If Wizards were to take it's Undermine, Recoil, and more stuff like Countersquall, Vapor Snag, and Geth's Verdict, we would see a control deck pop up; it wouldn't even need a Win Con as your spells tax the opponent's life.
Instead, we get Mill, which Wizards loves enough to keep it the norm, but hates enough to prevent it from ever being playable.
design philosophy back to the elegant days of - rxavage
- Registered User
-
Member for 12 years, 9 months, and 24 days
Last active Thu, Nov, 16 2017 18:07:40
- 1 Follower
- 1,494 Total Posts
- 94 Thanks
-
2
Lyle posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Huge GainersPosted in: Market Street Café ArchiveQuote from Richard Arschmann »Glittering Wish is huge right now at the $20 price point and Magic's smart money bought them when they were $2 apiece. These investors are ecstatic about their huge gains and will be naming their second yacht "Glittering Wish" to commemorate the spike. The Jeskai Ascendancy deck is real and it can win a major event, although I'm not convinced it's ban-worthy. Given that the card is from Future Sight, expect a price tag not dissimilar to that of something like Horizon Canopy. My price target for Glittering Wish is $30 six months from now and I wouldn't lose sleep if I made a bet that it'll hit $35 in that time.
Either you are very excited about a new combo deck or you have a lot of copies of Glittering Wish.
Your prediction seems a bit eccentric. Glittering Wish will probably be a $10 card until a new multicolored card makes it even more viable.
Yes it is ban-worthy. So is Jeskai Ascendency. Combo pieces are often the target for a ban. -
1
Grand Superior posted a message on Modern vs Legacy PopularityThis:Posted in: Magic General
Quote from Bread ConnoisseurAs for GP Richmond having a ton of players attendance wise, it's because it's SCG hosting the tournament. When they host a GP it draws in a lot of people every single time because they are the best tournament organizer in the business hands down.
And this:
Quote from TolarianAcademy13I have said this before, but with the amount of support WOTC has been giving to push Modern, it would simply be embarrassing if Modern isn't able to eventually get higher attendance than Legacy. Legacy/Vintage have a fixed cap because of the Reserved List. Modern doesn't. Combine more WOTC tournaments and a ton of reprints, and of course Modern should be growing.
Are in my mind the main reasons for GP Richmond's success. 4,300 people is way impressive and I'm not trying to diminish the success, but much of that has to do with both Wizards heavily pushing the format and SCG heavily pushing the event. To put my Legacy fan cap on for a second: the fact that Legacy is able to have the 1700 people GP Washington DC and the 1580 player GP Paris while getting next to zero support from Wizards says a lot more about the Legacy format's popularity than GP Richmond does for the Modern format's popularity.
Objectively speaking, I do want both formats to thrive. Both formats are incredibly diverse, are quite different from each other, have different things to offer to players and it makes sense for them to coexist. I'm a staunch Legacy player, but I've said many times on this site that Modern has never looked better to me and I'm slowly acquiring pieces for UWR Control/Midrange just so I can have a deck for Modern.
What annoys me is that Wizards doesn't seem to believe that both formats can coexist. Modern is basically being babied by Wizards and is being treated as something of a favourite child while Legacy is virtually being left for dead. I understand that the Reserve List is to blame for that, but I just wish that they gave Legacy just a bit more support rather than pretending that it doesn't exist. If we can't get a Reserve List abolition, at least throw a bone to Legacy once and while. -
4
Jostin123 posted a message on Sharuum, Everyone's Favorite KittyPosted in: Multiplayer Commander DecklistsQuote from Jostin1233) Karn Silver Golem - This card is only as broken as the pilot's imagination, and required more intimate rules knowledge to exploit to its fullest potential. This card is valuable not just because it interacts with your cards, but because of the many unique applications it can have on your opponents' cards. A lot of people have questioned this card in their lists. As a vintage player, I play with a lot of respect for Karn, and have seen Karn interactions win tournaments. The EDH playables card pool is a lot larger than that of Vintage, so I will put together a segment I will call the Karn Clinic, to illustrate the points where Karn has repeatedly had the most value on the table.
