I just don't think they'll have sufficient London mull data.
1 week in just isn't long enough and likely the correct conclusion to arrive at.
I would like a statement on how War and MH1 have altered format expectations and what is in a watch list in terms of bans and unbans but that is likely fantasy land.
Wow! This thread really took off since I've been gone getting slaughtered at a MCQ.
Hogaak Vine just won the Gamers and Geeks 2005 Mustang GT tournament. The player was a player who I used to occasionally play with in California, but I see he's moved on. (I think the tournament was in Alabama) For what it's worth, you can look it up on Facebook.
Before the MCQ and in between rounds, I played it vs. a local player who runs Cheerios. After I beat him in the first game, he literally slaughtered me the next 3 games in a row. But players are not willing to make deck changes like this because, "who likes Cheerios?" He's happy for this type of meta. I am all right with this type of meta because I could move on to NeoBrand, which is just quicker than a deck like Hogaak Vine that has literally no disruption for NeoBrand in its 75. (sorry, 2 SB Thoughtseize)
If players are not willing to adjust like I've seen a million players here say again and again, then they DESERVE to lose. I'm sorry for being blunt. Players during Eldrazi Winter that played me usually were not willing to play the best deck. They usually lost. All they could say is that "it will get banned." Well, during that time in which I bought the Eldrazi pieces that I was missing (only the new ones), I netted $1,300 worth of cash and prizes. I'm okay with it getting banned. That was obvious. It didn't mean that I was going to force myself to lose before it does actually get banned.
I do think something is going to get banned in Hogaak Vine. I prefer a Modern Horizons card (Hogaak/Altar) because things were not really fine, but not bannable per se before this set. Carrion Feeder also definitely helped, but it's not the culprit.
*disclaimer - too early to ban - give it will the gp/pt/mc whatever they're called now*
Reading this thread I've been on the same train of thought.
Old cards were all 'fine' ie didn't get/deserve a ban.
Bridge has been in a long standing deck, banning it very lieely kills dredge and while plenty would celebrate we've all had decks banned out from under us and it's a horrendous experience. Bridge stays.
So that should have us focus on the new cards.
If we keep with WotC example of banking the enablers then Hogaak should be fine. Tbh I think people generally agree that it's just the payoff for other shenanigans.
Feeder - same good card but hardly back breaking even with bridge.
Now Altar of dementia is both new (people haven't necessarily picked it up in paper yet) and is an enabler that allows this deck to backdoor into a 2nd strategy. It is what enables this level of fast crazy in the deck and dodges interaction. Removing this would also force the deck to run more dredgers and be more a dredge iterations than this milling monster that beats you to death with x 2/2.
With the addition of MH1 and the London mulligan I think we're (un)officially past the turn 4 format concept. I'd rather WotC accept this and don't start banning more cards if anything accepting the power creep and unban some stuff.
So Flusterstorm?? is the 'powerful blue card' urgh not only is storm not even a blip on the modern radar but this takes up a potential new and useful counter spot. Wizards hate the storm mechanic so much but we get it, jeez.
Agreed fetchlands will always be reprinted eventually it just depends on whether you can wait.
The current price is stupid high and I personally wouldn't but at that price.
Strangely the whole article included content on hand disruption too. Maybe just don't add the bit about silly (those in glass houses) and we could focus on your excellent response.
Anyway the comments section of the CFB article also has an interesting point regards what players are happy to allow in a format (via ban list)
It says
Most modern players are ok with Xerox styled decks being the best decks and anything better and different tends to end up banned. Goes on to suggest that this is a player perception issue rather than a card power and Brian DeMars agrees that he couldn't think of a rebuttal for this.
Now that is what lead me to preordain it also leads us into the murky twin water. so instead of that do we have any eternal format players able to highlight times when Xerox was bested and something got banned?
Edit - I could never condone the banning of looting and stirrings. Kills to many brews. Tron lands stay to. Whenever I come back to this thread I feel like what modern players hate most is their opponents getting to play magic too.
