MTG Salvation

Quote from Daeyel »

With the overwhelmingly popular reception of Standard Challenge decks, how long till we see a line of say, 20 different Modern Challenge decks?

Burn at $100, Affinity and Tron at $300, Elves, Merfolk, Soul Sisters etc all priced competitively, all the way up to Death's Shadow and Jund.

It would be an amazing idea, putting exactly the needed reprints into the marketplace at the same time it puts a hard cap on singles prices.

If WOTC does that, how could they promote selling Master series?
From the business point of view, creating Modern Challenge decks is not a smart move.

We do have something similar before: Modern event deck
https://magic.wizards.com/en/content/modern-event-deck

, and there is no 2nd Modern event deck in the past four years.

Quote from jwf239 »

Quote from Melkor »

So we were never going to see all 3 come off at once, I thought it was gonna be BBE this time, SFM next time, and Jace the time after that.

Is there any reason this would have an impact on SFM coming off in the next announcement or two? I would think if these go well then we will see more agressive unbans, but is there any reason it would be LESS likely?

It makes it nearly certain SFM won't come off in the next announcement or two and probably the next four or five. The format will take awhile to stabilize from this to where we even begin to have an idea of what the meta looks like and what optimized decklists are. That alone makes it less than a 1% chance anything gets unbanned in the next several announcements. In addition, if this does "go well" then there is even less need for unbanning SFM because these help similar archetypes that SFM would. Combine all this with the fact that caw-blade was one of the biggest boogiemen in the history of magic and we are looking at years before we are even seriously discussing SFM again.

I agree with you everything, except for the "Combine all this with the fact that caw-blade was one of the biggest boogiemen in the history of magic".
I would say Eldrazi Winter is a bigger disaster than caw-blade in the history of magic.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/february-12-2018-banned-and-restricted-announcement-2018-02-12

"Pro Tours give us excellent data and insight into how our formats respond to competitive pressure, and we will continue to use that data to inform B&R changes. But we hope this announcement sends a clear message that Pro Tours do not necessitate bannings, and especially that your favorite deck (or new favorite deck!) is not automatically in danger simply because it performed well."

This are the words I want to hear from WOTC for a long long time. I wish you (WOTC) can keep these in mind in the future...

Quote from thatmarkguy »

The funny bit is that the sole printing to date of Master of the Pearl Trident has a higher purchase price than several of the whiteborder printings of Lord of Atlantis. So this isn’t even whining about actual value - it’s whining about wanting a new card frame black border LoA. As if THAT should have been WotC’s reprint priority. They printed the more valuable card, they just didn’t satisfy the people with very specific wants. “And old style white border on my fishlord? No thank you!”

There is nothing funny at all.
This is not the product I am interested in because of the lack of Lord of Atlantis. Therefore I skip.
Simple enough.

You do not need to analysis why I think so or convince me this is a good or valuable product.
No matter how good it is, just not relevent to me.

Lord of Atlantis is the only thing I hope for this product. Bad news to me

Quote from natesroom »

Right and they printed the best creature for Theros in a Origins "Herald of the Pantheon"...

The card you mentioned not included in Theros block is silly.

Quote from MysticLeviathan »

Oh God, I just saw it...

Solemnity + Phyrexian Unlife

Doesn't this combo exist already:
Melira, Sylvok Outcast + Phyrexian Unlife
?

Quote from Ryperior74 »

And a strictly betetr Relic of Progenitus (you choose the cards not them.)

cmc 1 to cmc 2, how can this be 'strictly better' ?
In additional, you need to spend 1 mana to exile a card, where Relic of Progenitus does not need any mana to exile a card.

Relic of Progenitus is probably the best GY hate card in Modern, period.

I wish those people who believe Fatal Push will drop to 2usd can wake up.
This card hardly drops below 5usd.
I preorder 2 playsets, with $4 each, and buy two more playsets with $5 each after the release.
This is basically the PTE level you can see how much PTE is it now after so many reprints.

Quote from Billiondegree »

Standard is probably fixed now that CopyCat got banned,

It is too early to claim that.
Look at the most recent top 8 list here

https://www.mtggoldfish.com/tournament/scg-standard-open-atlanta-2017-04-30#online

You HAVE to remember the legal ramifications of all actions they take. Legally, Wizards can't acknowledge the secondary market to a degree like that. If they do, they get into weird gambling laws. Wizards can't expand the reserved list legally because they explicitly said they wouldn't. They're going to get into all sorts of legal issues if they do that they'd rather not.

As long as the packs have value, people will buy them. That much is clear to me. Modern players have money to spend on cards, they just don't have money to waste on packs where they're effectively gambling with an expected loss. Not once have I heard someone I know say "but the packs are $10", it's always "but the set sucks". Give us something good in the packs and we'll buy it. Nobody even cares if cards tank as long as the value is there.

