[Official] State of Modern Thread (B&R 07/13/2020)

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 582
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 2 years ago

They have basically exposed themselves with this Hogaak fiasco. Now it's painfully obvious that they don't have their finger on the pulse of Modern. They aren't designing cards for Modern very well, and they can't get their bans right either.

They look like a bunch of clowns right now and they know it. We might actually get a long overdue unban or two as an apology.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 857
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

robertleva wrote:
2 years ago
We might actually get a long overdue unban or two as an apology.
Sorry to be a negative Nancy, but I seriously doubt this.

They 100% are not going to do an emergency unban with an emergency ban. They may do an unban at the next announcement. That's always a possibility, albeit a tiny one. But there is no way they say, "we made a mistake with Hogaak...we're glad Bridge from Below is banned so it won't hurt our design space for future Hogaak like cards … btw, here are 2 new toys." That's not happening.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
Why do you carry this torch for Bridge? Like beyond an ideological reason, it's a net negative to exist.

.................

It did either NOTHING in modern (last 5 years?) times, or it let you throw X costed Creatures into the yard for nothing, hoping to power out Vengevines on Turn 1, with some zombies.

That wasnt good enough, because it folds to hate, so what it did THEN was let you combo kill your opponent by making them mill on turn 2, while you had 20+ power on board.

Convince me thats worth existing in the format.
I'll carry the torch for bridge. It was the wrong ban. The turn 2 kill combo was facilitated by recurring hogaak over and over for 0 mana cost using the bridge zombies and delving cards from your grave you milled yourself with hogaak. With hogaak removed this combo doesn't work the same. Havong one banned card is better than two banned cards.

WOTC acknowledged they looked at hogaak, alter and bridge as possible bans to solve the problem. Then they picked the wrong one. It's that simple. They were wrong. BBE vs DRS, I know I keep making that comparison but it's really accurate. They were wrong. They looked at three options and just picked the wrong one. The free 8/8 trampler has proven broken in multiple modern builds now while bridge saw very little play at all for all of modern's existance until a few months ago. The problem is obvious now, but it was the problem the entire time.


Here is a quote from ktk:
"In summary, Hogaak represents a unique situation we have never seen before. We have exceptionally dominant performance numbers and a major impact on sideboards/graveyard hate (admittedly, not necessarily limited to Hogaak). More alarmingly, however, this is the continuation of a failed/insufficient ban decision in July 2019 to address a deck that was already proven to be broken. It continues to overperform and break Modern events, justifying an emergency ban"

Bridge was a failed ban. That means it wasn't the problem. That is why I am complaining about the bridge ban so much much. They made the wrong ban and it is now clear.

User avatar
Albegas
Posts: 149
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Albegas » 2 years ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
robertleva wrote:
2 years ago
We might actually get a long overdue unban or two as an apology.
Sorry to be a negative Nancy, but I seriously doubt this.

They 100% are not going to do an emergency unban with an emergency ban. They may do an unban at the next announcement. That's always a possibility, albeit a tiny one. But there is no way they say, "we made a mistake with Hogaak...we're glad Bridge from Below is banned so it won't hurt our design space for future Hogaak like cards … btw, here are 2 new toys." That's not happening.
wouldn't be that weird. It's basically what happened with Eldrazi Winter. We lost Twin, then Eldrazi Aggro ruined the format, and finally we got Ancestral Vision and Sword of the Meek afterEye bit the dust. They won't unban anything that they weren't already considering, but it wouldn't be so weird to get new toys after two bans that occurred in such a short window

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
2 years ago
I'll carry the torch for bridge. It was the wrong ban. The turn 2 kill combo was facilitated by recurring hogaak over and over for 0 mana cost using the bridge zombies and delving cards from your grave you milled yourself with hogaak. With hogaak removed this combo doesn't work the same. Havong one banned card is better than two banned cards.
That still doesnt tell me that Bridge was worth keeping around. Extract Hogaak from the situation, and we have most recently Bridgevine. Do I want decks like Bridevine kicking around? Do really want for 'ultra fast Aggro/Combo' in the format? Absolutely not.

If they wont kick out the pillar that holds up a lot of these decks (Looting) then ya, I guess cards like Bridge need to be banned. Was it Hogaak that drove the deck? Absolutely. Does that mean Bridge added a net VALUE to the format? Was it doing anything within the meta other than being just one more Aggro deck?

I dont see how. So we lost one more version of an aggro deck. I wont lose any sleep, I would just play Dredge, or Phoenix (R, RG, UR) or Prowess, or Bloo, or Humans, or Merfolks, or Spirits, or Burn, or Skelementals, or. or. or.

