Surprised by the small amount of discussion from the Mythic Championship/Magicfest Barcelona. People seemed like they had written off Jund entirely, but then there were two copies of Jund in the Top 8 of Mythic Championship Barcelona. Granted, the Draft means that the Top 8 doesn't depend entirely on Modern and thus the results are questionable, but this is backed up by the fact that the finals of Magicfest Barcelona was a Jund mirror. You also had ThopterSword get into the Top 8 of both events.
Extremely disappointed not to see any unbans. If there was ever a time to do it, it's alongside a large and predictable ban.
Honestly... I don't think so. Banning Bridge from Below is ultimately not that big a shift in the metagame. Worst case scenario, it does nothing and we have the same metagame we have right now. Best case scenario, we just swap back to the metagame we had before Hogaak. Most likely it'll be something in between. The point is, you really don't have to make any major changes to your deck as the result of this change (unless you were on Hogaak), and people have made it clear they really don't like WOTC's tendency to do "shakeups" before the Pro Tour. Granted, the dislike is more towards pre-Pro Tour bans, but I feel the shakeups in general aren't liked.
Unlike a ban on Bridge from Below, which as noted ultimately doesn't shift the metagame that much, an unbanning could have some pretty big changes and require people to construct new decks entirely. I suppose this sort of encourages creative deckbuilding, but it means people who qualified would suddenly have to scramble to get the required copies of whatever is unbanned at whatever inflated price it ends up at. I'm in favor of unbans, but I would prefer they occur after the Pro Tour. (an accompanying reprint would also be nice...)
I already said so, but imho Twin wouldn’t even be a Tier in the current Modern. Force of Negation, Fatal Push, the general power level going up.
Yes. I saw it, hugely agree. Also, a thing that people do not mention that much. I did some testing vs UW Control. I played UR Twin and tried to tune it to today's meta, as much as I could. Still, the deck would evolve and one can not come that much close to how would today's Twin be. But I tried, as a past Twin player. Opts, JTMS, V cliques, 1 pierce, 1 snare, abrade side, magmatic sinkhole for sure. Anyways; here is what I found out.
Still, it's not easy for him to tap out for big bombs like Teferi, Jace, Narset, etc, which would make Twin a popular force and you to change your playstyle to win it. Then again, if he has FoN, he can tap out, then FoN the Twin, and then gain the card advantage back with those walkers, which still makes it a good matchup for UW.
All that said, yes, Twin would be absolutely beatable and not a tier 1 deck, I believe, but close. For sure, a safe unbanning, for the first time since it's banning, I believe.
While I have major doubts that Twin would be a problem if unbanned, I'm not sure its matchup versus UW Control is a good test. Didn't that already have a positive matchup before the ban?
I miss the days when the meta would stew for months , not just days before everyone start talking about bans.
What days? I'll admit I started up in Modern in late 2012 and thus missed the first year or so of the format, but since I've started playing Modern there was basically no time when people didn't jump pretty quickly onto the ban(d)wagon.
I literally acknowledged GGT as a ban with minimal GP data, I.e. the battle of sideboards reference you are making, in the post I assume you are responding to. So I don't know why you are framing this as a no GP result = no ban scenario. As I posted on this same page and will repost now, GGT was banned with very few GP results, likely based off MTGO data. Hogaak could be the same case regardless of how the GP plays out. I know you are exceedingly skeptical of Wizards and routinely negative towards Modern over a good chunk of the last 3 years, but that doesn't mean you need to indict Wizards' handling of the current situation. At least, not until after the 8th.
They knew what was going to happen with Eldrazi Winter but that PT still happened.
What do you think the chances are that Wizards leaves Hogaak in with the express purpose of making it the level 0 deck at the Pro Tour, and seeing if the PT can define a new metagame first?
On what do you base the idea that "they knew what was going to happen with Eldrazi Winter"? That deck made its debut on the Pro Tour and was a big shock to pretty much everyone.
You really think that the same Wizards of the Coast that missed a 2-card infinite combo in Standard (CopyCat) that the playerbase noticed immediately was somehow so prescient that they were able to see a deck coming in Modern that 99.999% of the playerbase didn't?
Here's a card I feel is being overlooked: Veil of Summer.
I've long had a soft spot for Autumn's Veil as sideboard tech against counterspell decks, but it was never quite good enough to justify putting into the sideboard. Veil of Summer, however, is a strict upgrade, drawing you a card if an opponent played a Black or Blue spell, which of course they would have if you were casting it in response to a counterspell or creature removal spell. For that matter, even if they didn't cast one of those, it can function as a cantrip as long as they cast a blue or black spell--which is what will generally be the case for decks you bring it in against.
