MTGNexus

A few comments.

1. Blazing Shoal - I feel like it could come off the ban list because there's no proof that Become Immense + "random +4/+4" is worse than Blazing Shoal + Progenitus. An Infect player drawing 2 Progenitus essentially loses the game, short of their opponent mulling to oblivion or having terrible draws. Remember, Blazing Shoal Infect had Ponder, Gitaxian Probe, and Preordain and was played in a much slower meta. (Sam Black)

2. Bridge from Below - it doesn't promote good game play, but if it doesn't do much, why not let it be? With Faithless Looting now banned, I see absolutely no reason why it couldn't be unbanned. That was the last reason, if there was any, for the incorrect ban from the Hogaak deck. Honestly the card would not be played in Tier 1 or 2.

3. Hypergenesis - it could essentially win the game as early as turn 1 with 2 Simian Spirit Guide. It doesn't need turns to cycle cards to build up. It just needs cards in hand that are tough to impossible to deal with. The only free cyclers are Street Wraith and Faerie Macabre. But metalmusic has a point that it is somewhat weak to discard and very weak to countermagic. I think preparing for what your opponent could Hypergenesis into play does lead to an odd meta, so it's best to leave this one off (and I have 28 Hypergenesis that I bought for $1.50 each when Modern was spoiled) But at the same time, it's kind of a joke that Hypergenesis is banned, but the Neoform deck is allowed to exist. Just saying.

That being said, there are several targets that are more likely than these. #1 and #3 won't be unbanned because they are perceived to do some degenerate %$#%. Become Immense is completely fine in most people's eyes, but the moment someone puts Blazing Shoal and Progenitus together, people are going to call out. #2 probably shouldn't be unbanned soon because Wizards does not want to admit a mistake. Banning Faithless Looting along with the obvious Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis kind of implied a mistake, but there is a lot at stake. Not to mention, there still are only 3 people in the world who want Bridge from Below unbanned...

[mention]FoodChainGoblins[/mention] [mention]metalmusic_4[/mention] [mention]Wraithpk[/mention]

thanks for the explanations on hypergenesis. I understand now why it's banned. It is indeed stronger than living end.

Oh ya, hypergenesis is far stronger than living end as a one shot glass cannon, but the trade off is resiliency. There would be seemingly unstoppable nut draws, but I think there would be the same amount of times the deck just falls on its face. Living ends has a back up plan of casting it's 5 mana creatures, hypergenesis has no such back up plan. It would be a fragile all in combo deck that wins in a blow out quickly or it would do nothing at all for the entire game. Neoform is probably a better comparison than living end, but I do think their are comparisons to living end. But again, I don't think this would ever be unbanned.

I think you'd be surprised at how consistent a Hypergenesis deck can be. They can run a City of Brass and Mana Confluence mana base because when they are casting a spell, they're killing you. That means they can pretty easily play all 12 copies of the 3 mana cascaders, and just fill the rest of their deck with fatties you can't beat. All they have to do is get to 3 mana and cast one of their 12 cascade cards. It's pretty gross.

Hypergenesis is just....broken, I don't see why anyone who thinks about it would come to any other conclusion other than "permanent lock up with no chance of parole".
I suppose on the upside if people are discussing this then there is not a big bogeyman in the room right for the ban-happy people. That said there is probably an Urza shaped one tapping on the window................,

Brought up hypergenesis, because I honestly don't know the card that well, The last time I saw the card it was being used in budget decks in legacy, so I thought it isn't that strong. Anyway, people already explained so I understand it better now.

As for an Urza boogeyman.. I think for now it's just an "imagined" boogeyman, not yet real. Let's wait for tournament results first.

Yeah, for Legacy it's not that strong because they have Sneak Attack and Show and Tell which do basically the same thing without the deck building constriction of not being able to play 1 or 2 drops, which is pretty big in a format where Brainstorm is legal. The Force of Negation decks could beat Hypergenesis, but pretty much nobody else could.

metalmusic_4 wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I agree with some of that. Hypergenesis is certainly vulnerable to counterspells, but also thoughtseize, rule of law type effects, ensnaring bridge and more. Living end's cyclers help it find more cascade cards, while hypergenesis would be more of a one shot glass cannon because you don't cycle through your deck to find peices as well.

I don't think it will ever be unbanned, but I think it could be.

I don't think Wizards will ever unban any of the T4 rule violators or potential T4 rule violators. This includes Blazing Shoal. Even if the cards are technically answerable with disruption, it's very easy for Wizards to believe they don't advance the format. One of Modern's more vocal criticisms has always been that it has too many goldfish/non-interactive/fast decks. HyperG and Shoal unbans play right into this criticism. Forsythe famously asked us to consider the "upside" when thinking of unbans. That is also to say, it's not enough for a card to be "safe." It also needs to benefit the format. Wizards is likely to dislike unbanning cards that contribute to so-called "one shot glass cannon" decks, as there is minimal if any upside to it.