Aggro is a dime a dozen in Modern. Bridge is not a card that is worth having around waiting to be a problem.

I agree, WRONG BAN. That doesnt mean its still not fine to be banned, if that makes sense.
UR Control UR

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 857
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

No, I'm just saying it would be weird to do an emergency UNBAN. They could have emergency banned Eye of Ugin any time, but they did not do it. They let it go on for too long in my opinion. As for Hogaak, they did a ban much quicker, but hit the wrong card. I don't think there's ever been an unban that hasn't been at a regularly previously designated unban announcement. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

[mention]idSurge[/mention] - Bridge Vine (w/ Bridge, w/o Hogaak) is a much worse Aggro deck in Modern than at least 5 other Aggro decks. I don't like my opponent doing Monastery Swiftspear X 3 on turns 1 and 2 on the play, then Manamorphose X 3, Faithless Looting away 2 Arclight Phoenix, Lava Dart X 3 and flashback, attack with 3 creatures bigger than Emrakul, the Aeon's Torn, but I don't call out for any banning here. This type of vomit everything out as quickly as you can deck has a place in Modern and many players love it.

*If Wizards had asked any competent player of Hogaak with Bridge before doing a ban, they would know what's the problem. Here is the strategy of the deck boiled down.
Turn 1 - put as much stuff in the yard as you can and dig for Hogaak and Altar of Dementia
Turn 2 - either get out Hogaak or just cast Altar (I know each one has their merits, depending on the matchup)
Turn 3 - cast the one that you didn't cast on turn 2, then mill through your deck until you find all your Bridges (that aren't in your hand already), stop short of milling yourself, then mill your opponent, Convoke using Hogaak and Zombies for another Hogaak on the stack, sacrifice the one Convoking, blah blah blah blah blah

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they put a dart board (like Look at me, I'm the DCI) and then threw darts at 3 choices and chose the one with the most darts.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

Hers the thing FCG.

Let's pretend Bridge wasn't banned, and Hogaak wasn't printed. In any world in which Bridgevine becomes Tier 1, what's the answer? A deck that can go off on Turn 1.

The answer? Main Deck Surgical, and Voids Main or Side.

If the deck isn't competitive, it's just waiting for something like Hogaak.

If the deck is competitive, it's too fast and warping.

The card was never going to be fine.

PS: Push or Path the Mentor. :p
UR Control UR

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

Want to vomit your hand?

Phoenix, especially R
Affinity
Burn
Elves

Want to do it Turn 1 and present an impossible board? We'll we call that broken, and it doesn't deserve to exist.
UR Control UR

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 857
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

But that could happen to any card. Do you know what my brother's friend did with 4 Grindstone, among other Mill cards? He threw the deck in the trash, yes, a deck that was worth about $25 at the time. Why? He kept losing to my brother and I. His deck was not competitive and there's only so much losing someone can take, even if Mill is his favorite archetype. Many years later, Wizards printed a little card called Painter's Servant and Grindstones went over $25. I still think about that deck that he threw in the trash and wonder. It makes me respect even the cheapest Magic card because a 1 penny rare could end up being worth $50 some day. I gave $5 bills to people years ago in the form of Dark Confidant. I should have kept those $5 bills because now they're $45 bills if that exists.

Wizards can always print something to break another card. I bet I can figure out a way to break some card that's average to good in Modern currently. It's similar to how I feel about Preordain. If it was unbanned, which it never would be, it would slot into UR Phoenix and UW Control. Those decks could cause a problem, but is it the Preordain or is it the Manamorphose, Looting, Phoenix, T3feri, Narset, etc? Who knows? Maybe the Preordain is the most busted of these?

The card was indeed fine. Wizards has been pushing graveyard strategies for "Lord knows what reason" recently. Outside of maybe Felidar Guardian, has Wizards even printed cards that were forcing them to ban Birthing Pod? Forget SfM, Twin, GSZ, Preordain, would Birthing Pod even be Tier 1 in today's meta?

*As a further example, look at the price history of the mtg card Flash. This was a card worth $1-3 for its whole existence. A deck was brewed up on MTGSALVATION. Yes, mtgsalvation people created that deck. That's why I will always respect mtgsalvation no matter what anybody says. Flash went to around $20-30 if I remember correctly (now I should go look at the price history). I remember seeing mtgsalvation posts with Protean Hulk and thinking, oh damn that's busted. I literally bought up every single Flash I could around town, totaling close to 20 of them only. I not only played the deck, but resold those cards for no smaller than 1000% profit. Why? Because I saw the deck on mtgsalvation and tested it to be busted in Vintage, Extended, and I think Standard at the time, but maybe not Standard legal.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

No, not every card has a chance to 'go off' simply by existing in the yard.

