Then it will get a ban cuz we know how wizards is with pro tour formats. Then where will we be?
Yep. Because GDS, Eldra Tron, Titanshift and Storm all play Path To Exile and Lighting Bolt, playsets, in the Mainboard.
Also, DS is the 35th most played card in the format atm. Why is Snap no.4? Maybe because other control decks play that as well?
again where did u get these stats....
Also I said linear Dominated.not 100 percent linear.
Tell me what percentage of the format is linear vs non linear?
I bet if you got good stats and did the work you would realize modern is more linear.
Metagame stats are alot more relevant than most played cards in terms of format health.
For instance bolt is in titan and burn, both very linear decks.
The rule has always been that any deck that consistently wins on turn3 gets a ban. Of course every deck that can do that, will get slowed down a few turns if it's disrupted. Couldn't infect shoal be disrupted with thoughtseize????
But the turn3 rule doesn't take into account any interaction.
The devoted druid combo is a 2-card combo that doesn't even win the game on the spot (although admitedly is quite strong cos you can play your entire hand). But still is a 2 card combo, and the possibilities of drawing those 2 cards by turn 3 in a 60 card deck are not that high.
I said this on the Storm thread and got infracted for talking about bans outside of this thread, so I'll say it here:
How can a combo deck like storm be TIER1 in a field where there is a tier1 deck packing 4 chalices main, a tier1 deck packing 4 eidolons main, and another tier1 deck packing 6 1CMC discard spells, 6 removal spells and 3 counterspells along with cheap big clocks???
The answer is: a super overpowered deck that can still have a decent win% against those 3 decks while it ABSOLUTELY DESTROYS all the other decks.
It's true. A top tier that has the best answers the format has to offer, and storm is still tier 1. The only reason it's not dominating is because of this too. But one should think it should be tier 2 because of all this indirect hate.
I felt the same way about etron. With so many fast decks at the top of the meta how is it still tier 1?
It's a sign of brokenness that's why.
But here is the thing, modern is broken, And it always will be. And the next best broken deck will rise and get banned or nerfed one day when it's dominating. History always repeats itself.
Modern will always be a linear dominated format(yes naysayers...I know.... Not 100 percent linear... I'm wrong...Here have a treat... good boy).
because of this there will always be an unhealthy amount of these type of decks in the top tiers keeping each other in check.
(a matter of opinion you say naysayers? ......here... another treat.... Good boy...)
So bans will never fully eradicate them as they slip under the hammer in each announcement.
And unless you like to drool and play solitaire and sideboard lottery, then it's not the format for you.
Solution: Instead get into hobbies that take more skill and Intelligence.
If it absolutely destroyed all other decks, plus had a decent win % against the rest of tier 1 (or as you put it, super overpowered), it would absolutely show in results and meta share. Also, yes the Turn 4 rule does take into account interaction as supported by WotC.
Certainly, there is a lot of fun to be had in that strategy. I've been known to belch some chars in my day, but it's not the kind of strategy we particularly like as a tier 1 strategy. Most of the super-fast combo decks in Modern that can win before turn three on a regular basis tend to do so in a way that we can expect most decks to easily interact with. I'm not saying that Infect can't get a quick win early, but that a deck with Lightning Bolts, Path, or Dismember has real game against it. It has ways to fight back. There is interaction.
Edit: To expand further, how the deck can be interacted with is absolutely key to a potential T4 violator's survival if it meets all other criteria including consistency and being top tier. Storm requires creatures that can be easily answered by all forms of major removal (bolt, path, push, dismember, abrupt decay). Compare that to say Amulet Bloom which required very specific answers and invalidated most forms of removal.
infect could be slowed down with lots of interaction..
its not so much death shadows effect on "healthiness" wizards would look at unfortunately though. I think they more or less look at its 15.7% metashare.
GDS is about 1/3 of that. No deck right now takes up more than 7% of the meta. Meta is currently unreasonably balanced.
Go ask on the ET forum if ET is prey to GDS. Seriously.
why would i ask 20 biased people when i can instead rely on actual data?
I don't have data from >100 games, but I can easily tell you that I would rather play Grixis Shadow than any control or midrange deck when I am up against Eldra Tron. (matchup seems about even to me, though and if they go turn 1 relic of progenitus life is very hard)
Edit: you are both kind of right.
Eldra Tron pushes people away from playing Control or Midrange decks and into playing Shadow, because it's better vs it than playing any other control or midrange deck. That's the reason why Eldrazi Temple should be hit, since it warps the format that way.
But the matchup still is about even.
I have no doubt in my mind that temple should be banned, but if its hit without death shadow wouldn't death shadow dominate even more?
