18 points(although it probably does not matter):
Grixis Shadow: 2
EldraTron: 1
Abzan Company: 1
Esper Control: 1
Skred Red: 1
BG Rock: 1
4c Saheeli Felidar Control: 1
Overall 21 points or better(leaving all 18p out, meaning 20p, 24p and 27p decks):
EldraTron: 3
Titanshift: 2
Burn: 2
UR Gifts Storm: 2
Ur Through The breach: 1
Grixis Shadow: 1
Junk: 1
Dredge: 1
Amulet Titan: 1
Merfolk: 1
Lantern Prison: 1
UB Control: 1
Kiki Chord: 1
Mardu Midrange: 1
Skred Red: 1
BG Tron: 1
Affinity: 1
Eldrazi and Taxes: 1
Ad Nauseam: 1
Ha! Called it on Dredge. That's going to be a great deck to play for the next week or two. Maybe, GDS as well. People are putting more artifact hate in their SB's for Eldrazi Tron and Affinity. It's going to have to tip back toward GY eventually, but for now, I'd be grinding Dreadge and GDS.
Modern is more diverse than ever indeed. I repost my previous post, because this so called certain minority does try to ignore my valid points and arguments.
Modern is vastly different than other times, it's more diverse and it's got no 3ple top 8's. For example, in the past years, if you did want to play:
A ramp deck, you had to go Tron. You can go with Eldra Tron, Gx Tron, Titanshift, Titanbreach now.
An aggro deck, sure, you could play plenty. But there's plenty more now(5c humans, Elves, Dredge, etc)
Midrange, you had to play Jund(or maybe Abzan). There's Grixis Shadow, Jund Shadow in addition to them(some people count Eldra Tron as midrange-y as well) meaning decks like Jund or Abzan. Even BG Rock is back on the map.
Toolbox decks, well you could play Pod. That was it. There's Bant Knightall, Abzan Company, GW company, the Todd Stevens GW Value Town deck, etc.
Control decks, you should play a certain deck. You can play UW with great success now, Jeskai Queller or Jeskai Control seems to be in a great position
Combo decks, well, there were many at times. There is Storm, Ad Nauseam, Amulet Titan, various Reanimator decks, Taking Turns decks, etc atm.)
White-Based Death and Taxes decks or White-based decks in general. You just could not. Now, you can. At various forms also. May it be Eldrazi and Taxes, Mono W Death and Taxes, GW Hatebears
Prison decks. Well, there were not any. There is Lantern Control and RW Prison now.
New strategies are popping up to catch up with the meta, decks like BW Smallpox and others.
Modern is MORE DIVERSE than any other time, it's not even comparable to an era where we used to see "2 Jund, 2 redacted, 2 Affinity, 2 random decks" or older where we used to see "2-3 Pod, 2 Affinity, 2 Jund, 1 Control deck".
It's like "1 Bant Knightfall, 1 grixis Shadow, 1 BG Rock, 1 Affinity, 1 Jeskai Control, 1 Lantern Prison, 1 Burn, 1 Junk" now. And it's much, much better.
Oh, and every time a new deck is winning a certain event.
Just look at the past GP Top8's or SCG Top 8's or Modern Challenges.
It's just like how you ignore our what's wrong with Modern comments too. I already see forum favoritism in effect from the mods, the post that's flamed me still has not received a warning which just confirms my theory that there is favoritism. I'm very surprised the mods have not revised the rules that anything negative about Modern is banned from discussion. You cannot criticize Modern in any way without sounding remotely negative at all because if you are positive, your point does not come across as intended. Just look at ktkenshin's post about generic answers, he posted it in a positive way and it got brushed off like it wasn't a problem in the format.
Sorry, I don't see anything wrong with this format right now. It might not be what you like, but that doesn't mean there's something wrong here. People have freedom to choose so many different decks and all of them can do well at small and large tourneys. This is as close to ideal as Magic has ever been.
Results like these really undermine a lot of the Modern critics' arguments. Indeed, almost all the recent Modern data undermines their arguments, which is why most of the posts identifying Modern problems tend to avoid citing data and tourney finishes.
