and I'd rather see the power level drop a bit to give other decks a chance(which now they may).
I am running a very successful LD deck atm. That being said, it actually faces a problem in fetch lands. In that most LD spells are targetted and sorceries. Meaning they can play a fetch, and pass. If you target it, they crack it, and your rain fizzles. If you pass, they crack it at your end step and play a land on their turn. And very few decks can't do anything with 2 lands in play. It may not be optimal, but they can start to make plays.
As for that deck specifically. It's far too slow to be threatening, and it doesn't have an endgame plan for after you've locked them out. Koth is...weak for this. And your removal is limited, they are likely to put you in the danger zone than you are to have burn every turn for the first 2-3 turns(before you start popping lands). And as for Goyf dying to any removal, he usually has 4 toughness, meaning your bolts are ignored.
I don't claim to be an expert. But I have gone through many iterations of my deck, and have a pretty firm grasp I think of what works and what doesn't.
And the other potential topic is the next banning/unbanning cycle. Which again, without data on what has happened from this, i cant see anything new coming of it. All the current cards coming off have been discussed to death, and all the potential additions are unknown until the dust settles.
The most notable deck to maindeck hand disruptions is...(Jund)
Hatebears is a fringe T2 deck
and Counters are all but dead in Modern atm. The reason why control is a flailing archtype.
And even with disruption, Epex storm has a 20% chance to T3 win. Which is horribly in violation of the rule.(Given they can over 50% without disruption)
It's been said hundreds if not thousands of times...and it's fact.
Jund > Combo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everything else. According to all tournament results. All numbers. All data. All statistics. This is fact.
So you're saying we should concede that they get a free win game1, and game 2 every single deck in the format needs to sideboard in 8 cards and mulligan until they get them in their opening hand...to set storm back a turn. This seems fair and balanced and totally non-biased.
If it was this simple, Storm wouldn't be so heavily winning. But it is. And with Jund being one of its worst matchups(T1 seize is strongest counter to storm), it would only be stronger with BBE gone(less Jund).
Out of all those cards listed, you think Dread Return is the most broken? Really? 3 creatures in exchange for 4 mana(the normal cost of a reanimate effect). Ignoring Bridge this is a perfectly reasonable tradeoff.
But as been stated before, if you want the "good decks" to all be turn 1 and 2 wins, go play Legacy. Because the turn 3 rule is why Storm was banned, not because it was the "top." Not much point to rules if they go unenforced.
Storm is very non-interactive(on top of being far more consistent). It casts spells, and then it casts more spells, and then it casts more spells. The only real interaction(outside of a select few creatures like Thalia and Cannonist), is counterspells. But they cast enough, that one or two counters, even on key spells, they will just keep casting like it didn't even matter. And most decks don't run counterspells to begin with, because control in Modern is...meh.
And I was so sure of it too. Guess I can take a little solace in there being less yard hate...maybe.
No, I don't think the changes are worth testing. Is it worth testing emrakul in RDW? Maybe by some sheer dumb luck it would work, but at that point I wouldn't be calling the deck RDW. But hey, you guys are running through the breech and emrakul here as well so...
And the dies to removal argument wasn't talking about lands. I was talking about your reliance on winning with creatures, in a deck that only has 12 of them. With no way to protect them, no innate survivability, no disruption, and telegraphing that they are coming.
I did suggest a change. Charbelcher. And it's been working wonders. I have yet to actually lose with the deck I build. Playing against Jund, Storm, etc.
But I go back to my original question. Which you have still not answered. And I doubt you will ever answer, given this is my fourth or fifth time asking with no response. "Why are you using balance?" It seems like you're trying to gimmick it. You have a reasonably sized hand, and a full mana base. Balance is nothing more than a wrath at this point. And it's a lot of limits, restrictions, and card slots to devote towards a gimmicky and easily hated out(cannonist, thalia, etc) wrath effect.
The word that strikes me as odd here is "might." DRS is already being slotted into every non-combo black and/or green deck that it can be. And some are splashing just for it.
Jund is not the reason this card should have been banned. It needed to be banned in its own right. In fact, being a requirement in every deck is a reason for certain bannings in the first place(looking at mox and top). The fact that it hurt Jund to lose it should have been irrelevant to the card ban, but the ban would in fact have hurt Jund and might have allowed BBE to stay.
Sometimes banning a card that only hurts a specific deck is the way to go. Others, banning the card that every deck is using is better. In this case, I think a lot of people would have opted for the latter(Or perhaps both, time will tell if that's the right choice).
The word that strikes me as odd here is "might." DRS is already being slotted into every non-combo black and/or green deck that it can be. And some are splashing just for it.
Jund is not the reason this card should have been banned. It needed to be banned in its own right. In fact, being a requirement in every deck is a reason for certain bannings in the first place(looking at mox and top). The fact that it hurt Jund to lose it should have been irrelevant to the card ban, but the ban would in fact have hurt Jund and might have allowed BBE to stay.
Sometimes banning a card that only hurts a specific deck is the way to go. Others, banning the card that every deck is using is better. In this case, I think a lot of people would have opted for the latter(Or perhaps both, time will tell if that's the right choice).
First off, what top tier decks are using counterspells? Jund? No.
Pod? No.
Affinity? No.
SoulSisters? No.
Infect? No.
And even if you did, every spell of theirs is copied when put on the stack, most of their spells are superfluous, and you can't counter their win-con because it's repeating. Besides, "counters" as their name implies "counter" things. And while should be considered in balance, the "it can be countered" argument is kinda silly, just like the "dies to removal." If they made a 2cmc burn that deals 25 damage, would it be balanced because it "can be countered"? No.
Their percentage post board WAS terrible when their field of view was narrow. When they relied on the graveyard to win. But at the moment, storm is so resilient, that for every strategy to board against them, they have multiple backup strategies. Take out their yard, they epic experiment and don't need it.
Basically the deck was nigh unbeatable game 1. And games 2 and 3 were still very winnable despite massive hate aimed at them, because of their resilience. The numbers Wizards quoted weren't out of thin air, they may not have been the biggest part of the field, but they were a strong showing for winnings.
Anyone who doesn't think Storm was dominant is as starry-eyed as they come. The deck was on the rise, and do you know the only thing that stops it? T1 black targetted discard. And do you know what deck is famous for those plays? Jund? And you know what other deck got knocked off the most-played list?(You can see how Wizards is planning ahead for the next few months, while most others just look at what we have now)
Storm was already a nearly 100% turn 3 win with the shift to Epic Experiment assuming no disruption(even without electromancer or ascension). And that's something that's not okay. Even if the deck wasn't among the most played(and it was).
Like everyone else, I am sad at the lack of GGT Unbans. But overall, I did hope for more bans over unbans. I'm with Wizards in not wanting legacy lite, and I'd rather see the power level drop a bit to give other decks a chance(which now they may).
As for that deck specifically. It's far too slow to be threatening, and it doesn't have an endgame plan for after you've locked them out. Koth is...weak for this. And your removal is limited, they are likely to put you in the danger zone than you are to have burn every turn for the first 2-3 turns(before you start popping lands). And as for Goyf dying to any removal, he usually has 4 toughness, meaning your bolts are ignored.
I don't claim to be an expert. But I have gone through many iterations of my deck, and have a pretty firm grasp I think of what works and what doesn't.