I'm not saying we should ban anything not seeing play. I'm am saying Bridge was never going to increase anything but the % of degeneracy in the format, a format with way more than enough of that.

I get what your saying, many cards could break.

We'll, Bridge did, and it's not like it improves the format.
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
metalmusic_4 wrote:
2 years ago
I'll carry the torch for bridge. It was the wrong ban. The turn 2 kill combo was facilitated by recurring hogaak over and over for 0 mana cost using the bridge zombies and delving cards from your grave you milled yourself with hogaak. With hogaak removed this combo doesn't work the same. Havong one banned card is better than two banned cards.
That still doesnt tell me that Bridge was worth keeping around. Extract Hogaak from the situation, and we have most recently Bridgevine. Do I want decks like Bridevine kicking around? Do really want for 'ultra fast Aggro/Combo' in the format? Absolutely not.

If they wont kick out the pillar that holds up a lot of these decks (Looting) then ya, I guess cards like Bridge need to be banned. Was it Hogaak that drove the deck? Absolutely. Does that mean Bridge added a net VALUE to the format? Was it doing anything within the meta other than being just one more Aggro deck?

I dont see how. So we lost one more version of an aggro deck. I wont lose any sleep, I would just play Dredge, or Phoenix (R, RG, UR) or Prowess, or Bloo, or Humans, or Merfolks, or Spirits, or Burn, or Skelementals, or. or. or.

Aggro is a dime a dozen in Modern. Bridge is not a card that is worth having around waiting to be a problem.

I agree, WRONG BAN. That doesnt mean its still not fine to be banned, if that makes sense.
Thank you for agreeing bridge was the wrong ban. THAT is the most important point here.

I'm summing up your counter point as "that card wasn't worth keeping around, didn't add anything important, could have been broken in the future, who cares, play something else." That may be a bit blunt and I apologize if I summed that up too insensitivity. I just wholeheartedly disagree with this principle. Under this logic we could justify a ban on raging goblin, incinerate, twin, sfm or almost anything. Are those cards and many others "worth keeping around?" A better question is "is this card deserving of a ban?" And there is room for disagreement on this question, but that needs to be the question we ask. Modern from its conception was supposed to be an inclusive format where you can play just about any kind of strategy in a non-rotating format effectivly forever, love it, master it, and you get to keep having fun with it. For that to happen consistently cards should only be banned when absolutely required. That's it, that's the whole deal. If bridge wasn't the problem it shouldn't be banned. That's it.
Now if you think bridge is deserving of a ban then we can have a completely different discussion based on its merits. But an idea like "who wanted that around anyway, nothing lost" is IMO not in the spirit of modern or the game.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 857
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

I guess we just see it differently then.

Cards like Simian Spirit Guide, Manamorphose, arguably Chalice of the Void/Ensnaring Bridge/Blood Moon don't improve the format. It doesn't mean that they don't deserve to exist. Heck, my favorite creature isn't ever going to do anything fair, Griselbrand. Do people even know how busted this card is? It makes Yawgmoth's Bargain look like trash.

Do the cards Boil, Choke, or Flashfires improve Modern?
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
2 years ago
Thank you for agreeing bridge was the wrong ban. THAT is the most important point here.

I'm summing up your counter point as "that card wasn't worth keeping around, didn't add anything important, could have been broken in the future, who cares, play something else." That may be a bit blunt and I apologize if I summed that up too insensitivity. I just wholeheartedly disagree with this principle. Under this logic we could justify a ban on raging goblin, incinerate, twin, sfm or almost anything. Are those cards and many others "worth keeping around?" A better question is "is this card deserving of a ban?" And there is room for disagreement on this question, but that needs to be the question we ask. Modern from its conception was supposed to be an inclusive format where you can play just about any kind of strategy in a non-rotating format effectivly forever, love it, master it, and you get to keep having fun with it. For that to happen consistently cards should only be banned when absolutely required. That's it, that's the whole deal. If bridge wasn't the problem it shouldn't be banned. That's it.
Now if you think bridge is deserving of a ban then we can have a completely different discussion based on its merits. But an idea like "who wanted that around anyway, nothing lost" is IMO not in the spirit of modern or the game.
I agree, if we wanted to kill the deck with Hogaak, it was the wrong ban, clearly.

As to the rest...kind of. I realize I'm taking a pretty hard line on this, but no. You cannot make this argument for Raging Goblin. or Incinerate.

