The Pro seems to have chosen: Hogaak is at 21% of the meta. Neobrand is just at 1.1%. The truely broken deck seems to be the first. We'll see the results.
One deck loses to Force of Negation, the other deck wins through multiple graveyard hate cards. Seems reasonable.
Side note, considering we get, what, 4-6 of these a year? I'm not a fan of the roman numeral numbering system. Maybe if it was 1 per year... but this is going to get real big real fast, and just look silly.
I have to agree, I don't understand how the host location and year was a bad naming system. This very forum had people always quoting back to Pro Tours such as Los Angeles '09, or Philadelphia '08. Then they changed the marketing to be named by set (we all know how disastrous that was) and now they think scratches on a prison wall is going to work?
The fact that Kaya was designed with modern IN MIND, doesn't necessarily imply that it will also be a GREAT card. They are exploring possibilities and printing cards. Balancing 280 card sets is pretty hard and you don't want to go overboard with anything just to make something viable in one format. Rending Volley was designed with modern in mind but in the end, it was not enough to do anything. Even Fatal Push was probably designed WITH fetchland synergy in mind. There is no reason to believe otherwise.
This right here, is my homestead argument as to why Wizards needs to stop printing huge sets with next to no purpose. It's so easy for us as a community to evaluate Kaya in mere minutes, but I understand the other side of the coin when developing cards. So stop printing tons of chaff? Limited apparently doesn't get coverage or even a Trophy anymore, our card stock is half of what it used to be since Theros. So now their best design team just does shot in the dark cards for Modern now?
It's pretty damn simple that this community doesn't want shots in the dark card design. It's really frustrating to know that this design team says "We were worried about Phoenix and the potential impact on Modern" and at the same time "Yeah this Kaya card is gonna be super realz for dem Modern players!"
6.19% Grixis Control
5.84% Grixis Delver
4.81% UW Stoneblade
4.81% Jeskai Miracles
3.09% Death's Shadow
2.41% UR Wizards
Unfair decks using cantrips
3.78% Ad Naus
3.44% Sneak and Show
2.75% Reanimator
This shouldn't even be contested. Fair decks have always had more efficiency in Legacy with cantrips compared to combo and linear decks.
His point was not that "Unfair decks are doing better in the overall metagame". His point was that "Unfair decks benefit more from having good cantrips". Your argument seems to conflate the two, which is just dumb to be honest. That's like saying "Fair decks have always had more efficiency in Legacy with Islands compared to combo and linear decks." It's a meaningless statement.
"Unfair" decks attempt to dig to find combo engines in order to win the game immediately while "Fair" decks are digging to find answers to various threats. The increase in win probability from drawing a removal spell vs. a land is completely different from the increase in win probability from drawing a gifts ungiven vs. a land.
I think saying that Sleight of Hand -> Preordain is much better in Storm than UW is fairly uncontroversial. Given that UW doesn't even run sleight of hand or serum visions because digging slightly deeper is not worth losing instant speed in Opt.
And yet my argument was exactly in the quote you cited. So what are you actually conflating? He responded to my original post, and I restated my argument in the exact citation you posted.
I think you need to step back from this conversation, you are distracting from the main argument I made.
[
All being said. I'm fine for it's unbanning, and in favour of it. It would bring the fair decks more forward than the skeptical fears of the increased power level to linear decks. Your prime example is Legacy. Fair decks use cantrips to more success than the unfair ones.
Not to cherry pick but I think you're incorrect on this front. The two best unfair decks in legacy are Show&Tell and Storm, historically, and both of those decks are hugely dependent on cantrips - resolving ponder in storm is far more likely to produce a win than in miracles.
While the fair decks do play cantrips saying that they do so to more success than unfair decks probably sits somewhere in between "somewhat wrong" and "very wrong" in my opinion.
Similarly in modern, Storm and Phoenix both receive a meaningful upgrade with Preordain and I think that's something to be concerned with. The more I think on it I think it's actually more likely for card selection to break a combo deck than a midrange/control deck.
.
Preordain is not.that.strong. It simply isn't and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.
Primarily, I agree with two of your notions. Firstly that Stoneforge Mystic is completely acceptable to be in the current Modern format. Even though play patterns could become obnoxious in specific matchups. I refuse to believe 30Bolt.dec should be a reasonable Modern deck.
The second notion is that this community understands Modern more than Wizards. I also agree. I also highly question the current situation with Tom Ross not being in R&D anymore. This pattern happens far too often with too many professional players where they join R&D, then a difference of opinion happens, and all of a sudden pro leaves company. After a while you would begin to think that something internal is very wrong in R&D. Hopefully Jadine joining the team gives some insight into the grinder circuit and how ridiculous some of the unfair decks can be in comparison.
