MTG Salvation

Well, 20% Modern maybes is still almost 50 new cards that might be Modern playable. That's huge. We usually get what, like 2 or 3 cards from each Standard set? And I like what they did. We got some powerful answers, which is something the format has sorely lacked from its inception, but we also got a lot of support for several different archetypes that have been underpowered or just didn't exist before, like Slivers, Ninjas, Goblins, Seismic Loam, support for some kind of Sultai snow deck, an Astral Drift blink deck, some strong tempo threats, and some sweet new lands. There's a lot to like in this set for Modern.

The GDS vs. UW matchup isn't as bad as it used to be when GDS was a new deck. Back then, UW was playing Verdict and Condemn, and a lot of GDS pilots didn't know how to play the matchup. I would always see people try to side into a grindy plan post-board, but you're just not going to out-grind UW Control. You have to be the aggro deck, strip all their answers and then kill them quickly before they find another.

With GDS pilots starting to figure that out, and UW moving towards Terminus and Oust, the matchup improved. I think it's still very unlikely to be an even matchup, though. If UW moves back towards Verdict, it'll make it bad again.

Quote from cfusionpm »

Turn 1 Forcing a Faithless Looting or Ancient Stirrings is going to feel SOOOO good. I don't care if it's correct or not; my body needs this.

Even Forcing a Vial from Humans. The hardest games to play against Humans are the ones where they overwhelm you with tempo advantage because they played a turn 1 Vial. Humans playing on curve is a VERY fair deck. I would probably board the card out in sideboard games, but my point is that it does have some play even against a deck like Humans in game 1. It's going to be a main deck card for fair blue decks. I don't know if it's a 4-of, but if you want it at all you want it in the main, and you can board it out if it's bad like people do in Legacy with Force of Will.

Not just a combo breaker, but it's a way to answer all the busted 1 mana turn 1 plays that different decks play when you're on the draw. Ancient Stirrings, Faithless Looting, Aether Vial, Thoughtseize (if you really want to protect something in your hand), Mox Opal, Amulet of Vigor, a Chalice powered out by a SSG. The only deck I can think of where it's REALLY unfortunate that this doesn't hit creatures is Bogles.

If this card sees wide adoption by fair decks, it will go a long way towards slowing down the format, and I think that's a good thing. It hits almost every busted turn 1 play that enables so many decks. And it does so while not being something that combo decks will want. Great design.

Quote from ElectricEye »

I don't buy the argument that Belcher suddenly becomes playable with Chrome Mox. It's still a glass-cannon deck, much like Griselbrand combo and Cheerios. These type of strategies tend to mulligan terribly and fold to commonly played sideboard effects

Quote from FoodChainGoblins »

I think his points stands. Modern Belcher is going to need a lot more than just Chrome Mox to become "playable." And when I say playable, I realize that everyone has a different definition. Some people believe that only UR Phoenix, Dredge, Amulet, Whir Prison, and Grixis Shadow are playable right now and I can't fault them for that line of thinking (yes, even with the 1 win that a Jund Titanshift deck did this weekend) We are talking about giving yourself the BEST chance, not just spiking a tournament with a deck that put you at a disadvantage from the start, even if you out tested all other 2,000 players at the GP.

Even though many of us assume it, I don't think Wizards has ever said explicitly that Mox Opal to be close to a banning. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong here.

But I do believe that your point also stands because Wizards seemingly does not want (and I say this loosely because honestly there isn't any proof) fast mana to be prevalent in Modern. I guess there technically is proof with Rite of Flame and Seething Song banned, but other cards are not banned. This is the most likely conclusion one can have.