And without further ado, I give you...
The Karn Clinic
Karn, Silver Golem provides Sharuum with a lot of solid interactions, oftentimes extending advantage, either through raw card advantage, resource conversion, or punishing answers. The flowing is an in-depth analysis on Karn interactions. In order to understand the interactions, one must have a good grasp of the comprehensive rules, in order to know when and how it would be beneficial to use Karn. I will break down the interactions with card by card type and/or engine where applicable. Before we do that, I want to explain Karn's unique interaction with combat.
As an attacker, he will get in for 4 damage on a defenseless opponent. However, he is an even better defender. Most of the popular aggro generals lie in the 6 power to 7 power range, making Karn a very efficient defender. In addition, there are specific instances where you do not want to damage or kill the incoming attacker but still protect your life total. He defends very well against the following popular cards and more:
- Academy Rector
- Phyrexian Obliterator
- Mogg Maniac
- Seedguide Ash
- Solemn Simulacrum
- Stalking Vengeance attackers
Equipment - Karn has the ability to function as a supercharged Tower of the Magistrate. To use Karn in this manner, you have to know timing and interaction rules with equipment. From the Comprehensive Rules
- 702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. "Equip [cost]" means "[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery."
- 301.5c An Equipment that's also a creature can't equip a creature. An Equipment that loses the subtype "Equipment" can't equip a creature. An Equipment can't equip itself. An Equipment that equips an illegal or nonexistent permanent becomes unattached from that permanent but remains on the battlefield. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.) An Equipment can't equip more than one creature. If a spell or ability would cause an Equipment to equip more than one creature, the Equipment's controller chooses which creature it equips.
With both these rules, Karn can offer you maximum flexibility with controlling equipment in the game. Karn can slow the tempo that the "Sword" cycle can generate. Karn is also an excellent answer to Umezawa's Jitte as it has as a big butt (which can be bigger after combat) and can keep Jitte from netting counters by unequipping it before combat damage. However, there are instances where you would want to prevent a creature from being equipped. Grafted Exoskeleton kills a card that it becomes unattached from. If your opponent has a card with a death trigger that you want to prevent, by animating G.E. with Karn while the equip trigger is on the stack, the equip effect will fail, preventing that Reveilark from resurrecting a creature, or preventing an Academy Rector from tutoring an enchantment into play. In Sharuum, I have animated a Sword of The Meek as an extra blocker, just to prevent extra damage and get it back when I sac it to Thopter Foundry.
There are lots of different equipment, and Karn's interactions with them can help you skew combat math and play equipment activated abilities and their combat triggers. Just as each equipment has a different ability, so is Karn's utility just as different with each equipment and each change in the board state.
Non-Equipment Non-Creature Artifacts -
Karn has the ability to change an artifact's card type, which is a rare effect in this game. Here are the rules for type changing effects as per the Comprehensive Rules
- 205.1b Some effects change an object's card type, supertype, or subtype but specify that the object retains a prior card type, supertype, or subtype. In such cases, all the object's prior card types, supertypes, and subtypes are retained. This rule applies to effects that use the phrase "in addition to its types" or that state that something is "still a [type, supertype, or subtype]." Some effects state that an object becomes an "artifact creature"; these effects also allow the object to retain all of its prior card types and subtypes.
- Example: An ability reads, "All lands are 1/1 creatures that are still lands." The affected lands now have two card types: creature and land. If there were any lands that were also artifacts before the ability's effect applied to them, those lands would become "artifact land creatures," not just "creatures," or "land creatures." The effect allows them to retain both the card type "artifact" and the card type "land." In addition, each land affected by the ability retains any land types and supertypes it had before the ability took effect.
- Example: An ability reads, "All artifacts are 1/1 artifact creatures." If a permanent is both an artifact and an enchantment, it will become an "artifact enchantment creature."