Banlist will be a "No changes," but friendly reminder that Whirza is currently the best deck in Modern. If you aren't playing Whirza variants, you are probably playing the wrong deck (or are adapting to some metagame considerations in your area).

ktkenshinx wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Banlist will be a "No changes," but friendly reminder that Whirza is currently the best deck in Modern. If you aren't playing Whirza variants, you are probably playing the wrong deck (or are adapting to some metagame considerations in your area).

While that may be the case in the short term, it also stands for massive apprehension spending upwards of $500 for a playset of a card actively on a ban watch list. If people aren't buying into and playing Whirza, it's might not just just the fear of a ban, but the massive cost associated with buying key pieces. It doesn't help that one of those pieces is both the most expensive and the most likely to be banned.

While I'm also confident we will see "no changes" for at least the next six months, I would imagine it'll be because we have no meaningful events to tell us otherwise (thus no strong public outcry about anything and no pressure for them to act). But with Whirza already being the best deck, and receiving extremely good upgrades from Eldraine... I would be terrified to buy in.

I watch scg Philly and 11/12 matches on stream till now used urza. This is horrible and a very bad sign, because people like me stopped watching streams now, because everywhere same deck. OK it's only a team event, but I think mox is extremely in danger at the moment. Yesterday after round 5 I switched because it was so boring and watched Kanister.... With urza playing 7:0 bevore he loose first game versus another 7:0 urza. His words after: only urza can beat me, fire with fire

Next round, it is now amulet versus urza. This is unbelievable

Regardless of the "correct" card to ban, WOTC logic seems easy to predict at this point. "We don't like X card. That card is played in a problematic deck. So that card gets banned." In this case, that's Opal.

However, they also never officially take into account SCG events (and especially shouldn't take into account team events). And playing Whirza on MTGO is clunky and awkward, leading to many games you would have won in paper, but may not because of time constraints and opponent refusing to concede to the loop.

So with no official GPs for quite a while and MTGO data being quashed due to limitations of the client, it would take a big push by the community to do anything about it in the next several months.

Still a messy, awkward place to be in for players....

ktkenshinx wrote: ↑

4 years ago

metalmusic_4 wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I agree with some of that. Hypergenesis is certainly vulnerable to counterspells, but also thoughtseize, rule of law type effects, ensnaring bridge and more. Living end's cyclers help it find more cascade cards, while hypergenesis would be more of a one shot glass cannon because you don't cycle through your deck to find peices as well.

I don't think it will ever be unbanned, but I think it could be.

I don't think Wizards will ever unban any of the T4 rule violators or potential T4 rule violators. This includes Blazing Shoal. Even if the cards are technically answerable with disruption, it's very easy for Wizards to believe they don't advance the format. One of Modern's more vocal criticisms has always been that it has too many goldfish/non-interactive/fast decks. HyperG and Shoal unbans play right into this criticism. Forsythe famously asked us to consider the "upside" when thinking of unbans. That is also to say, it's not enough for a card to be "safe." It also needs to benefit the format. Wizards is likely to dislike unbanning cards that contribute to so-called "one shot glass cannon" decks, as there is minimal if any upside to it.

Banlist will be a "No changes," but friendly reminder that Whirza is currently the best deck in Modern. If you aren't playing Whirza variants, you are probably playing the wrong deck (or are adapting to some metagame considerations in your area).

Did Aaron Forsythe really say, "consider the upside when thinking of unbans?" Because I'll try to stop clamoring for cards like Bridge from Below if he did. I'll try.

This is news to me. I always thought that if a card wouldn't be played much or make waves, then it is okay. But maybe I need to work on my thinking here somewhat?

Mtgthewary wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I watch scg Philly and 11/12 matches on stream till now used urza. This is horrible and a very bad sign, because people like me stopped watching streams now, because everywhere same deck. OK it's only a team event, but I think mox is extremely in danger at the moment. Yesterday after round 5 I switched because it was so boring and watched Kanister.... With urza playing 7:0 bevore he loose first game versus another 7:0 urza. His words after: only urza can beat me, fire with fire

Yes that's true that it is kind of annoying and gives the impression that Urza is EVERYWHERE in this event, but at the same time, the D2 metagame breadown is completely different:
Modern
Urza Outcome – 4
Amulet Titan – 4
TitanShift – 3
Mono-Green Tron – 3
Burn – 2
Affinity – 2
Jund – 2
Azorius Control – 2
Infect – 1
Humans – 1
Grixis Death's Shadow – 1
Jund Death's Shadow – 1
Eldrazi Tron – 1
Four-Color Whirza – 1

Only 4 Outcome decks, and 1 Whirza deck. So in no way do the Urza Outcome decks have dominated the modern field. Biases of a team event aside (I know them, we talked about them, no need to bring them up again), the coverage impression is different from the field. By contrast Standard has 15/28 Golos decks, 13 of which are Bant, and Legacy has 11/28 Temur delver decks, both instances of warped formats. Modern, when compared to the other two fields, seems just fine.