WotC may not have realised but they're seeking to balance this same internal inconsistency by changing the Mulligan rule.
We want players to consistently play games of magic (because it's fun) but we don't want to give them consistency tools.(because that's not fun)??
Xerox decks remain the problem, despite players loving to play them. There is very little counter play in existence to them. It's no surprise Chalice, Tron, and Amulet decks are rising.
That channel fireball article is interesting and I'll finish it later. But I disagree with preordain being unfit for modern play.
I feel like it is the line that would ensure control decks can hit their land drops while also lowering overall land count, stopping them control decks missing their land drops so they just die.
You could say but it also allows them to dig for combo pieces but I feel like the gain for decks that beat combo/xerox would be better than for the xerox (faithless looting is probably more powerful than preordain in the current meta).
We are still waiting on the announcement of the next premium pricetag product (and it will be coming) so until that announcement there doesn't seem to be anywhere for fetches to go (but up).
So since we're on answers in the other thread I'd love an opinion on the playability of hero's downfall but with the addition of surgical extraction effect (at an additional cost of either life or mana) on whatever creature/planeswalker is targeted?
I can agree that I'm speculating. but banning hasn't worked since the format was in its infancy eg seething song, blazing shoal
Adding cards will always increase power and degeneracy unless you allow players consistent access to their sideboard cards. So give them tools to find them.
If dredge was going to play against leyline or tormods crypt every game 2 and 3 it'd need a lot more than creeping chill to have people pick it up as often as they do.
And I do think most bannings have been to appease players not ban dangerous weapons. I think you're misunderstanding my analogy.
(All of this card game is wonderful cookies, we're all arguing over which filling or frosting is everyone's favourite without asking everyone)
@crashcapt - the point wasn't that the cards go together the point is they allow a variety of decks no matter what colour they are the ability to find what they need.
When answers are fairly balanced against threats we're hoping to get a format where the most skilled players can put in a lot of practice with whatever variety of deck they want to play and win.
Always amused by people's opinions on 'card selection' OP ban it all (a huge part of this is WotC's stance on B&R list maintenance).
Every colour does it the issue isn't that it happens or the cost but the disparity between what colours have access to.
IE banning stuff never solves the problem!
(Off topic example education the issue isn't that one group has more or better it's that the other group don't have fair access to it. You don't make things better by taking stuff from other people.)
Would love to see sfm come off the ban list and maybe a new squadron hawk printed in white.
Preordain unbanned in blue
Red keeps faithless looting
Green keeps ancient stirrings and gets a sylvan librarian designed to help fair decks
And finally black get a reasonable tutor eg cruel tutor power level(ish)
Essentially what I'm saying is they'll keep printing cool cards that break decks for short periods of time. But if they keep lopsided banning of certain enablers they guarantee having to ban other enablers in the future.
Wow after this last weekend MH1 is starting to look like containment priest or bust (bans).
If that card is in the set the next b&r should just be a picture of that card in the modern portion of the announcement.
So after this weekend has anyone's feelings on what should be in MH1 changed?
Initially I hoped for lots of tribal cards for the unsupported/non-perennial tribes and some old standard favourites that don't see play in legacy (Atog).
But now I'm wondering about FoW (or a varient, maybe life loss and sac an untapped island you control).
1 week in just isn't long enough and likely the correct conclusion to arrive at.
I would like a statement on how War and MH1 have altered format expectations and what is in a watch list in terms of bans and unbans but that is likely fantasy land.
*disclaimer - too early to ban - give it will the gp/pt/mc whatever they're called now*
Reading this thread I've been on the same train of thought.
Old cards were all 'fine' ie didn't get/deserve a ban.
Bridge has been in a long standing deck, banning it very lieely kills dredge and while plenty would celebrate we've all had decks banned out from under us and it's a horrendous experience. Bridge stays.
So that should have us focus on the new cards.