The goal from Wizards has always been abundantly clear to me: make the set affordable without ruining the investments of existing players. There's a range in prices for cards that satisfies this, and I think Goyf/Lili/Jace topping the format is about where they want it to be. Sure, maybe cards could come down like 10-20%, but I think prices are within the window that they're willing to accept. They always want to get more people into the game with the caveat that it can't come at the expense of existing players. If you push someone away who's played your game for 5, 10, or even 25 years, you've done something horribly wrong.

Quote from Spsiegel1987 »

Foodchain, have you played the humans deck yet?

Is this a real deck or just a flash in the pan that'll disappear quickly into tier 3? Can it adapt? What kind of meta shift would destroy it?

Check the post above. I haven't played Collins' deck. I could try it or have a friend try it, but I personally prefer Collected Company over Aether Vial. It is definitely very strong. The only 2 decks in which I've had a higher win percentage with, playing over 30 sanctioned matches with, has been Grishoalbrand (but has since went down to around 73%) and Eye of Ugin Eldrazi. I have played Modern since forever and at least tried every single strong Tier 1 or Tier 2 deck.

Humans is very strong. After losing at a bunch of PPTQs with Titanshift, I was nearly ready to switch to Humans. Luckily for me, I didn't switch, but honestly I'm pretty sure I would have gotten there with Humans too. Right now, I would say that the decks to play if Humans gets popular is Titanshift or Affinity (there are knockout cards vs. Affinity, but if they are not drawn, the matchup is bad for Humans). Grixis Shadow should beat this deck too. Aether Vial complicates things, but I always felt that I needed some Collected Companies to resolve to beat GDS.

It will certainly not fall to Tier 3. Not any time soon. I originally heard about Human Company making waves online - Magnus Lantto 5-0ing a bunch of Leagues with Humans. Since I was on other decks, I was hesitant to try it. Eventually I saw an FNM player run a budget version, then over the course of 2 weeks have it optimized (outside of Noble Hierarch, which took a bit longer). I was paired against him a lot in the next month, going 3-2. But our matches were the most stressful to me, mostly because my other matches were 2-0s. So I decided to test it at home. I noticed that CONTROL EXTRAORDINAIRE, Gabriel Nassif, a guy who I adored back in the Cruel Control of Standard days (he and Wafo-Tapa were my idols), was running WHAAAAT!!! Humans. That surprised me, so I watched some vids and I got attached to the deck.

I personally think that the deck is stronger than Knightfall, which is close to Tier 1 in my opinion. Humans may very well be Tier 1 or very close to it. Knightfall would be if you could control how often you get the Knight Retreat combo, but you can't. Personally I feel that these decks would do the best vs. it in this order.
1. Grixis Control
1.5 Titanshift
2. Jeskai Control
3. Junk Midrange
4. Jund Midrange

I actually think that Affinity is number 2 and Big Tron is certainly up there (in addition to E Tron when they All is Dust) because Affinity is just too fast. There are not many chances to get Izzet Staticaster or Orzhov Pontiff, depending on which you play, in time.

I think the main problem for decks is that the decks that overload on removal like Grixis Control just straight up fail vs. decks that don't care about that, like Titanshift.

Comment Hidden

Is it better than Ghost Quarter though ? I think that it isn't.
Sure you get a land replacement but it costs 2 mana to activate and can only target non-basics.

Compared to Tectonic Edge you don't need them to have 4 lands but they do get a basic.
I find it difficult to evaluate at first glance.

On another note, would Dust Bowl be too good for Standard ?

Might this finally be the place we get a Lord of Atlantis reprint where it's in the modern card frame?

I just made a 5 color Saence deck win a 40 person tongiht.

2-0 revolt zoo
(G1: rhino chain, g2: damnarion then whip' d thragtusk at his face)
2-0 grixis
(G1 and 2 seance out value)

2-0 jund/blue shadow
(Siege rhino op)

2-0 GB tron.
(Fulminator/slime chains to good)

Placed 1st/40.
Built the list while I was at work this morning.

Hello, MTGS community!

I'm posting to let you all know some sad news. Effective May 1, I'm stepping down as a staff member at MTGS. This means I will no longer be one of the Modern subforum moderators. I've loved working to make the forums a better place, promote this great format of ours, and discuss all the strategy, policy, and cards that make Modern the format we call home. Unfortunately, with life changes on the horizon, I'm no longer able to dedicate time to the site and must step down.