The notion quoted above, is where I will definitely argue with you. I understand your logic of Serum Visions and it's interesting applications with other Modern cantrips. Yet I feel (actually I just KNOW) Preordain is leagues ahead in power level. Although, I believe Preordain is where blue Modern Cantrips should reside.
I recently placed 9th on MTGO RPTQ playing UR Phoenix (LINK HERE). My list is very different from most conventional lists, I get that, but look as to how I chose my cantrip selection. Sleight of Hand is leagues above Serum Visions even in a decklist such as this. I understand the Faithless Looting logic, but did you consider the logic of "I'm desperate for this removal or countermagic" or even perhaps "I need this land drop" or even "If I can keep chaining spells, my TiTI will flip!"
It's not just the synergies listed that we may not ever fully discover the potential behind, it's the fact that if you were only restricted to 4 Cantrips, Preordain would lead the pack undoubtedly.
All being said. I'm fine for it's unbanning, and in favour of it. It would bring the fair decks more forward than the skeptical fears of the increased power level to linear decks. Your prime example is Legacy. Fair decks use cantrips to more success than the unfair ones.
These last 12 hours of Wizards communication is arguably some of the best we have had in the last 3 to 4 years.
If Wizards keeps these channels open and consistent, while most of the community strikes when they see wrong and promotes when they see good, we can finally come to terms on more issues than simple format health.
I feel the focus should be which argument is best. Attacking consistency should have a specific metric, but once again I feel the need to address the larger problem Modern has. It's Speed. These types of bannings have happened in the past namely with Rite of Flame and Seething Song. Meanwhile consistency has been banned with cards like Ponder and Preordain.
From various cited sources, we can agree Wizards has a philosophy of consistency where Ponder is above what they want in a Cantrip and that Serum Visions fits the mold of the format. The same can be said about Red Rituals, where Desperate Ritual fits the mold but Seething Song does not. I feel attacking consistency is such a weird concept for Wizards to take a stance on. They incorporated Scry into recent design, and changed the color pie so that card selection is among more than just the notorious Blue of the past. They just printed a Sorcery Speed Impulse in Ravnica Allegiance and no one bats an eye.
Modern has no Free highly playable levels of counter Magic, and from that perspective of game design over the last 10+ years, we need to understand that cards which break the basic resource of the game (ie; Mana) are the cards we should definitely be under a closer scope than most other offenders.
This is why my stance is and always will be to ban both Mox Opal and Simian Spirit Guide. The cards would never pass current day design, and obviously break the mold of any possibility of interaction in the Modern format by simply "having it all". KCI can't loop effectively without Mox Opal. It also cannot combo faster, or have resilience and perfect mana. Simian Spirit Guide on the other hand, is nowhere near as prevalent as an offender, but it still feeds into tier 2 decks such as Grishoalbrand, Ad Nauseam, and Colorless Eldrazi along with Red Prison Decks denying any game experience whatsoever with a Turn 1 Blood Moon or Ensnaring Bridge.
I'd much rather live in a world where I know my opponent will do what their deck is designed to do on turns 3-4 than live in a world where we have the former, and a possibility included that these decks will win on turns 1-2 in addition.
If we go down this road of banning Ancient Stirrings, I feel it's just one of the weird Xerox options in Modern that define deck creation. Such as Street Wraith, Mishra's Bauble, Manamorphose, Faithless Looting and Serum Visions. Which in my opinion, makes deck creation in Modern a much more interesting and varied format.
Can we just realistically look at this KCI deck and realize Mox Opal is the most broken card out of the whole deck? Sam Black didn't even loop and just returned Mox Opal 4x to just destroy all of the opponents lands with Spine of Ish Sah.
It's definitely one of the, if not the single, most powerful cards in the deck. But so what? That acknowledgement doesn't really get us anywhere. This just doesn't translate into any applicable banlist or format health considerations. If KCI is bannable, Wizards will likely isolate a KCI specific problem and ban that, as they did with Bloom. Opal has significant splash to inoffensive decks. If KCI is not bannable, us acknowledging Opal as a powerful card doesn't get us anywhere except maybe guiding us to attack Opal in games or prioritize Opal as a KCI pilot.
If you remove Mox Opal, the loop is nearly impossible to create, the combo is guaranteed 1 turn slower, and the deck is more susceptible to hate.
Fast Mana or "Free" is a common theme among most of the banned list. How can a person justify any single Artifact Land on the banned list while Mox Opal is active?
Can we just realistically look at this KCI deck and realize Mox Opal is the most broken card out of the whole deck? Sam Black didn't even loop and just returned Mox Opal 4x to just destroy all of the opponents lands with Spine of Ish Sah.