By gaining the creature type, an artifact is now subjected to all the game rules that creatures are subjected to. Here are some relevant rules creatures are subjected to. As stated in the Comp Rules
- 302.6. A creature's activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can't be activated unless the creature has been under its controller's control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can't attack unless it has been under its controller's control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the "summoning sickness" rule.
Creature Damage and Toughness-
There are rules that govern how creatures deal and receive damage. As per the Comp Rules
- 302.4b A creature's toughness is the amount of damage needed to destroy it.
Karn can animate 0 cost artifacts, killing them on sight. In this regard, Karn is a colorless Gorilla Shaman.
Karn's type changing ability allows him to work very well with specific cards. In this section, I will begin with interactions specific to my list, and then branch out into common interactions with Karn in Sharuum lists, ending in interactions with cards you can anticipate out of different archetypes and generals.
Salvaging Station
The most important of my engines is the Salvaging Station engine. The tap ability is amazing, but it is it's triggered ability that Karn facilitates. My list runs a number of "cogs" (non-creature artifacts which cost 1 mana or less, some people nickname them "trinkets". By animating some of these cogs, you can force Salvaging Station's untap trigger to go on the stack, for your benefit.
Karn + Salvaging Station + Mana Rocks -
Interactive pieces:
A) Seat of the Synod, Ancient Den, Vault of Whispers, Mox Opal
B) Mana Crypt
A) You can mana fix by tapping your colored sources, then using off-color or colorless mana to animate your colored source, killing it, which triggers S.S., which you can then use to reanimate the artifact, tapping it again to fix your colors
B) If you do the above with Mana Crypt, you can generate infinite colorless mana, which will enable you to generate infinite colored mana through the above process. Note that all the above mentioned pieces as well as Darksteel Citadel will enable to generate infinite morbid triggers for no mana deficit to you.
As a side note, whenever you use Karn to kill one of your opponent's artifacts, that morbid trigger will untap YOUR Salvaging Station. Most people forget that.
Karn + Salvaging Station + 1cc cogs
Interactive pieces
A) Tormod's Crypt, Nihil Spellbomb, Dispeller's Capsule, Executioner's Capsule, Expedition Map, Expedition Map
B) Aether Spellbomb, Voyager Staff
C) Sensei’s Divining Top / Nihil Spellbomb
A) When Karn animates these artifacts, Salvaging Station can bring them back for use a second time before your next turn.
B) These cogs don't have a tap ability, so you can use Salvaging Station to reuse these cogs for as many times as your mana allows. Just spend the extra 1 mana to animate before you use them.
C) By animating these cards and sacrificing them, you generate a mini card-draw engine. You can tap your STD, and then with the ability on the stack, sacrifice it to an effect. Then, with the draw ability on the stack, use salvaging station to bring it back. You get to draw a card and since the Top is a new object, it won’t be put on top of your library. It is similar with Nihil Spellbomb: animate it, sacrifice itself to trigger S.S., and you’ll need to pay a black mana to draw a card each cycle.
Also note that this method also has different applications. Salvaging Station, Karn, and mana can:
1) generate enough "persisted" blockers as you have Cogs and mana.
2) Blunt or Prevent net loss of permanents from Annihilator triggers
3) Allows you to make multiple thopter tokens without access to Sword of the Meek by using your cogs, at no net permanent loss to you
4) Allow you to take infinite turns with Time Sieve (when you have a minimum 5 cogs and 5 mana, and is a great way to come back with infinite turns when your Thopter/ Sword combo is broken up.
5) Generate morbid triggers to break open Bitter Ordeal (which, even if not enough to rfg all libraries, can neuter enough from everyone's library to still make a HUGE impact on the game).
6) Protects Sword of the Meek from Crypt effects
7) Protects your cogs from exile effects for availability and reuse later in the game
Salvaging Station + Karn in combat-
Everyone knows that Karn can make blockers, but many don't realize that Salvaging Station offers combat tricks. For 2 mana, you can off an artifact, untapping S.S. And animating it to block. Salvaging Station is an even better attacker. When swinging at an opponent who has a low life total, or attacking a planeswalker an opponent strategically needs to protect, Salvaging Station is a huge body that gains "Vigilance" when it's killed its blocker.