If we keep with WotC example of banking the enablers then Hogaak should be fine. Tbh I think people generally agree that it's just the payoff for other shenanigans.
Feeder - same good card but hardly back breaking even with bridge.
Now Altar of dementia is both new (people haven't necessarily picked it up in paper yet) and is an enabler that allows this deck to backdoor into a 2nd strategy. It is what enables this level of fast crazy in the deck and dodges interaction. Removing this would also force the deck to run more dredgers and be more a dredge iterations than this milling monster that beats you to death with x 2/2.
For me alter should be the card to go.
The current price is stupid high and I personally wouldn't but at that price.
Anyway the comments section of the CFB article also has an interesting point regards what players are happy to allow in a format (via ban list)
It says
Most modern players are ok with Xerox styled decks being the best decks and anything better and different tends to end up banned. Goes on to suggest that this is a player perception issue rather than a card power and Brian DeMars agrees that he couldn't think of a rebuttal for this.
Now that is what lead me to preordain it also leads us into the murky twin water. so instead of that do we have any eternal format players able to highlight times when Xerox was bested and something got banned?
Edit - I could never condone the banning of looting and stirrings. Kills to many brews. Tron lands stay to. Whenever I come back to this thread I feel like what modern players hate most is their opponents getting to play magic too.
WotC may not have realised but they're seeking to balance this same internal inconsistency by changing the Mulligan rule.
We want players to consistently play games of magic (because it's fun) but we don't want to give them consistency tools.(because that's not fun)??
Examples? At least engage in a conversation. 'No' when something isn't demonstrably wrong doesn't progress understanding.
And WotC says no is temporary for any banned list card. Proof JtMS, BBE, Bitterblossom, GGT
That channel fireball article is interesting and I'll finish it later. But I disagree with preordain being unfit for modern play.
I feel like it is the line that would ensure control decks can hit their land drops while also lowering overall land count, stopping them control decks missing their land drops so they just die.
You could say but it also allows them to dig for combo pieces but I feel like the gain for decks that beat combo/xerox would be better than for the xerox (faithless looting is probably more powerful than preordain in the current meta).
Adding cards will always increase power and degeneracy unless you allow players consistent access to their sideboard cards. So give them tools to find them.
If dredge was going to play against leyline or tormods crypt every game 2 and 3 it'd need a lot more than creeping chill to have people pick it up as often as they do.
And I do think most bannings have been to appease players not ban dangerous weapons. I think you're misunderstanding my analogy.
(All of this card game is wonderful cookies, we're all arguing over which filling or frosting is everyone's favourite without asking everyone)
@crashcapt - the point wasn't that the cards go together the point is they allow a variety of decks no matter what colour they are the ability to find what they need.
When answers are fairly balanced against threats we're hoping to get a format where the most skilled players can put in a lot of practice with whatever variety of deck they want to play and win.
Every colour does it the issue isn't that it happens or the cost but the disparity between what colours have access to.
IE banning stuff never solves the problem!
(Off topic example education the issue isn't that one group has more or better it's that the other group don't have fair access to it. You don't make things better by taking stuff from other people.)
Would love to see sfm come off the ban list and maybe a new squadron hawk printed in white.
Preordain unbanned in blue
Red keeps faithless looting
Green keeps ancient stirrings and gets a sylvan librarian designed to help fair decks
And finally black get a reasonable tutor eg cruel tutor power level(ish)
Essentially what I'm saying is they'll keep printing cool cards that break decks for short periods of time. But if they keep lopsided banning of certain enablers they guarantee having to ban other enablers in the future.
If that card is in the set the next b&r should just be a picture of that card in the modern portion of the announcement.
So after this weekend has anyone's feelings on what should be in MH1 changed?
Initially I hoped for lots of tribal cards for the unsupported/non-perennial tribes and some old standard favourites that don't see play in legacy (Atog).
But now I'm wondering about FoW (or a varient, maybe life loss and sac an untapped island you control).
Very torn as I don't want more bannings.