I almost feel like they would both have to go.
Grixis Shadow is a prey to all of the fair decks. It gives you a reason to play Control and Midrange fair decks. If Shadow gets hit, people will have even less reason to run those decks(tbh, it's nearly pointless to play fair in Modern atm if you want to win)
Also, the deck is not putting that much numbers, according to the latest Modern Challengs and honestly, it is not as good as people claim it is.
It has the old Splinter Twin effect without being a combo. It's a check and a great deck to have.
its not so much death shadows effect on "healthiness" wizards would look at unfortunately though. I think they more or less look at its 15.7% metashare.
What a bunch of nonsense. ET is Shadow's prey? Do you really believe that? That matchup is close to 50/50, and I actually feel slightly favored tbh. Not sure why you'd post about things like this when you have no idea what you are talking about.
"Your post doesn't comport with my own anecdotal personal experience so you must have no idea what you're talking about." ROFL.
Go ask on the ET forum if ET is prey to GDS. Seriously.
why would i ask 20 biased people when i can instead rely on actual data?
I don't have data from >100 games, but I can easily tell you that I would rather play Grixis Shadow than any control or midrange deck when I am up against Eldra Tron. (matchup seems about even to me, though and if they go turn 1 relic of progenitus life is very hard)
Edit: you are both kind of right.
Eldra Tron pushes people away from playing Control or Midrange decks and into playing Shadow, because it's better vs it than playing any other control or midrange deck. That's the reason why Eldrazi Temple should be hit, since it warps the format that way.
But the matchup still is about even.
I have no doubt in my mind that temple should be banned, but if its hit without death shadow wouldn't death shadow dominate even more?
Grixis shadow is one of the best things that could happen to Modern at the moment. Reasons:
1) super beatable deck(thus increasing variance)
2) gives the more linear deck a hard time
3) creates interesting, skill based decision games
4) packs lots of interaction
5) and only really wins with simple beats from vanilla ground creatures(cfusion mention).
6) The decks that keep DS in check are super interactable decks, like UW Control, Death and Taxes decks, Abzan Midrange and promote good magic, skill based games, where the best player can create an advantage over the weaker player.
It's a check for everything and a win-win deck to have in the format. We need more decks like this. We need a kind of Infect or Twin deck back, so that it keeps Eldra Tron in check.
On the other hand, Eldra Tron is a deck that:
1) Creates lopsides matchups and is eliminating the skill based games. In other words, if an Eldra Tron player is playing vs an X player, let me see their initial keep. I can predict with an at least 70% point of certainty which is going to win. This is what we want to avoid in the format and Eldra Tron (thus Modern) is promoting atm. It's a net negative force that makes the whole format worse overall.
2) gives the fair players a reason to not play fair, because they just fold to it and instead go linear
3) Plays little interaction and one of their best ways to handle several decks is a prison card(Chalice Of The Void-which is super game over vs certain decks, like Grixis Shadow and generally shuts down a lot of interaction pieces)
4) is winning with creatures that create a snowball effect(TKS, RS) where if you dont answer them instantly, they take over the game in a heartbeat.
After this analysis(maybe you find it wrong, maybe right) everyone can pick their desired solution for the format.
It is because of Grixis Shadow that Eldrazi Tron is so powerful in this format, because the format has this quick Xerox style strategy that can only be outclassed by a ramp deck. Seems about right, this has happened and been true in every format.
Why do you get to ick someone else's yum? Because you want every deck to be multicolored and rocking removal? Welp, some people don't like playing those strategies.
Strix is probably the only card on this list you proposed that would have any chance of coming into the format and even then, to prevent UBx Shadow from being teir 0 (as they would have a better Tron matchup) it would def get hit with a ban somewhere.
Anyways, I'm just kinda blown away by how many people all want Modern to look like Legacy Lite with most of the top decks being attrition based or multi colored midrange piles. If anything I would rather advocate the opposite and promote fewer bullets that shut down entire swaths of decks or archetypes just because they naturally have a lopsided matchup.
but it's ok to have almost the entire top tier of the game be linear,
and unbalanced powerlevel wise.
With MORE archtype diversity we could have without those decks in our format.
Ok
Modern would still be modern without ds and etron. Nothing close to legacy lite.
Eldratron has a hard time with elves and affinity if they don't get chalice on 1. Heck if I want to ban anything, I'll ban Chalice of the Void. That one card is the only reason EldraTron has a chance against multitude of decks.
But that said, if that does get banned, tons of cheap 1 CMC decks spring back out all over the place. So I rather just keep it around, and keep playing until someone solves the puzzle.
and yet with chalice in etron we still have alot of top tier decks who run a ton of 1cmc cards. I don't see your point.
