Tomatotime wrote: ↑4 years ago
ktkenshinx wrote: ↑4 years ago
The only difference is that in Modern, we know to scoop to certain T3-T4 board states and lines.
We also know to play those powerful decks.
Emphasis added, this part is highly dubious and in my opinion are large factor in the current identity crisis facing Modern as a format. The bolded statement is not a given.
I should be more specific. I should specify that more players in Modern know to play the powerful decks than in other formats (except Standard). I'm mostly talking about Pioneer here, where we'll see awesome League dumps, similar to Modern, even if we know at the competitive level we should all be playing only a few powerful options. In Modern, that means playing stuff like G Tron, E Tron, Urza, Amulet, GDS, etc. In Pioneer, this means playing Green Devotion, Black Aggro, Bant Field, and a few others. In both formats, players will play other decks for fun or because they have the reps on them, but that doesn't make those optimal choices. We just recognize the best, optimal choices more in Modern than in Pioneer.
Its fine to say that all aspects of MTG are having the similar issues, but it is not the Modern communitie's obligation to lobby on behalf of all these other formats they don't even play, it is perfectly reasonable for Modern plays to lobby for Modern interests and to be utterly ambivalent to the other formats, after all, for a long stretch of time, the rest of the formats were ambivalent to Modern as well.
Don't lobby on those issues for the sake of other formats. Lobby on those issues for the sake of Modern and look for evidence of the widespread problem in other formats. Design/development/testing failures are Modern issues. Players focusing unwarranted criticism on Modern under the illusion that other contemporary formats are healthier is also a Modern issue. The former leads to increasingly unhealthy metagame and overpowered threats. The latter leads to format decline.
Mtgthewary wrote: ↑4 years ago
We can say bannings doesn't solve problems in long term, but this doesnt mean we should not ban. Look at hoogak as example. Should we wait till wotc change philosophy or print good answers? Sometimes we MUST ban, even we agree on failures of wotc
There's a significant difference between lobbying for a Hogaak ban, which I loudly did for most of the summer, and lobbying for many of the other bans I've seen over the past few pages. Hogaak's ban case had overwhelming data to support it. There is no similar case for a Tron piece or Opal with the current data. It's always okay to make data-driven ban cases to request Wizards ban egregious issues. Once we start taking chip shots at disliked decks without good data, even if those decks aren't really provable "problems," that should be a signal for us to look elsewhere. In these smaller cases, the uproar should be about design/development/testing failures, not bans.
Modern has some undiagnosable health issues which feel very subjective. For instance, it's hard to make a data-driven case about why something like Tron is a problem. Its win rates are fine, its metagame share is fine, it has plenty of bad matchups, it doesn't have recent, high profile finishes. It just feels bad. That puts us in the Justice Stewart position of identifying problems: "I know it when I see it." I want us to look past "Tron feels bad" to "Wizards continues to ninja-buff proactive decks with overly pushed stuff like Ulamog, Ballista, Karn Creator, Blast Zone, etc. while answers are stagnant or worse." That's the real issue to focus on.
Mtgthewary wrote: ↑4 years ago
By the way, I watch at this moment mkm series and urza is ahead with 8:0. Are anyone here, really anyone is here surprised about? Maybe we should explain them mtgo has less urza since 1 week? Or maybe his opponents they just need selling their modern decks for Pioneer?
As I and others have said for months, Urza is the secret/not-so-secret best deck in Modern. But that is irrelevant at this time because Modern will always have such a deck, and there has been no major event to test its true power. This weekend will change that with GP Columbus. EVEN IF Urza ends up busted at the GP, that doesn't mean we should preemptively go after decks with bannings because they feel busted. Dozens of Modern decks have felt broken before they were proven acceptable in larger proving grounds. We must always wait for the data to ban cards.