My point is that you can't blame someone for questioning the line of thinking - Chrome Mox won't get unbanned because of Belcher because Belcher has no relevance in the current meta and there is some percentage of players over 0% that don't believe Belcher to potentially be a problem if Chrome Mox is unbanned. My own opinion is that I don't think it currently should be unbanned, but I think it's close. I think 5 unbannings down the line, it SHOULD come off. I just don't know if that time period is 2 years or 22 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF0_3hFMX-4&list=PL04lbfeNAaS8W-BSi1u7JHHM4YesThl2V

This video is a few years old, but the point still stands. Belcher requires a certain amount of free fast mana to be consistent enough to be a real deck. There is a mono-green version now that's sort of a meme deck because it's capable of very quick kills, but it's inconsistent. Raising the number of free fast mana spells in the format from 8 copies to 12 greatly increases the consistency of this strategy, especially if they end up going with the London Mulligan. There is a very real possibility that adding Chrome Mox to the format makes Belcher consistent enough to be a real player in the meta, and do we really need another turn 1 or 2 deck in Modern? No, we don't.

Even if it's not Belcher specifically, Chrome Mox would absolutely result in the format speeding up, because that's what free fast mana does. We need to go in the opposite direction, so Chrome Mox is a huge no-go for an unbanning.

Yep, I'd say you really nailed it on the head. Faithless Looting has been in Modern for forever, and it was never a problem until now. WotC has been printing a bunch of graveyard payoff cards in recent years to make the graveyard a more active part of the game, but not a lot of answers to those things.

What kind of effects could they staple graveyard hate onto to make it main deckable? Maybe something like a card that's a Shock that also exiles a card or two from a graveyard, or a modal card with graveyard hate along with effects that people often want main?

I really hope they don't make any more ban decisions before we get Modern Horizons. That set is probably going to cause some changes in the format, so I'd rather wait and see what happens with that than ban anything right now.

I'm pretty pumped up for this set. A way to skip Standard and get needed cards directly into Modern is something we've all been asking for for years. It's also nice to see that they do listen to us. Cabal Therapist looks interesting in something like Dredge or Bridgevine. Could also work in a fair deck that makes tokens to sacrifice. Serra is very interesting. Obviously, the barrier to entry for a 4-drop is very high in Modern, but she might get there. There are decks that want Worship, and she's a main-deckable Worship that can't be removed. Worst case scenario, she's a 4 mana Serra Angel that leaves a planeswalker behind. She seems like she would go well in a Lingering Souls deck, or a creature deck that would want Worship.

I think the card I'm most hoping for is Counterspell. I don't even think it would be a huge difference, but it would be nice to not have to play such a wide split of incredibly situational 2 mana counters and hope you have the right one at the right time. I'm excited to see what else they have for us in this set, this is going to be HUGE for the format!

So, does this GP result solidify for anyone else that GB Rock is the best build of the GBx Midrange decks? I know people have been trying to force Jund for the past year, but the consistency and power you get from the two color manabase seems to be where it's at.

Containment Priest is a card that absolutely should be in Modern. It's an excellent answer for fair white-based midrange and/or control decks to all the graveyard shenanigans going on in the format. They keep printing so many threats that recur from the graveyard without giving us nice answers to that strategy, and Containment Priest would be a nice step in the right direction.

I'll be honest, what we need is WotC to stop trying to pretend that if they hide their data, it will make their terrible formats seems less terrible.

Quote from joshshadowfax »

@ktk, the scenario has a second Coast in hand as well, so there's no mana decisions, just which engine to play and how many (if any) Cheeri0s to play. I was purposefully leaving out the opponent's T1 play to see how much it affects the choice.

Got it. The other scenario with just one land is also interesting and definitely comes up when I play.

For this two land scenario, I'm generally going to lead on Sram and play 1 equipment. If the opponent kills Sram, I replace him and get to try again with Paladin next turn (or wait for Silence/Song). If the opponent doesn't kill Sram, I'm drawing a card and setting myself up for a virtually guaranteed T3 win. If I draw another equipment off the first draw, I play it. I repeat this until I either hit Retract or have a hand with 2 equipment in it; in this case, I'm not dropping below 2 equipment without a Retract. At that point, we just chill until T2. There are basically no top-tier Modern decks that can beat two engines on the draw when they didn't have a T1 proactive play. As for the Retract line, if I have Opal, Retract, and at least 6 equipment, I'm just going for the T2 win.