Karn + Trading Post -
Karn allows Trading Post to Regrowth any artifact in your graveyard to your hand at the cost of an artifact in play.
Karn + indestructible artifacts -
Karn allows indestructible artifacts to become your best attackers and blockers in combat. The most common of these is Darksteel Ingot and Darksteel Forge. Indestructible artifacts are the best way to clog the ground and go a long way to giving your planeswalkers the time needed to go ultimate.
Karn + Duplicant -
This is a great way to exile artifacts. This is very useful for dealing with indestructible artifacts, and the new annoying legendary equipment in Theros. You will just want some things to stay dead.
Karn + Tawnos’s Coffin
Protect your non-creature artifacts from targeted removal, or take someone else’s out of the equation.
Karn + Mycosynth Lattice
Karn allows you to Stone Rain any land in play for 1 colorless mana
Karn vs. Intruder Alarm -
Karn can allow you to generate a wealth of mana by animating your artifacts in response to the I.A. triggers. You can also animate Oblivion Stone and use I.A. to put counters on multiple permanents a turn.
Karn vs. Drop of Honey/Porphyry Nodes –
Save your creatures by animating other creatures for these effects to pick off.
Karn + The Abyss
The Abyss pick off non-artifact creatures every turn, keeping a contained battlefield contained. Karn allows you to use your mana artifacts as an army to swarm the table to close out the game that The Abyss can’t touch.
Karn vs. Wrath of God effects
Karn can punish those who use sweeper effects by animating their artifacts so they’ll die along with all the creatures on the table, or animate your own artifacts to save them from some conditional sweepers (such as Barter in Blood). I’ve killed many artifacts in response to Sunblast Angel’s trigger by animating the same artifacts it’s caster used to pay its cost.
Karn vs. green removal
Most popular green removal spells in EDH have a clause specifying that it cannot kill creatures, such asWoodfall Primus, Terastadon, and Sylvan Primordial. By using Karn, you can animate an artifact in response to the targeted spell, saving your artifact.
These are only a few of the hundreds of niche interactions where Karn’s ability can alter the outcome of an interaction, board state, or line of play. His use is only limited to the rules knowledge and awareness of the pilot.
-
6
Galspanic posted a message on Dear Commander - Fixing EDHI feel like the OP missed a few things though...Posted in: Commander (EDH)
Step #5 - Play EDH outside of local game shops. There are plenty of other venues that offer better opportunities to socialize. If you live in a decent sized city, bars and restaurants are great places to play MTG (assuming you pay your table tax and are careful about keeping liquids away from cards). Schools tend to draw more ridicule than they are worth, so invite people from school over to your house. It may sound less social than a game shop, but there seems to be a natural psyche in most shops that reinforces whining and bad habits. People can't adapt as easily (from observations).
Step #6 - Don't be awkward anti-social geeks. Don't use the game as a wall you put between yourself and other people. It's supposed to be the thing that gives your hands something to do and your mouth something to talk about. The main goal is still to hang out, talk, and interact with other humans. This world can be pretty damn dark and cold for a lot of us. Don't blow the easy chances given to you to warm it up a bit.
Step #7 - Girls. Seriously, having more women involved in the grand EDH-Meta game might help people accomplish #5 and #6. The game is so painfully male that the socialization we have misses a lot of what it could accomplish. A more diverse play group in terms of age, gender, and interests keeps things interesting, but also fosters more actual discussion - as opposed to passive aggressive douchebaggery like most of the people here report.