OK thanks

As much as I've believed for a long time that Mox Opal was a potential violator in Modern, if something from Urza decks eats a ban, I really hope it's Urza himself. Opal is used in a lot of decks that are totally fine, or even actively bad: Lantern is unique, Affinity (which is nonexistent) and Scales suffer from tons of hate and control/midrange decks with good matchups, and decks like Thopter Sword (or whatever Tezzerator became before adopting Urza) are fine as well. All of the more oppressive Mox Opal decks are connected by a single card -- Urza.

I don't think it should make Modern Horizons look bad either. I'm fine with a few cards in Horizons turning out to be too pushed and eating bans if it means we get to keep other nice cards designed for/reprinted into Modern.

As an aside, I spoke to the local Whirza player at my shop who's gone T4 probably nonstop for the past 2 months if anything should be banned from Whirza, and he said he thinks Urza needs to be banned. He played UB Thopter Sword before Urza and did fine.

Mtgthewary wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I watch scg Philly and 11/12 matches on stream till now used urza. This is horrible and a very bad sign, because people like me stopped watching streams now, because everywhere same deck. OK it's only a team event, but I think mox is extremely in danger at the moment. Yesterday after round 5 I switched because it was so boring and watched Kanister.... With urza playing 7:0 bevore he loose first game versus another 7:0 urza. His words after: only urza can beat me, fire with fire

And in about half of those matches the Urza deck lost, so good job team mates I guess?

TheAnnihilator wrote: ↑

4 years ago

I don't think it should make Modern Horizons look bad either. I'm fine with a few cards in Horizons turning out to be too pushed and eating bans if it means we get to keep other nice cards designed for/reprinted into Modern.

Agreed. The only major thing I want them to change for MH2 is not to make it a premium priced set. It put a lot of financial stress on us.

Urza beat 2:0 Affinity on stream and even the commentary sayed how strong this deck is and you can build it in different ways like ascendancy, all of them are great. My opinion is this deck is far about rest and reason why we see them so often on stream is because it seems it is allways on top tables.

TheAnnihilator wrote: ↑

4 years ago

As much as I've believed for a long time that Mox Opal was a potential violator in Modern, if something from Urza decks eats a ban, I really hope it's Urza himself. Opal is used in a lot of decks that are totally fine, or even actively bad: Lantern is unique, Affinity (which is nonexistent) and Scales suffer from tons of hate and control/midrange decks with good matchups, and decks like Thopter Sword (or whatever Tezzerator became before adopting Urza) are fine as well. All of the more oppressive Mox Opal decks are connected by a single card -- Urza.

I don't think it should make Modern Horizons look bad either. I'm fine with a few cards in Horizons turning out to be too pushed and eating bans if it means we get to keep other nice cards designed for/reprinted into Modern.

As an aside, I spoke to the local Whirza player at my shop who's gone T4 probably nonstop for the past 2 months if anything should be banned from Whirza, and he said he thinks Urza needs to be banned. He played UB Thopter Sword before Urza and did fine.

People have heard it from me before - it is indeed Urza that needs a ban. But then WotC will probably ban Mox Opal, then have to later on ban Urza, Lord High Artificer and Mox Amber, while unbanning Green Sun's Zenith. This seems to be the predictable outcome of all of this. I haven't tested the Paradoxical version yet because my Mox Ambers haven't come yet, but I had a super close match in Round 4 of Las Vegas when I played Hogaak against Outcome and this was before Emry.

On another note, that's cool that your local player got to upgrade his deck with Urza. I always love it when some people stick to certain decks they love and eventually they get a tool that pushes it to Tier 1 (or beyond in this case). I've always loved Thopter/Sword ever since playing it in Extended, but rarely had the guts to try it until Urza was printed.

5/8 of top 8 modern decks in Philly are mox opal decks. Affinity, whirza, 3 urza outcome. This is insane

Mtgthewary wrote: ↑

4 years ago

5/8 of top 8 modern decks in Philly are mox opal decks. Affinity, whirza, 3 urza outcome. This is insane

Take a deep breath and repeat after me:

"Team events are not good data points to ascertain metagame prevalence and metagame dynamics."

The above is especially true in such a new format where multiple cards can affect decks or create new ones.

Well, I have a good answer if Whirza or Urza Outcome is a problem, play Narset, Parter of Veils

Ym1r wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Well, I have a good answer if Whirza or Urza Outcome is a problem, play Narset, Parter of Veils

Assuming they don't just attack and kill her with a 9/9 Construct token.

Snapcaster Mage was the best creature in Modern for so many years, even if Control and Blue as a color struggled a bit. But ever since Modern Horizons came out, 2 creatures have supplanted it. Snappy is not even the best Blue creature now.