Updated 2017 meta: combined GPs and SCG's Opens; data starts from GP Copenhagen/ GP Kobe (around the time when Jund DS was supplanted by Grixis, and bant eldrazi by eldrazi tron) --> i consider this cut-off to be more representative of the actual meta.
In my opinion Grixis DS and Eldrazi tron are one step above the rest of the field, thought the data sample is really limited and the fact that groups of 2 GPs are compressed in the same days clearly doesn't help in having a picture of a better developed metagame (Grixis DS numbers, for example, are affected by its spike around the Charlotte Open).
Due to the difficulties in the eldrazi tron classification, i've made two graphics of the meta suddivision in archetypes, in the first graph eldrazi tron is put togrther with midrange decks, in the second one together with ramp, obviously this change depict two very different metas.
that's interesting. I would argue for a death shadow and temple ban.
Even before I seen this data, I've felt these 2 cards would need to leave together.
Format would be more healthy Imo. Of course this is all speculation. But interesting nonetheless.
Unfortunately Wizards generally scheduls more than one GP in the same weekend making it really hard to figure out if a deck's numbers are due to a spike or to a consistent performance through a longer period of time. Adding the fact that mtgo's datas are currently unreliably makes figuring out this trends even harder.
but if these stats are true....we are in for bans, before or after the pt, I can tell you that.
Updated 2017 meta: combined GPs and SCG's Opens; data starts from GP Copenhagen/ GP Kobe (around the time when Jund DS was supplanted by Grixis, and bant eldrazi by eldrazi tron) --> i consider this cut-off to be more representative of the actual meta.
In my opinion Grixis DS and Eldrazi tron are one step above the rest of the field, thought the data sample is really limited and the fact that groups of 2 GPs are compressed in the same days clearly doesn't help in having a picture of a better developed metagame (Grixis DS numbers, for example, are affected by its spike around the Charlotte Open).
Due to the difficulties in the eldrazi tron classification, i've made two graphics of the meta suddivision in archetypes, in the first graph eldrazi tron is put togrther with midrange decks, in the second one together with ramp, obviously this change depict two very different metas.
that's interesting. I would argue for a death shadow and temple ban.
Even before I seen this data, I've felt these 2 cards would need to leave together.
Format would be more healthy Imo. Of course this is all speculation. But interesting nonetheless.
If Death's Shadow leaves the format, get ready for a more linear metagame. Twin, Infect were all bad hits if what you are looking for is skillgaming decisions and long games. Are you having lopsided matchups and matchup lotteries where skill does not matter so much in modern atm? Prepare for that happgning twice more after this ban.
but what if thats not true?
we see in this data that eldrazi tron cannibalizes other midrange deck shares, being played more than twice as much as the next option: abzan. theres is also an argument to be made that eldrazi tron is toxic to other midrange decks and it shows here very much, either that or its just more than twice as powerful as other mid decks, either way this is not healthy.
The same could be said about Grixis death shadow, where it doubles or even triples most other aggro strategies in meta percentages.
im sorry but these stats point to eldrazi tron and grixis death shadow being tier .5, leaps and bounds above everything else.... and if this is actually true, than we should expect temple and death shadow to be banned within a year or sooner.
which is a good thing because there are decks that will rise in their place,like what has always happened.
it wont be the end of the world if these bans happen, nor the end of modern.
Updated 2017 meta: combined GPs and SCG's Opens; data starts from GP Copenhagen/ GP Kobe (around the time when Jund DS was supplanted by Grixis, and bant eldrazi by eldrazi tron) --> i consider this cut-off to be more representative of the actual meta.
In my opinion Grixis DS and Eldrazi tron are one step above the rest of the field, thought the data sample is really limited and the fact that groups of 2 GPs are compressed in the same days clearly doesn't help in having a picture of a better developed metagame (Grixis DS numbers, for example, are affected by its spike around the Charlotte Open).
Due to the difficulties in the eldrazi tron classification, i've made two graphics of the meta suddivision in archetypes, in the first graph eldrazi tron is put togrther with midrange decks, in the second one together with ramp, obviously this change depict two very different metas.
that's interesting. I would argue for a death shadow and temple ban.
Even before I seen this data, I've felt these 2 cards would need to leave together.
Format would be more healthy Imo. Of course this is all speculation. But interesting nonetheless.
Also, your incessant personal crusade against Eldrazi Temple, which isn't even putting up big results, is definitely getting old.