The cards aren't the problem. We are. -
21
Arcadic posted a message on Candy coated MM'sIf you have spoilers, post them. If you have the need for attention, don't postPosted in: Rumor Mill Archive -
2
Infallible posted a message on [[Official]] Current Modern Banned List Discussion (1/2013 - 4/2013)Posted in: Modern ArchivesQuote from KirblarThe big problem with GSZ is the Dryad Arbor interaction - it's essentially the world's most ridiculous split card Llanowar Elf.
i would honestly argue that 8 Deathrite Shaman's able to be put into play on turn 2 is a lot more problematic than a ****ing Dryad Arbor is to the game right now. Just go look at legacy; know how often you're pulling an Arbor turn 1? Unless you don't have a turn one Mom/Hierach you are never doing that. It's just not that good.
I think we're all coming to understand (Aside from Bocephus who seemingly wants us all to play Grizzly Bears vs Grey Ogre, and that's his right) that the ban list is too big as of right now. The format has grown, has shown what it is to become and we really are looking at a gigantic cardpool that is hindered by cards that are too powerful and narrow literally every other option. Not to mention when was the last time you saw THIS MANY midrange decks competitive. Ever?
Maybe it's because DRS, Dark Confidant, Thoughtseize and Goyf are the best cards in Modern. Maybe because Snapcaster Mage +Remand can only do so much. Maybe it's because we have no functional reprint of Wasteland and maybe it's because WotC has banned everything that resembles control or combo of standard past that could be lumped in with this, therefore diversifying?
This is a format where GSZ and Ancstral Vision's are too strong. This is a format where Dark Confidant and Lightning Bolt aren't too strong.
This is an ass backwards format. Shutting up and going with "WOTC KNOW WHAT THEYRE DOING" and just accepting it is not right and none of us should/are doing that. Can anyone say the list is perfect? Honestly? How many cards do you feel do nothing? I can spot at least five.
Look at Legacy's ban list. Know how many cards do nothing? like one. Look at Standard. How many decks look so similar it's gross? Isn't the atmosphere, aside from Eggs, pretty damn similar?
Are we bored yet? Cus' we will be. -
11
rukcus posted a message on Is legacy of dying format?Posted in: Legacy (Type 1.5)Quote from ValarinSince when does opinion = agenda? I have an agenda as much as Legacy players feel threatened by anyone who disagrees with them that Legacy is the best thing in the entirety of Magic.
Anyway, it's kind of a pointless debate to have. Time will tell who was right and who was wrong. I'm pretty comfortable in my opinion, since Vintage has shown us exactly what happens when formats consist of cards on the reserve list that get more and more expensive over time. I have no idea how anyone can look at Vintage and not see the parallels to Legacy.
Several of us have demonstrated growth to you. You blatantly ignore the information and continue to froth at the mouth that "legacy is dying", but cannot offer concrete evidence to support it. Turns out, opinions can be quite wrong and damaging. I'd be delighted if you showed up proof positive that your agenda is founded in fact.
Until that point, please refrain from sounding off every few days about your death wishes.
Specifically, this earlier post:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=9676866&postcount=91 -
5
Tormod posted a message on [[Official]] Current Modern Banned List Discussion (Next announcement: 4/29/13)Hello,Posted in: Modern Archives
I just want to interject and clear up some facts and add some historical information.
In reference to standard cawblade and the banning of SFM and JMS. Many people were very surprised, shocked and angry that they banned 2 cards. It would have been the equivalent of Banning BBE AND Deathrite Shaman for Jund.
Also many believe that DCI went after the wrong targets with the banning of SFM and JMS, or that only 1 of those cards should have been banned. The real consistency and power behind Caw-blade was Squadron hawk + JMS. Being able to play Squadron hawk, grab 3 more hawks and brainstorm those excess hawks away and turn them into profitable cards and the ability to supply a line of blockers while the Caw player developed board position.
It should also be mentioned that during the caw-blade period, that standard was weak in power level with the exception of caw blade and Valakut. There was no successful mid range decks at the time.