As I said earlier, this is virtually no different than almost the entire history of Modern. Plus, the only pieces of "data" we have available are glorified FNM tournaments and small handful of paper Top 8s, several weeks and months apart. "Results like this" are not an excuse for complacency in a format that still has PLENTY of things it can improve on. It's nice that you have the patience to wait another 2+ years for the PD team to make positive changes. Some of us have just moved on to other things in the meantime.
I don't see how it can get much better. I think we're at peak Modern right now. So far, I haven't seen anything Ixalan that will cause a severe imbalance, but you can never tell for sure. But we need to enjoy this format as it is right now. It may never get to this good of a spot ever again.
I think UG Merfolk can perhaps be a viable deck, but Speaker alone will not be the reason. A few more powerful green cards and we could have a deck in the making. Of course, Collected Company makes sense as well, but I am referring to new cards.
I can't remember who said it, but someone on the forums here made a good point about CoCo in Merfolk. Merfolk as a deck makes liberal use of Aether Vial, which makes you want to run a lot of 2 drop creatures. CoCo on the other hand makes you want to run a lot of 3 mana creatures so you can get a mana advantage out of the card. In a way to two strategies oppose each other.
I had never conciously thought about this, although I would tend to agree.
The common problem with Merfolk at the current meta though, is that the early, and late game are absolutely terrible. Merfolk needs to replace Cursecatcher and Master of Waves to see success in our new Modern metagame. Having little to no impact turn 1, then having something go completley over the top and just explode to Fatal Push doesn't seem good for most matchups. I suspect with the printing of a few more 1-3 Merfolk in the UG combination we see an entirely new breed of the deck have success.
Financially, I wouldn't wait on Lord of Atlantis, or Meerow Reejery those cards can explode overnight with any decent spoiler.
I agree about Master of Waves. But Curcatcher is so good at early disruption. It's going to be hard to find a one drop that's better.
But you are at least making a reasonable argument of a spikey nature. sisicat literally said he wants a pay to win option in modern, and that's worth a bit of laughter.
no he doesn't. That's strawmanning and you know it.
He wants games to have less matchup variance like legacy has, minus the blue dominance. Which is possible with a plethora of positives this format could use.
That doesn't sound very positive to me. We already have one Legacy. Why do we need another?
if you don't think modern needs any better hate, answers, and unbans to improve it further, than why even comment on my post. Your clearly just trolling here
No trolling at all. Just disagreeing with your statement. I don't see why Modern needs to be like Legacy. We already have Legacy.
Yeah, Shapers' Sanctuary is the first decent creature-kill hoser we've gotten. It'll be interesting if decks like Affinity try it. Might incentivize more cards like Firespout and Anger of the Gods.
Matchup roulette is a part of any format ever though. Not sure what you're getting at with this post. You made it to top 4 and lost from a judge call, don't see how that is the fault of matchups. And winning 3 PPTQs in 3 seasons could've just been a good streak, now followed by a not so good one in this season. After all, I'm sure there are other players nearly or more prepared than you are in attendance also. You can't all win first place.
My point is that it is amplified in Modern. No, nobody can always win first place, but there are players who win a PPTQ every season. Many probably play in more GPs and try to stay on the train. I'm probably not good enough to do that, but I still have super high expectations for myself. I'll be more specific then. Players who have beaten me at the PPTQs are players that I have beaten at least a little bit in the past. Don't get me wrong. They've practiced a bunch too and have probably improved their play skill much more than I have in that time, but I still feel that I have the skill advantage quite often. Yet, it doesn't matter quite as much in Modern.
My point mainly is that people are quick to dismiss what sisicat is saying. Nothing is Black and White. There is a lot of truth to what he's getting at. Now, I don't think that something drastic or dramatic should happen. But I do think letting consistency tools back into the format like Preordain and Green Sun's Zenith can alleviate a little bit of it without shaking the boat much.
But you are at least making a reasonable argument of a spikey nature. sisicat literally said he wants a pay to win option in modern, and that's worth a bit of laughter.
no he doesn't. That's strawmanning and you know it.
He wants games to have less matchup variance like legacy has, minus the blue dominance. Which is possible with a plethora of positives this format could use.
That doesn't sound very positive to me. We already have one Legacy. Why do we need another?