I might as well put forward a suggestion: While Hogaak is running around, playing a copy of the original Kozilek, Ulamog, or Emrakul may be worth running (probably in place of one of the new Ulamogs). If it's in your deck, it shuts down their mill plan quite thoroughly--and that's if they even know it's in your deck, they might have no idea and will just happily throw their library into their graveyard, start milling you, and then realize when the Eldrazi Titan gets tossed in that they've lost. Personally I think Kozilek is the best for this purpose even though his effects aren't as impressive, he's the cheapest of all of them.
Another advantage of Kozilek: Do you ever have the situation arise when you have the necessary pieces for the Karn/Lattice lock, but your opponent has a Karn or a Stony Silence? Well, as long as they don't have any creatures they can attack with in play, a Kozilek anywhere in your deck will guarantee your win regardless of who has more cards in deck, because you can discard him to shuffle the graveyard back and they'll inevitably run out of cards. Even if they Surgical Kozilek in response to the trigger, everyone else still shuffles back in.
So this new mill deck wins either by dredge style creature rush or turbo mill. That means pillow port will have a spot light or turbo fog. Ghostly Prison and singleton main deck Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. That's so much fun. For those of you who have never thought of that as an anti-mill card, it's amazing. I play it in one of my decks all of the time. O and you're welcome. I only give you all the best SB cards solutions ever.
If you're going to go that route, you're better off with Kozilek than Emrakul. Most Modern decks are legitimately incapable of casting Emrakul due to not having enough lands that produce mana--Kozilek is still a tall order, but most decks can at least potentially cast him at some point. Sure, the difference is minimal, but Kozilek is the better option. I suppose Emrakul is better in that there's more decks that can play him so if you purchase a copy you can do more with it, but in terms of pure gameplay Kozilek is a strict upgrade, if an extremely marginal one.
As someone who plays this deck, I don't think banning Bridge from Below is enough. I think there has to be multiple bans, like Hogaak AND Altar of Dementia or Hogaak and Bridge from Below. I personally don't think a turn 2/3 8/8 Tramply fellow is all right for Modern. But maybe I'm wrong? Stitcher's Supplier is another card many forget about and is one of this deck's best draws. That and Faithless Looting...
If the deck does turn out to be too good, I actually do wonder if Stitcher's Supplier might be the right ban; practically all of the crazy starts the deck can get rely on that card. The only "crazy start" I can think of that doesn't require it is turn 1 Faithless Looting, drop in two Vengevines, turn 2 cast two 1-mana creatures, which is fairly unlikely to be able to pull off.
Ross Merriam makes a good argument for never unbanning stoneforge mystic. Stoneforge isn't exactly strong but also doesn't warp the way a deck is constructed. "The opportunity cost to run twin or stoneforge packages is almost zero." I personally feel that stoneforge would make tempo decks too strong.
That's not a good argument. If lack of opportunity cost is a problem, then we should be banning Lightning Bolt; exactly what opportunity cost does that card have? Or Path to Exile? Or Thoughtseize? Or, heck, the fetchlands? In fact, I'd say all of those have less opportunity cost than Stoneforge Mystic. And while Tarmogoyf's stock has gone down considerably due to Fatal Push being printed, for a long time that card had the opportunity cost of... having to play cards that were already good. Reminds me of how I've seen it remarked that the "downside" of Delver of Secrets in Legacy is having to play what are already the best cards in the format.
As for the Splinter Twin example, that makes even less sense, because there is major opportunity cost. The combo requires 10 cards in your deck, which is hardly a minor amount, and all of them--all of them--are mediocre-to-terrible by themselves. That means that you've taking out 10 good cards in favor of cards that are not good in order to try to pull off or threaten the combo. The claim there's barely an opportunity cost is laughable.
To be fair, I am responding to your representation of his argument, so maybe he said it better originally... but as presented, it's a nonsense argument.
Isn't it time for the obligatory SFM unban hype train?
Not with UW being a deck. It's not happening.
Is Stoneforge Mystic even particularly good in UW Control? It seems to lack general synergy with the deck (not to mention it's an easy target for all the removal spells that are otherwise mediocre against UW Control). Stoneforge Mystic is a midrange card, not a control card.
Granted, perhaps UW could adapt itself into a midrange deck, but that's a different deck than the one that's currently doing well.
What does the mulligan fix, and why is it better than the old way?
Because people hate, hate, hate mana screw. It's possibly the single most disliked thing about Magic. And they especially hate getting mana screwed so hard they have to mulligan down to 5 or less and effectively lose the game before it's begun. It's why susbsequent TCGs have either eliminated the possibility of mana screw entirely (e.g. Hearthstone) or at least made it dramatically harder to occur (Pokemon TCG). I saw Richard Garfield say in a lecture he was giving that he regrets the way the mana system created mana screw.
Not only is it not fun to be the player, it's not particularly fun to watch someone on coverage lose a game due to having to mulligan repeatedly.