THIS IS BUSTED (Legacy)
Generic responses in reference to Legacy comments like "You need FOW or you auto lose" are an absence of experience and knowledge of the format. Yesterday I asked a couple of workers who I know play standard and limited. I asked them about their honest thoughts were about Legacy. Both of them admitted to not knowing the format and how it plays, but their perception was pretty typical. "Its a turn 1 format, its expensive" Even though both these guys didn't have any first hand knowledge of Legacy, this was their impression. I'm really not sure how and when Legacy developed this reputation but its quite uneducated and false. Statements made from a place of ignorance are usually quite absurd, laughable and just plain wrong. But it does raise the importance that optics and the impression of a format are very real.
BANNINGS AND RESPONSE
The latest community response to the banning of BBE and Seething Song are mixed. Some are happy, some are angry, some blindly follow the gospel of the DCI, some are glad they play Legacy. The underlying discussion is the subtle message is What is modern? At the establishment of Modern there was massive banning sweeps that imprisoned the archetypes of yesteryear and it was noticeable that the Jund archetype was not hit. It might have been an over-site on the DCI, but I imagine all these Jund players are feeling shafted like the cawblade, valakut, dredge... players who's decks were hit with the initial banning. The difference is that Jund players believed and were told their decks were fine since they weren't hit by initial bans. This leads to the impression that Modern is the Ban hammer format. Yes Valakut was unbanned and rightfully so because it was always a turn 4 or later combo. And this gave an impression that perhaps the DCI was finally starting to let up, they were going to allow Modern to develop its own identity. The banning of BBE and more specifically Seething Song has throw the reputation of Modern being the ban hammer format 100 years into the past, and it will be quite difficult going forward for Modern to shed this reputation.
The message going forward is that Modern will become the "People's format" supported by reprints from "Papa Wizards" watched over by "Big Brother DCI" and any one deck that stands out or is a little more successful, consistent and wins more than the other decks will have a reduction in power to be brought in line for the "Betterment of the Group"
To me It feels more like a "boxed game product" where there is equal access to everything. Some people will love this kind of format, and some won't. I personally do not. I would have liked the format to mature and develop its own answers to Jund as it was doing so with UWR. The problem with this is also that people want their heroes, champions and villains. That is what helps give formats an identity.
Sadly, we have been denied will never know the story and final outcome of how the Villian Jund terrorized modern and was challenged by a would be hero in UWR. Instead we are left to live with the conclusion that the sky opened up and a mighty voice commanded that all Bloodbraid Elves be banishes, and by the way Seething Song too. -
2
Jusstice posted a message on Grand Prix Toronto DiscussionPosted in: ModernQuote from raygunYou do realize that the problems with the format are much deeper than Jund's dominance, right?
There's two things you can do in this format: you can play fair or play unfair.
If you want to play unfair, you've got your choice of combo decks. None of them can win against a prepared opponent because they'll beat you with the eight cards they put in their sideboard to beat you, but you're pretty good otherwise. The combo decks all operate on different principles (to some extent) but this holds true. I'm here regarding decks like Affinity and Infect as part of this "unfair" category.
If you want to play fair, you have to play a bunch of cards that can win the game on their own. That's all Jund is- it's the best deck at that task. You can't play for various synergies because they're too hard to assemble when they don't immediately win the game, and you can't really play conditional cards because they're conditional.
So when you go into a tournament, you have two options:
A. Do I want to play Jund?
or
B. Do I want to play deck X and hope people are unprepared for it?
I don't think a simple banning can fix that problem- maybe you ban Bloodbraid Elf, but there's still going to be a fair deck of choice (or maybe you encourage some diversity, but those decks will mostly play the same anyways- they'll feel like the same deck).
I don't know what the fix for this problem is. The problem isn't Jund. It's the format as a whole. It needs to be fixed, but I'm not sure how to do that.
This is a good post. I don't want to critique it right away, because I think that the problems it points to are real. Whenever a strategy that forgoes synergy for raw power is competitive, there will be one single best deck of that strategy. Either Bloodbraid Elf is better than Huntmaster of the Fells, or it isn't. It gets boring. I think this is the main problem people have with Jund being the most represented deck. It doesn't have any personality.