Yet where is Jund lately? im sure many out there want it to do well and know it intimately. BUT, if a meta is too hostile to a certain archetype or deck it will fail/underperform no matter how hard you prepare.
funny how some say pros words mean nothing, all the way up until one says something that matches their rhetoric.
there are many factors to a deck doing well. skill and preparation with your deck is big, but I would argue in a huuge playing field its only half the story, especially in modern.
of course I blame this on maindeckable better answers to the vast amount of linear POWERFUL strategies that exist in this format.
it simply doesn't make sense in this game to play fair( for the most part), and its the reason my lgs has faded into pokemon.
and the: "leave things be" attitude wizards has is not helping confidence of some players. unfortunately there are even more players who enjoy this kind of format as it currently is. I don't get it, but to each there own I guess.
Jund has no right to always be a Tier 1 deck.
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
This is nonsense. A deck's cost doesn't entitle the player to anything. At all. Ever.
WOTC's reckless bannings, the community being better informed about how metagame representation can lead to bans. Why do you think Tron and some other Turn 2 kill Grishoalbrand decks are under-represented? I can guarantee you if you have 2 or 3 Modern GPs in a row with 10+ turn 2 kills on camera, Grishoalbrand would have eaten a ban. That's why Tron players don't get their deck banhammered, they saw how other decks with high metagame representation get hit and are scaling back accordingly. This is also the reason no deck in the format has more than 10% metagame representation, it's artificial diversity created by the fear of banning.
You know I feel like we have a name for this phenomenon. Oh right, it's called THE EVOLUTION OF THE METAGAME
What metagame? You mean your 100+ different deck metagame in a GP? How do you metagame that? How do I achieve the 90% win rate needed to top 8 the GP I need for the weekend? If I could play against Eldrazi Tron 15 times with Affinity in a GP, I wouldn't be having this discussion about Modern being too diverse. It's not like those MTGGoldfish metagame representation numbers are accurate, they base it mostly on MTGO decklists from comp leagues that are cherry picked. This EVOLUTION OF THE METAGAMEdoes not happen in practice the way you say it does. Unless I deliberately sink excessive amounts of cash to cleanout the community of certain cards that are favorable against my deck of choice, I cannot reliably predict what I play against in a large tournament when there are 100+ different decks that are viable and capable of winning a tournament of any size. This diversity is beneficial to the replayability of the format, but it is very detrimental to people who must win at all costs.
Idk, brewing is very difficult in modern and legacy and that difficulty is about the same to me. In legacy the blue cantrip shell restricts brews. You are heavily incentivesed In legacy to start your deck with 4 brainstorm, 4 ponder and 4 fow. In modern the diversity among tier 1 and tier 2 decks punish brews. You simply can't brew a deck that can have decent matchups across the majority of tiered decks
It is hilarious that you say diversity stifles brewing. How was that deck diversity reached I wonder? Like, what did it take to get so many different decks to a viable state?
WOTC's reckless bannings, the community being better informed about how metagame representation can lead to bans. Why do you think Tron and some other Turn 2 kill Grishoalbrand decks are under-represented? I can guarantee you if you have 2 or 3 Modern GPs in a row with 10+ turn 2 kills on camera, Grishoalbrand would have eaten a ban. That's why Tron players don't get their deck banhammered, they saw how other decks with high metagame representation get hit and are scaling back accordingly. This is also the reason no deck in the format has more than 10% metagame representation, it's artificial diversity created by the fear of banning.
Or, less cynically, we've got some great brewers in the community who know how to tune decks.
Idk, brewing is very difficult in modern and legacy and that difficulty is about the same to me. In legacy the blue cantrip shell restricts brews. You are heavily incentivesed In legacy to start your deck with 4 brainstorm, 4 ponder and 4 fow. In modern the diversity among tier 1 and tier 2 decks punish brews. You simply can't brew a deck that can have decent matchups across the majority of tiered decks
It is hilarious that you say diversity stifles brewing. How was that deck diversity reached I wonder? Like, what did it take to get so many different decks to a viable state?
I just want to cast bloodbraid elf, cascade into stoneforge mystic then lose to half the tier 1 decks in the format. With no unbans and the lack of communication about them not unbanning certain cards makes it hard to get excited over modern
With that type of logic, you can argue for unbanning SFM by saying you want to use it to search up Leonin Scimitar or Shuko. This format is legitimately awesome and well-balanced, but you want to be able to play a midrange deck with 50/50 or better matchups against the entire field. You've actually used numbers as high as 70% winrates, but I will assume some element of hyperbole in those statements.