Unfortunately, the mana system is so engrained in the game you can't truly fix mana screw. Ideas like giving people guaranteed lands don't work because unlike Hearthstone, the game's balance is based around not being guaranteed to make all your land drops. But they can at least try to make it feel less punishing and not "well, I lost the game before my turn even started", which this mulligan rule is trying to do.
The inclusion of the Swords makes me wonder if we may see the printing of a "fixed" Stoneforge Mystic that will work with the Swords but not Batterskull (e.g. a Stoneforge Mystic that only works with equipment that costs 3 or less).
The inclusion of the Swords makes me wonder if we may see the printing of a "fixed" Stoneforge Mystic that will work with the Swords but not Batterskull (e.g. a Stoneforge Mystic that only works with equipment that costs 3 or less).
Stoneforge doesn't need fixing. Nothing it does is remotely as powerful as all of the rest of Modern.
I don't think Stoneforge Mystic is too powerful either. But printing a "fixed" version would mean they can be absolutely sure and maybe use it as sort of a "test run" of sorts for the actual card.
The inclusion of the Swords makes me wonder if we may see the printing of a "fixed" Stoneforge Mystic that will work with the Swords but not Batterskull (e.g. a Stoneforge Mystic that only works with equipment that costs 3 or less).
Honestly... I don't think so. Banning Bridge from Below is ultimately not that big a shift in the metagame. Worst case scenario, it does nothing and we have the same metagame we have right now. Best case scenario, we just swap back to the metagame we had before Hogaak. Most likely it'll be something in between. The point is, you really don't have to make any major changes to your deck as the result of this change (unless you were on Hogaak), and people have made it clear they really don't like WOTC's tendency to do "shakeups" before the Pro Tour. Granted, the dislike is more towards pre-Pro Tour bans, but I feel the shakeups in general aren't liked.
Unlike a ban on Bridge from Below, which as noted ultimately doesn't shift the metagame that much, an unbanning could have some pretty big changes and require people to construct new decks entirely. I suppose this sort of encourages creative deckbuilding, but it means people who qualified would suddenly have to scramble to get the required copies of whatever is unbanned at whatever inflated price it ends up at. I'm in favor of unbans, but I would prefer they occur after the Pro Tour. (an accompanying reprint would also be nice...)
You really think that the same Wizards of the Coast that missed a 2-card infinite combo in Standard (CopyCat) that the playerbase noticed immediately was somehow so prescient that they were able to see a deck coming in Modern that 99.999% of the playerbase didn't?
I've long had a soft spot for Autumn's Veil as sideboard tech against counterspell decks, but it was never quite good enough to justify putting into the sideboard. Veil of Summer, however, is a strict upgrade, drawing you a card if an opponent played a Black or Blue spell, which of course they would have if you were casting it in response to a counterspell or creature removal spell. For that matter, even if they didn't cast one of those, it can function as a cantrip as long as they cast a blue or black spell--which is what will generally be the case for decks you bring it in against.
Another advantage of Kozilek: Do you ever have the situation arise when you have the necessary pieces for the Karn/Lattice lock, but your opponent has a Karn or a Stony Silence? Well, as long as they don't have any creatures they can attack with in play, a Kozilek anywhere in your deck will guarantee your win regardless of who has more cards in deck, because you can discard him to shuffle the graveyard back and they'll inevitably run out of cards. Even if they Surgical Kozilek in response to the trigger, everyone else still shuffles back in.
If the deck does turn out to be too good, I actually do wonder if Stitcher's Supplier might be the right ban; practically all of the crazy starts the deck can get rely on that card. The only "crazy start" I can think of that doesn't require it is turn 1 Faithless Looting, drop in two Vengevines, turn 2 cast two 1-mana creatures, which is fairly unlikely to be able to pull off.
As for the Splinter Twin example, that makes even less sense, because there is major opportunity cost. The combo requires 10 cards in your deck, which is hardly a minor amount, and all of them--all of them--are mediocre-to-terrible by themselves. That means that you've taking out 10 good cards in favor of cards that are not good in order to try to pull off or threaten the combo. The claim there's barely an opportunity cost is laughable.
To be fair, I am responding to your representation of his argument, so maybe he said it better originally... but as presented, it's a nonsense argument.
Granted, perhaps UW could adapt itself into a midrange deck, but that's a different deck than the one that's currently doing well.
Not only is it not fun to be the player, it's not particularly fun to watch someone on coverage lose a game due to having to mulligan repeatedly.
Unfortunately, the mana system is so engrained in the game you can't truly fix mana screw. Ideas like giving people guaranteed lands don't work because unlike Hearthstone, the game's balance is based around not being guaranteed to make all your land drops. But they can at least try to make it feel less punishing and not "well, I lost the game before my turn even started", which this mulligan rule is trying to do.
I don't think Stoneforge Mystic is too powerful either. But printing a "fixed" version would mean they can be absolutely sure and maybe use it as sort of a "test run" of sorts for the actual card.