Lantern has already posted an announcement for new moderator candidates, and I encourage you to apply if you think you'd be a good fit for the job. You can see his announcement here:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/774999-help-wanted-looking-for-a-new-moderator-for-modern

And here's the link to the Moderator Applications subforum, for those who want to submit an application. This subforum also includes application submission guidelines:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/community-discussion/staff-inbox/moderator-applications

I will still post on the site after May, but with much less activity than before. No matter where Modern goes from here, it will always hold a special place in my gaming interests, and I hope all of you keep Moderning on through thick and thin. If you have any subforum suggestions that the rest of our amazing staff can look into (Lantern, Torpf, and CavalryWolfPack), please post them here so they can look them over as the new staff member gets onboarded.

It's been a great ride since I joined the staff years back, and I look forward to seeing the team keep improving the forums after I depart. For all you Modern players, keep up the great conversation and always remember to consider all the qualitative, quantitative, and anecdotal evidence when making statements and decisions about the format. Stay critical and level-headed. Always try to elevate the conversation and keep it data-driven. If we can do that, we'll have a better community and a better format overall.

Take care, everyone!

-ktkenshinx-

Quote from ktkenshinx »

Quote from sss123 »

My question is simple:
If a trigger ability where the trigger condition is cycle, does it mean that when cycle is put in the stack, or mean that when cycle is resolved?

This is triggers 101. When you pay the cycle cost, the cycling ability goes on the stack. This triggers Sphinx, and then Sphinx's trigger goes on the stack above the cycling. It will resolve first. After you scry, the cycle resolves. This is exactly how it worked in old Rift and Slide formats and it's how it works today.

This is hardly 'triggers 101.' That's a belittling sentiment which I think ignores the specific difficulty some people are having with understanding what goes on.
The confusion doesn't lie with how triggered abilities work, but with the Additional Rules cycling is given.

"An ability triggers only if its trigger event actually occurs. An event that's prevented or replaced won't trigger anything." (CR 603.2f)

It is understandable that people would assume from this intuitive rule that cycling would be considered a completed 'event' where a trigger is concerned, when the discard and draw parts are completely fulfilled.

The new wording, intended to make it cleaner, actually makes it more confusing by reinforcing the assumption above.
"Whenever you cycle or discard a card" implies "whenever you discard a card, or whenever you discard a card, then draw a card to fulfill the conditions of a cycling event."
Taken literally you would even infer that you could trigger two events from cycling - one for the discard cost of cycling, and another for the cycling event itself.

This may be lost on older players, but if you gave this a fresh look; if this were a new mechanic that you had never seen before, it's how you would assume it works. Even if you aren't new, but had only experienced cycling in Alara block.
The reason cycling even works the way it does with this trigger - to be clear, you do get to scry before you draw - is not because of 'triggers 101' but because of an exception to everything I've said above given to cycling by the Additional Rules.
"'When you cycle [this card]' means 'When you discard [this card] to pay a cycling cost.'" (CR 702.28c)

That additional rule conflates the completion of the cycling event with the cost.
This creates a disparity when you ask someone "What does cycling mean?" Vs "No, what does cycling really mean?"
The intuitive response would be "'Cycling' means discarding a card, then drawing a card after you activate its Cycling ability."
The correct response is "'Cycling' means discarding a card to pay the activation cost of a cycling ability."
It's basically a fancy, strange alternative to discard.

Compare Herald of Anafenza which says "whenever you activate Herald of Anafenza's outlast ability" and Flamespeaker Adept, which doesn't even trigger until after you finish a scry event.
If you somehow removed a scry instruction and prevented it from happening, Flamespeaker Adept wouldn't trigger. Herald of Anafenza specifies the trigger is when the outlast ability activates, rather than 'when this outlasts.' That just leaves an activation requirement for the trigger, which doesn't care if the ability is countered. It didn't complete an 'outlast' event, but it only cares about the outlast activation event.
Flamespeaker Adept, on the other hand, doesn't care about someone attempting to scry, just that they do it or not. "Did you scry?" Yes, or no.
If you were to counter someone's cycling activation with something like Stifle or Disallow, the game still considers that player to have 'cycled,' for triggering abilities even though they, well, didn't

So all up, triggers do seem to work intuitively. That's not where the confusion lies. The confusion comes from that weird Additional Rule for cycling.
For a pretty basic mechanic, that Additional Rule makes it pretty clunky.
It's just something to get used to, though it's certainly something else Wizards could streamline.

Quote from ashtonkutcher »

Quote from Ironhorse75 »

This talk about tiers is interesting to me.

How much difference has the banlist order made? For example, what if Bitterblossom was always unbanned and a Faeries deck was a thing early on. Would Faeries be tier 2 today?


Popularity vs cream rising to the top.

Definitely! If Bitterblossom had been legal in Modern from the outset, Faeries would have probably been the deck to beat for the format's early life. It would also be pushing Tier 0 status right now unless Wizards banned a card or two from it.

thanks for the vote of confidence in the capabilities of the deck. Im sure if we had more people working on the deck tier 1 isnt a far stretch /s