But then instead of expounding on this problem until it seems like it threatens the viability of the entire format, I have to take a step back, compare and contrast, and assess the scope of what is actually going on.
First, what are we talking about when we say "fair"? A bunch of unconditional cards that each win the game on their own. Kind of specific. Does the inclusion of any synergy make a deck "unfair"? The distinction is pretty self-defeating if it is. And if some synergy is allowed, why aren't decks like Affinity and Infect considered "fair"? They both can be stopped along the traditional axes of interaction between players - creatures plays and creature removal. Is Infect + pump so powerful a synergy that it escapes the definition "fair"? Was Zoo "fair"? See, I don't think we're really talking about the ability to win the game with any draw, or avoiding synergy. I think we're talking about interacting along the traditional axis of creature and removal on the removal side ONLY. Jund is basically Removal + Draw + Goyf. I'd call that creature control, or just Control. Aggro is represented by Tokens, Affinity and Infect, they've just been forced toward synergies because of how powerful removal Control is, and so they escape the OP's definition of "fair". But whatever you call it, make sure to do it the justice of knowing what you mean.
Second, if we acknowledge that what people mean by "fair" is just creature-based control, is anything else possible with the "fair" strategy? Is it possible to have more than one control deck in a format? Has the best "fair" deck, using the OP's definition, ever been anything other than a collection of the best cards? I'm not sure. Looking back, I can only see one best control deck in each format. It seems that once you decide that you're going to play an answer-oriented strategy, the best answers are going to present themselves, you'll decide your colors accordingly, and then finally you will include a few of the best threats and draw cards in those colors. Pretty telling that Jund is called "Jund", a color combination, and not Liliana-Control, or Bob's and Goyfs, or some other such. Bolts and Decays and Inquisitions aesthetically can't work as the poster-boys of the deck, even though they are.
Third, what is the problem? Is it that Jund is too dominant, that Jund is too boring? Is it that everything else is too slanted toward synergy, such that it's easily "hated out"? If it's too boring, that's sort of a problem with the anti-strategy, isn't it? Absent any synergy, which cards are better is pretty clear, and it will play like, feel like and be the same deck. So all you can do is neuter that entire strategy, which might be disastrous or even impossible due to how the strategy works. Is it that Jund is too dominant? That's seems more related to representation than power. Jund's good matchups don't favor it that heavily, and it's bad mathups don't have it at that bad of a dog. So, Jund isn't that powerful. The decision to play it never guaranteed anyone's tournament. And admitting that it's solely representation, won't the anti-synergy strategy always be overrepresented, simply because players are wary of sideboard hate? That leads into the third thing, is it that you want to play a different deck without the vulnerability of being "hated out"? If we had a synergistic anti-creature deck more powerful than Jund that didn't have any specific hate for it, what would that look like? Faeries? Is that better? Maybe it is, maybe it's not. You want a deck with personality, but then when a deck with personality becomes dominant, it loses personality and its cards just become the best cards of its type. Likewise, that's self-defeating.
So, I admit that these problems are real. They're just intractable. The only issue that's not just flat-out intrinsic to the deck type is with players being courageous enough to run decks that there's sideboard hate for. And what can you do about players being lazy? Retweak the rating system, stop grandfathering players into pro events, and just making the pro player circles more vulnerable to competition, maybe. But why? Are there enough players who want to play the "best" deck without testing it that they just can't read a little more into tournament results, appropriately minimize the hype in their own minds, and just play something they like more? Why does enough pro's going the safe route mean that so many other players HAVE to play Jund too?
I guess just something to think about. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
keep ruining the format
1
yay more bans!
2
2
1
2
and no i don't play the deck.
1
1
this is the saddest part of this format and pretty much the reason I have no desire to play modern anymore. nothing is ever safe. I don't want to play super standard. WOTC needs to make a new format to make standard more appealing for the people that dislike the fact that the cards rotate. Let them regulate that format with a heavy hand. Or the players need to create a format of their own.
1
1