Don't get me wrong, I wish there would have been more comment on the No Change decision, considering pros were briefly crying for a ban to hit DS decks. I would like them to say "we consider the format to be healthy, so we did not consider any changes early on" or even "we considered trying to boost (insert archetype here), but do not yet have the data to justify this specific unban." But I can't help but believe that you and a couple other users just want your pet deck to be tier 1 or even tier 0.
You keep telling people what they want dispite not actually knowing these people.
You have literally said on this thread that you want a deck with a positive win percentage against the entire field, and that one reason you didn't like modern was the lack of a clear best deck or ones that could clearly be best with proper metagame awareness. I'm not telling anyone what they want, I'm remembering your claims some fifteen pages ago.
That was probably me, I am still a firm believer that Modern is too diverse and not worth the effort to get to a win percentage where monetization of the format can provide you a living. You can't build a Modern deck that has even to favored matchups against the field, that bothers me when the rewards of most Magic events are structured in such a way that you have to win at all costs to get the big reward.
Yeah, sorry. I guess this format isn't for the 1337$. Infraction issued for trolling. -- CavalryWolfPack
Is now the best time to buy tarmogoyf or are they likely to go down in price even more?
If you can get them for less that $60, I'd do it. It's very unlikely they show up in the next two premium products, and even if they did it won't crash the price much from here. Goyf may be at its bottom right now. I wouldn't speculate on them, though. Just buy what you need. Fatal Push is still a card and until players figure out a way to neutralize it, Goyf won't be good again.
Possible "surprising" reprint at uncommon:
Maybe a rarity downshift to match Lightning Helix and Countersquall for absorb and undermine. They won't give us 2cmc counters like miscalculation, but maybe these would be reasonable?
I'd like to see Absorb. Also, I think Hull Breach would be on-flavor for this set. Maybe that will get reprinted. It would make a nice SB card in Modern.
Ha! Called it on Dredge. That's going to be a great deck to play for the next week or two. Maybe, GDS as well. People are putting more artifact hate in their SB's for Eldrazi Tron and Affinity. It's going to have to tip back toward GY eventually, but for now, I'd be grinding Dreadge and GDS.
Sorry, I don't see anything wrong with this format right now. It might not be what you like, but that doesn't mean there's something wrong here. People have freedom to choose so many different decks and all of them can do well at small and large tourneys. This is as close to ideal as Magic has ever been.
I don't see how it can get much better. I think we're at peak Modern right now. So far, I haven't seen anything Ixalan that will cause a severe imbalance, but you can never tell for sure. But we need to enjoy this format as it is right now. It may never get to this good of a spot ever again.
P.S. gkourou's post rawks.
Looks like people are starting to put more artifact hate in their sideboards to tamp down Affinity. Time to switch to Dredge!
I agree about Master of Waves. But Curcatcher is so good at early disruption. It's going to be hard to find a one drop that's better.
No trolling at all. Just disagreeing with your statement. I don't see why Modern needs to be like Legacy. We already have Legacy.
Yeah, Shapers' Sanctuary is the first decent creature-kill hoser we've gotten. It'll be interesting if decks like Affinity try it. Might incentivize more cards like Firespout and Anger of the Gods.
That doesn't sound very positive to me. We already have one Legacy. Why do we need another?
This is nonsense. A deck's cost doesn't entitle the player to anything. At all. Ever.
Simple: Practice your deck.
Or, less cynically, we've got some great brewers in the community who know how to tune decks.
It is hilarious that you say diversity stifles brewing. How was that deck diversity reached I wonder? Like, what did it take to get so many different decks to a viable state?
Yeah, sorry. I guess this format isn't for the 1337$.
Infraction issued for trolling. -- CavalryWolfPack
If you can get them for less that $60, I'd do it. It's very unlikely they show up in the next two premium products, and even if they did it won't crash the price much from here. Goyf may be at its bottom right now. I wouldn't speculate on them, though. Just buy what you need. Fatal Push is still a card and until players figure out a way to neutralize it, Goyf won't be good again.
I'd like to see Absorb. Also, I think Hull Breach would be on-flavor for this set. Maybe that will get reprinted. It would make a nice SB card in Modern.