This totally changes if I don't have that second engine. In that case, I'm probably playing every piece of equipment ASAP to either dig for a Retract or dig for engine #2. The number of removal options increases dramatically at 2 mana instead of 1: you add Terminate, Decay, Helix, and Brutality. You also give them one more turn to topdeck a one-mana removal, and a turn to draw a cantrip into a removal spell, all with the benefit of a fetch thinning one extra card. Bad odds for our engine! This is why I generally dig furiously in one engine hands. Of course, modify this as-needed if you also have a protection spell in hand.

As for lands, I'm going to assume that most fetches represent removal, but I'm not going to play scared because I have two engines. Even with one engine, their removal isn't going away later and the window for an opponent to make a mistake starts closing around T4, when they have more than enough mana to play a threat and hold up 2+ removal.

Quote from Smash10101 »

So, can we talk about Sigil of Distinction for a bit? I've personally never played with the card, so I'm curious what other people's thoughts are on it. Is it better than Kite Shield? What about Bone Saw or Spidersilk Net? How do we decide what's better? Let's look at the pros and cons of each; remember, we generally don't care what most of these do if we're able to combo, they only matter if we aren't winning the turn we play them.
...
What do you guys think?

I'm on 4 Mantle (helps with mana issues), 4 Net (reach is a key Plan B or C against Delver/Affinity/Infect), 4 Cathar's/Accorder's Shield (vigiliance lets you aggro more effectively and 3 toughness rocks), and 4 Bone Saw (+1 power helps the aggro clock). I used to have 3 Saw/1 Sigil but I almost never cast Sigil for mana, despite wanting a little extra power on the board. As an example, two Shielded/Netted engines can't double-block and kill Tasigur, Goyf, Reality Smasher, etc. Bone Saw makes that a lethal block, in addition to reducing the deck's aggro clock or Grapeshot thresholds when you can't combo.

Re: Kite Shield
Since picking this deck up again after Sram got spoiled, I've had maybe 2-3 games where I wanted Saw to be Kite Shield so it could save something from removal or allow it to make a better block. But I've had dozens of games where I played a Saw and was really happy it was adding power to the board instead of more useless toughness. This is doubly true with Push improving Esper decks, which don't play damage-based removal.

Quote from PPKAP »

Curious about the possibility of Heart of Ghirapur over silence. Heart is a bit more proactive since your mana usage is split over two turns. Cast heart, pass, on the next turn, if it lives, you attack, sac it, and the rest of the turn is disruption-free. I know it has less utility vs some decks that are also trying to combo you out, but it does seem better as a goldfish. If the deck is actually popular, then silence for the mirror is likely where you want to be.

Hope of Ghirapur seems a little better on the defensive and a lot worse on the offensive. Defensively, you can go T1 Hope, T2 Engine and win. Silence doesn't allow that to happen. You can also T2 Hope with mana up and T3 engine ALSO with mana up. Then again, a topdecked Hope won't allow you to combo out for at least another turn. Of course, the card is bad offensively. It doesn't buy time against Infect, Ad Nauseam, the mirror, and other matchups. I'm sticking to Silence for now.

People are giving SFM way too much credit, and damage-based aggro decks too little credit, if they think SFM would completely remove those decks from the format. Affinity, Merfolk, Burn, Gruul Zoo, and Death's Shadow Zoo might lose some metagame ground as a result, but certainly wouldn't be removed from Modern. This is why I want us to view SFM as a generic answer for damage-based aggro decks. Players constantly complain about the lack of generic answers in Modern, and SFM is one such answer we might benefit from.

Posters in this thread, content producers, and the overall Modern community have consistently overrated the impact of unbans, particularly unbans that benefit interactive strategies. BB, Sword, and AV all took significant flak when people suggested they be unbanned. Then they got unbanned and did basically nothing. That's not to say all interactive unbans are safe, or that we should automatically accept all interactive unbans just because they are interactive. Rather, we need to carefully examine our assumptions about interactive cards. SFM is included in that.

I expect SFM's unbanning would lead to a downtick Death's Shadow Zoo, Burn, Gruul Zoo, and Affinity (SFM plus splash damage from more Stony Silence decks). Tron and Breach Titan/Titan Shift decks would increase, as would Infect (which would, in turn, lower the ramp deck share). Then the format would shift back against Infect and basically self-regulate in a cycle.