They've said before that most people, probably newer players, always feel way worse when their spell gets countered than when it gets killed by a removal spell. I think it has to do with removal being at least somewhat narrow where counterspells aren't, and there's something about it actually hitting the board and passing the turn vs it just going straight to the yard.
I personally think the design team shouldn't care about that. Blue and counterspells have been a part of magic since the beginning. I don't get why people complaining about counterspells have any merit. Counterspell should be apart of Modern, I don't really see why it shouldn't
The first notion you bring up, was a survey done shortly after 8th Edition was released. Land Destruction and Counter Magic (according to various sources throughout the years following) were shown to be the worst experiences rated among magic players. It's also quite natural to see logically as well. Some people on these very forums clamor for a Blood Moon banning meanwhile they can essentially lose a game as early as turn 2.
Both mechanics have something very similar, they do not allow the opponent to play Magic. Add that in combination that the game includes Mana Screw or Flood based on it's inherent variation, and you can lose quite a few games due to chance more than anything else.
I would argue that Counterspell wouldn't help the subset of decks or archetypes most people claim they would like to have it for. The other argument which I am a proponent of is I find restrictive countermagic interested in deck design.
Although I am glad for the Absorb printing (an actual card to help against both combo and aggro, I feel people are evaluating the card incorrectly) Undermine and Prohibit are still on my wishlist to enter the Modern format. I just feel robbed as to how many times Prohibit and the Kicker Mechanic could have easily entered Standard and was never printed.
I foresee Stinkweed Imp, and Ancient Stirrings, and a larger chance than most realize; Aether Vial being the ban targets before the Pro Tour at this stage of the game.
I can't see Dredge surviving past this next announcement, the free multiple Lightning Helix to the face has changed so many horrible matchups the deck naturally had without massive graveyard hate. The Ancient Stirrings question is still interesting after all this time, and at this point it would baffle me if KCI and Tron could possibly exist in the next Pro Tour in their current iterations.
I'm unsure of the cards, but this feeling creeps in my skin saying we will have two bans, and two unbans for the next Pro Tour.
One deck loses to Force of Negation, the other deck wins through multiple graveyard hate cards. Seems reasonable.
I have to agree, I don't understand how the host location and year was a bad naming system. This very forum had people always quoting back to Pro Tours such as Los Angeles '09, or Philadelphia '08. Then they changed the marketing to be named by set (we all know how disastrous that was) and now they think scratches on a prison wall is going to work?
This right here, is my homestead argument as to why Wizards needs to stop printing huge sets with next to no purpose. It's so easy for us as a community to evaluate Kaya in mere minutes, but I understand the other side of the coin when developing cards. So stop printing tons of chaff? Limited apparently doesn't get coverage or even a Trophy anymore, our card stock is half of what it used to be since Theros. So now their best design team just does shot in the dark cards for Modern now?
It's pretty damn simple that this community doesn't want shots in the dark card design. It's really frustrating to know that this design team says "We were worried about Phoenix and the potential impact on Modern" and at the same time "Yeah this Kaya card is gonna be super realz for dem Modern players!"
And yet my argument was exactly in the quote you cited. So what are you actually conflating? He responded to my original post, and I restated my argument in the exact citation you posted.
I think you need to step back from this conversation, you are distracting from the main argument I made.
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy#paper
Fair decks using Blue Cantrips in Legacy
6.19% Grixis Control
5.84% Grixis Delver
4.81% UW Stoneblade
4.81% Jeskai Miracles
3.09% Death's Shadow
2.41% UR Wizards
Unfair decks using cantrips
3.78% Ad Naus
3.44% Sneak and Show
2.75% Reanimator
This shouldn't even be contested. Fair decks have always had more efficiency in Legacy with cantrips compared to combo and linear decks.
This deck is super vulnerable to Lightning Bolt which is very common.
Primarily, I agree with two of your notions. Firstly that Stoneforge Mystic is completely acceptable to be in the current Modern format. Even though play patterns could become obnoxious in specific matchups. I refuse to believe 30Bolt.dec should be a reasonable Modern deck.
The second notion is that this community understands Modern more than Wizards. I also agree. I also highly question the current situation with Tom Ross not being in R&D anymore. This pattern happens far too often with too many professional players where they join R&D, then a difference of opinion happens, and all of a sudden pro leaves company. After a while you would begin to think that something internal is very wrong in R&D. Hopefully Jadine joining the team gives some insight into the grinder circuit and how ridiculous some of the unfair decks can be in comparison.
The notion quoted above, is where I will definitely argue with you. I understand your logic of Serum Visions and it's interesting applications with other Modern cantrips. Yet I feel (actually I just KNOW) Preordain is leagues ahead in power level. Although, I believe Preordain is where blue Modern Cantrips should reside.