I'd like to add that, personally, I have nothing wrong with Eldrazi Temple as long as Eldrazi are all 8+ mana Titans or something big and crazy. The land is all kinds of broken when it's casting massively pushed creatures, that are already insane value for their printed cost, 1-3 turns early. The problem isn't Temple, it's stuff like TKS, Reality Smasher, and all the other low-cost hyper-value Oath Eldrazi creatures being powered out several turns early with incredible reliability. They have been a cancer on the format for nearly two years, and will continue to be so as long as they (and Temple) are legal.
TKS and Smasher are really strong, yes. They're why I play the deck. But so are cards like Tasigur, Tarmogoyf, etc. Like a wise person on this thread likes to say, if you're not doing something overpowered in Modern, you don't stand a chance.
except tasigur and goyf are rarely on the same power level as tks and reality smasher on turn 2-3.
and its those situations/varience, that make dealing with those decks much too difficult for anything but an opposing broken deck to keep up with.
to be fair death shadow is busted as well.
but the whole point of the discussion on the last couple pages is how much more powerful/high varience and broken the top tiers are vs the rest of the meta. and how linear these decks are( 2 ships passing in the night), even gds with nut starts/kills is relatively linear. I hardly could imagine much enjoyment from players and spectators in such a meta game. of course there will be a (bg/x dnt uw/x ect) finish from time to time. but overall I can see why some consider this meta( especially the top tiers) to be toxic atm.
Because of this, I wouldn't be surprised if they shook up the format with some bans before or after the pro tour in order to make the top tiers less stale and less linear.
In today's Modern you can't be 100% reactive, sadly. Grixis Shadow is a good deck, because it can also present a fast clock sometimes. Grixis Shadow or Jeskai Queller are the evolution of Midranhe and Control, respectively in Modern. You can't play purely reactive draw go, sadly.
and that is to be expected. you have to be proactive in a proactive game. which is why I dont get why they arent giving uw/x decks sfm to help with this. but thats another discussion altogether.
while being proactive is what one must do. I think a line needs to be drawn on how powerful a deck can be in its archetype, as to allow more diversity amongst that archtype and also have less high variance match ups when facing opposing or even same archtypes. this creates less ships passing in the night and more skill in games.
will do
Also I said linear Dominated.not 100 percent linear.
Tell me what percentage of the format is linear vs non linear?
I bet if you got good stats and did the work you would realize modern is more linear.
Metagame stats are alot more relevant than most played cards in terms of format health.
For instance bolt is in titan and burn, both very linear decks.
Then it will get a ban cuz we know how wizards is with pro tour formats. Then where will we be?
I felt the same way about etron. With so many fast decks at the top of the meta how is it still tier 1?
It's a sign of brokenness that's why.
But here is the thing, modern is broken, And it always will be. And the next best broken deck will rise and get banned or nerfed one day when it's dominating. History always repeats itself.
Modern will always be a linear dominated format(yes naysayers...I know.... Not 100 percent linear... I'm wrong...Here have a treat... good boy).
because of this there will always be an unhealthy amount of these type of decks in the top tiers keeping each other in check.
(a matter of opinion you say naysayers? ......here... another treat.... Good boy...)
So bans will never fully eradicate them as they slip under the hammer in each announcement.
And unless you like to drool and play solitaire and sideboard lottery, then it's not the format for you.
Solution: Instead get into hobbies that take more skill and Intelligence.
You will thank me later trust me!
So can storm
how do you know? where do you get your stats
I have no doubt in my mind that temple should be banned, but if its hit without death shadow wouldn't death shadow dominate even more?
I almost feel like they would both have to go.
and unbalanced powerlevel wise.
With MORE archtype diversity we could have without those decks in our format.
Ok
Modern would still be modern without ds and etron. Nothing close to legacy lite.
but what if thats not true?
we see in this data that eldrazi tron cannibalizes other midrange deck shares, being played more than twice as much as the next option: abzan. theres is also an argument to be made that eldrazi tron is toxic to other midrange decks and it shows here very much, either that or its just more than twice as powerful as other mid decks, either way this is not healthy.
The same could be said about Grixis death shadow, where it doubles or even triples most other aggro strategies in meta percentages.
im sorry but these stats point to eldrazi tron and grixis death shadow being tier .5, leaps and bounds above everything else.... and if this is actually true, than we should expect temple and death shadow to be banned within a year or sooner.
which is a good thing because there are decks that will rise in their place,like what has always happened.
it wont be the end of the world if these bans happen, nor the end of modern.
Even before I seen this data, I've felt these 2 cards would need to leave together.
Format would be more healthy Imo. Of course this is all speculation. But interesting nonetheless.
while being proactive is what one must do. I think a line needs to be drawn on how powerful a deck can be in its archetype, as to allow more diversity amongst that archtype and also have less high variance match ups when facing opposing or even same archtypes. this creates less ships passing in the night and more skill in games.