All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
Dismiss
 
The Role of Ecosystems in Fantasy Worldbuilding
 
Life's Legacy: Delving into Delver
 
All Sets Are Good: Prophecy
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 10/02/18)
    Quote from idSurge »
    Is it a real Draw Go gkourou?
    It is. The other 14 decks playing for the last 6 slots include Grishoalbrand, Jeskai Control, Traverse Shadow, 5c Humans, Jeskai Breach, Bogles, BR Hollow One, two Burn and BG Midrange.

    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 15/01/18)
    Quote from Shmanka »
    Quote from Lord Seth »
    Quote from gkourou »
    Actually, Aether Vial was a ban consideration back to where Modern was started but they decided against it in the end(WOTC).
    Hrm, this is the first I've heard of that. Where'd they say that?


    During the format's inception, I believe it was a video interview - the notion is believable since the card was banned in Extended.
    Maybe you guys are thinking of this article, specifically: "There are some very powerful cards in the format that we didn't ban. For example, Hypergenesis and Æther Vial have both been banned in Extended. This banned list is an experiment. We intend to use it at the Community Cup, but we reserve the right to change it if we decide to unleash Modern on the world at large."

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (Rules Update 27/10/17)
    So I actually went back and ran the GP Top8 numbers. These are from the 8 Modern GPs this year (not taking into account Team Modern ones):
    • Affinity - 9% (6/64)
    • Dredge - 8% (5/64)
    • Grixis Shadow - 8%
    • RG Scapeshift - 8%
    • 4C Shadow - 6% (4/64)
    • Abzan Company - 6%
    And the benchmark we're looking for is Twin's 19% from back then, so my prediction would be "No bans" for next announcement. However:
    • Shadow decks - 14% (9/64)
    • Tron decks - 11% (7/64)
    • Company decks - 11%
    Here we should remember that they will wait for PT Rivals to reevaluate. That means the previously mentioned 19% benchmark would translate to 14 Top8s, so in theory these decks could still get there. It's unlikely, but possible nonetheless. Getting there would be outrageous on its own though, just imagine Shadow getting 5 Top8 spots at the PT, or Tron (7) or Company (7).

    Calling it now, after PT Rivals: no bans in Modern. And hopefully 1 or 2 unbans as well :p
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (Rules Update 27/10/17)
    I mean, of course we should worry about these last results. WotC focuses on GP/PT Top8 diversity for Modern bans after all. But come on guys, I come back to the thread after months and knee-jerk reactions still abound. Did someone at least run all the 2017 GP Top8 numbers? More level headed discussion and informed opinions would be nice, just saying.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    I 100% agree, I just think people have a tendency to over-value top 8's, WotC included, and that would go doubly so in the case of a PT. But just reverse the question. What would you need to see at the first PT to make you consider certain bans/unbans more than you already do?
    That's the thing, Wizards makes the decissions, not us. Even if it's not ideal, that's how it is. It would be foolish to give more weight to other data or just dismiss Top8s altogether, unless you want to theorycraft "better" new format rules instead of understanding the ones actually used. No wonder why people were surprised by Twin getting targeted by a ban last year.

    *As for your question: I'll look into any deck that has ~19% of the GP/PT Top8s since the Probe/Troll ban.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from gkourou »


    I completely agree. That's what Modern is about at the moment. It saddens me though to see one of the main UR Control and interactive players of this site saying "screw interaction".
    Or just screw Modern entirely, I'm actually taking a break Frown Nothing is really OP so I don't expect any changes. There's no point in playing a game you don't enjoy anymore though. It's been months, but hopefully the metagame eventually shifts. Maybe then I'll come back.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    I'm not seeing where you see 15.7%. This is what I see...

    https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/modern#paper

    The meta is very diverse, even if there are other problems there.
    I don't know where that comes from, but I'd advice against using mtggoldfish. It's unreliable, at best. Besides that, we should be looking at the GP Top8 numbers anyway. Last time I checked, Shadow wasn't close to bannable numbers.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Deadkitten »
    What have other decks been at that have previously gotten the Banhammer?
    The most important number, if not the deciding one, is the GP Top8 %. We know that 13% is fine and +19% is bannable, at least for the diversity criteria.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from ktkenshinx »
    Quote from acc95 »
    Sadly, all this discussion won't do much at all. Unless someone here is on Magic R&D :p They will probably ban whatever problematic land arises before giving Modern better land hate through Standard. They could achieve that if priorities were different, but eh. I'll take whatever comes our way. After all, the format is doing fine.