I recently placed 9th on MTGO RPTQ playing UR Phoenix (LINK HERE). My list is very different from most conventional lists, I get that, but look as to how I chose my cantrip selection. Sleight of Hand is leagues above Serum Visions even in a decklist such as this. I understand the Faithless Looting logic, but did you consider the logic of "I'm desperate for this removal or countermagic" or even perhaps "I need this land drop" or even "If I can keep chaining spells, my TiTI will flip!"
It's not just the synergies listed that we may not ever fully discover the potential behind, it's the fact that if you were only restricted to 4 Cantrips, Preordain would lead the pack undoubtedly.
All being said. I'm fine for it's unbanning, and in favour of it. It would bring the fair decks more forward than the skeptical fears of the increased power level to linear decks. Your prime example is Legacy. Fair decks use cantrips to more success than the unfair ones.
If Wizards keeps these channels open and consistent, while most of the community strikes when they see wrong and promotes when they see good, we can finally come to terms on more issues than simple format health.
From various cited sources, we can agree Wizards has a philosophy of consistency where Ponder is above what they want in a Cantrip and that Serum Visions fits the mold of the format. The same can be said about Red Rituals, where Desperate Ritual fits the mold but Seething Song does not. I feel attacking consistency is such a weird concept for Wizards to take a stance on. They incorporated Scry into recent design, and changed the color pie so that card selection is among more than just the notorious Blue of the past. They just printed a Sorcery Speed Impulse in Ravnica Allegiance and no one bats an eye.
Modern has no Free highly playable levels of counter Magic, and from that perspective of game design over the last 10+ years, we need to understand that cards which break the basic resource of the game (ie; Mana) are the cards we should definitely be under a closer scope than most other offenders.
This is why my stance is and always will be to ban both Mox Opal and Simian Spirit Guide. The cards would never pass current day design, and obviously break the mold of any possibility of interaction in the Modern format by simply "having it all". KCI can't loop effectively without Mox Opal. It also cannot combo faster, or have resilience and perfect mana. Simian Spirit Guide on the other hand, is nowhere near as prevalent as an offender, but it still feeds into tier 2 decks such as Grishoalbrand, Ad Nauseam, and Colorless Eldrazi along with Red Prison Decks denying any game experience whatsoever with a Turn 1 Blood Moon or Ensnaring Bridge.
I'd much rather live in a world where I know my opponent will do what their deck is designed to do on turns 3-4 than live in a world where we have the former, and a possibility included that these decks will win on turns 1-2 in addition.
If we go down this road of banning Ancient Stirrings, I feel it's just one of the weird Xerox options in Modern that define deck creation. Such as Street Wraith, Mishra's Bauble, Manamorphose, Faithless Looting and Serum Visions. Which in my opinion, makes deck creation in Modern a much more interesting and varied format.
If you remove Mox Opal, the loop is nearly impossible to create, the combo is guaranteed 1 turn slower, and the deck is more susceptible to hate.
Fast Mana or "Free" is a common theme among most of the banned list. How can a person justify any single Artifact Land on the banned list while Mox Opal is active?
The first notion you bring up, was a survey done shortly after 8th Edition was released. Land Destruction and Counter Magic (according to various sources throughout the years following) were shown to be the worst experiences rated among magic players. It's also quite natural to see logically as well. Some people on these very forums clamor for a Blood Moon banning meanwhile they can essentially lose a game as early as turn 2.
Both mechanics have something very similar, they do not allow the opponent to play Magic. Add that in combination that the game includes Mana Screw or Flood based on it's inherent variation, and you can lose quite a few games due to chance more than anything else.
I would argue that Counterspell wouldn't help the subset of decks or archetypes most people claim they would like to have it for. The other argument which I am a proponent of is I find restrictive countermagic interested in deck design.
Although I am glad for the Absorb printing (an actual card to help against both combo and aggro, I feel people are evaluating the card incorrectly) Undermine and Prohibit are still on my wishlist to enter the Modern format. I just feel robbed as to how many times Prohibit and the Kicker Mechanic could have easily entered Standard and was never printed.
Why? It was previously banned in Extended for the exact same reasons it's popular now.
I can't see Dredge surviving past this next announcement, the free multiple Lightning Helix to the face has changed so many horrible matchups the deck naturally had without massive graveyard hate. The Ancient Stirrings question is still interesting after all this time, and at this point it would baffle me if KCI and Tron could possibly exist in the next Pro Tour in their current iterations.
I'm unsure of the cards, but this feeling creeps in my skin saying we will have two bans, and two unbans for the next Pro Tour.