    Not a mod anymore, but we need to remember that the purpose of discussion is not necessarily to influence D&D/R&D. Wizards is no more/less likely to look at an MTGS custom card than they are to look at our ban/unban rationale. I push back here because the suggestion appears to be "there's no point in discussing this because Wizards won't act on it," but that should never be a reason for us to avoid any topic in this wide-reaching thread. If that's not your intent then disregard. If it is, we should avoid those kinds of unproductive suggestions.
    Oh, I know discussion here is moot and theoretical rather than practical. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good discussion here regardless of how productive it actually is. I was just pointing out how it makes me sad it is the way it is, almost lamenting WotC could change their priorities but it won't happen, probably. Like I said, I've come around that so I'll take whatever we get as long as the format is doing fine, which it is.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Sadly, all this discussion won't do much at all. Unless someone here is on Magic R&D :p They will probably ban whatever problematic land arises before giving Modern better land hate through Standard. They could achieve that if priorities were different, but eh. I'll take whatever comes our way. After all, the format is doing fine.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Sabertooth »
    i dont agree. i was at gp sao paolo, and all i saw was big mana decks vs decks trying to race with a combo finish or disruption (grixis shadow). Maybe im biased and i just thought that big mana decks were warping the meta at the gp, but The thing with these big mana decks is that there is no real answer to them
    Except there are answers: all those decks have bad matchups like any other. ETron and RG Shift are just Tier 1 decks, maybe some don't like that, but they aren't a problem. Modern is really doing fine, I haven't crunched the numbers yet, but I highly doubt we'll get a competitive diversity ban next January, at least based off the information we have (deck with ~20% GP Top8s).

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from h0lydiva »
    I think those big mana decks can just be attacked and controlled. Yes, I'm aware that the kind of decks that will attack them, some people don't like, but that's the nature of the matchup cycle. You don't keep them in check with midrange and control, you keep them in check by murdering them or comboing them out if possible on turn 3. That's the way it is.

    Yep. I think one of the main problems or obstacles that players here have is that they have to change their deck CHOICE and maybe play something that they hate playing to beat these types of matchups. If someone is not willing to play a deck that destroys another deck (ie. Affinity vs. E Tron), then how can they continue to complain about E Tron? It Boggles my mind.
    We have to keep in mind that not every player is a PPTQ grinder or an online player renting cards like you both. Ideally, you'd change decks and be done with it, but I doubt most players are willing and/or able to change decks on the fly, just to beat a matchup or improve their winrate. Complaining is, albeit ineffective, much easier.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Zorakkiller »
    Quote from Tanukimo »
    Temur already exists in Modern as RUG Scapeshift.


    That deck hasn't been viable in forever
    Eh, Temur Scapeshift ft. Dig Through Time wasn't that long ago.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on UW Control
    So, after a 2 months break due to a broken hand it seems I'll be finally back to MTGO action Smile I figured I might as well go back to posting on the threads of the decks I play. My decklist is mosly Ben's decklist, who's been killing it online for months now (props btw).

    Nice to see old faces here Smile I'll try to come here with weekly feedback guys, any suggestion or constructive critique is welcome as well.

    Posted in: Tier 2 (Modern)
  • posted a message on Temporary State of the Meta Thread (Rules Update 7/17/17)
    Quote from Drekavac »
    Your own data shows a significant uptick for E-Tron in the past few months and when I say ET should be considered for banning you're telling me I'm trolling?
    I wouldn't say you are trolling, but this is exactly why you and many others are wrong: the total ignorance or disregard for the format's known rules and guidelines while discussing the banlist. Eldrazi Tron going up in the overall metagame doesn't mean anything as long as it doesn't translate to GPs. Eldrazi Tron has what? 1 GP Top8? Not even close to getting banned. I'd suggest going back to the bans of BBE, DRS, Pod, Twin and Eye.

    Like Ulamog :p here said, people should step back and really consider their posts and arguments. All of us. Else the thread devolves into bans to kill decks we dislike, improve our own decks, bring back our decks to the format and "mud-slinging"... I guess it always ends up happening, wonder why. The quality of the posts would increase if we just stop disregarding what we know, which isn't a lot to begin with.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.