Those cards are not, and have not, been part of a combo kill at the top of one of the most competitive formats within the game. Bridge was. You can point to Hogaak, you can point to Altar, but Bridge was just as much a part of it, in fact without Bridge, the Altar line is gone no? So really...no. Bridge was a problem.
Modern from its conception was supposed to be an inclusive format where you can play just about any kind of strategy in a non-rotating format effectivly forever, love it, master it, and you get to keep having fun with it.
Yeah wouldnt that be nice? Unfortunate indeed Wizard's doesnt see it that way, or at least, they didnt.

I guess we just see it differently then.

Cards like Simian Spirit Guide, Manamorphose, arguably Chalice of the Void/Ensnaring Bridge/Blood Moon don't improve the format. It doesn't mean that they don't deserve to exist. Heck, my favorite creature isn't ever going to do anything fair, Griselbrand. Do people even know how busted this card is? It makes Yawgmoth's Bargain look like trash.

Do the cards Boil, Choke, or Flashfires improve Modern?
SSG? Its not particularly good for the format, but it also has not been part of breaking the format. Rest assured if its found to be in a deck that is busted, it will be banned. Most of us I think would not be surprised to see that happen.

Manamorphose? I am positive its been on a watch list for a very long time. If this was 2015, it would have been banned to bring Phoenix down to earth.

Chalice/Ensnaring/Blood Moon/Choke/Boil/Flashfires? Hate is hate. Without it, we get degeneracy. They actively do improve the format, by keeping other things in check. Chalice hits nearly every deck I have played since 2014, and Choke/Boil almost certainly does because Island is the best card ever printed. Still, those are improvements to the format, just by existing.

Bridge is far closer to SSG/Manamorphose, than Chalice/Ensnaring/Moon/Etc, and it was DEMONSTRABLY part of a broken line of play. This is not a hypothetical. Bridge was part of a broken combo that played beyond the accepted bounds of Modern.
UR Control UR

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 857
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
Bridge is far closer to SSG/Manamorphose, than Chalice/Ensnaring/Moon/Etc, and it was DEMONSTRABLY part of a broken line of play. This is not a hypothetical. Bridge was part of a broken combo that played beyond the accepted bounds of Modern.
Okay, that argument won't work. How about this one?

Since people make comparisons to Eldrazi Winter all the time. What if Wizards banned Thought-Knot Seer and Reality Smasher instead of Eye of Ugin? Those cards are undercosted beaters that are made a lot stronger when each one has a cost reduction of 2 generic mana for just the cost of a land drop. People play TKS and Smasher today to pretty good success, yet the deck hasn't had talk about a ban since Eye of Ugin was banned. Tehre, they DID in fact ban the correct card. Still, the other super powerful cards (way better than the card Bridge from Below) are allowed to exist in the current Modern. In fact as recent as 3 weeks ago, the deck was smashing a few tournaments.

(Now I also realize that you have no love for Eldrazi, but I think this argument works best.)

*SSG and Mox Opal are just cards that don't conform to the turn 4 rule of Modern. But I don't think anyone takes that rule seriously anymore, so my point is moot here...
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

I would have banned both lands, but certainly Eye was correct here.

Especially since Forsythe thought it's 'interesting lines of play' where worth not nuking from orbit.

Still, not sure what you are getting at. Eldrazi of today cannot win on turns 2/3.
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

Hey if your opinion is bridge from below is a good ban, that's fine. We are all entitled to our own opinion. I just disagree. Only putting one card on the ban list in this particular case is better than two IMO. I just HATE ban list mismanagment and WOTC has had, and still has, ban list management problems. We may disagree on the problems and correct solutiins but I think we can all agree they don't manage the ban list perfectly.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

I think you are probably right, but the thing with Hogaak, is it does actually have interesting lines, its just too strong. I can see why Wizards wanted to at least try and salvage it, but in 20/20, yeah it needed to go.
UR Control UR

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1177
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 2 years ago

Top 16 is up.



This also contains 44 copies of Faithless Looting and three Arclight Phoenix decks (the only other deck to have multiple copies), when GY hate is at a critical-mass, all-time-high.

Banning Hogaak alone is ignoring the larger problems of the format (unless they are just a 'feature' by this point. And I am terrified to see what happens when people cut back their GY hate because "banning Hogaak will bring back great, interactive, and engaging games of Modern." At least it will make my middling Unearth decks better?

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

cfusionpm wrote:
2 years ago
Top 16 is up.



This also contains 44 copies of Faithless Looting and three Arclight Phoenix decks (the only other deck to have multiple copies), when GY hate is at a critical-mass, all-time-high.

Banning Hogaak alone is ignoring the larger problems of the format (unless they are just a 'feature' by this point. And I am terrified to see what happens when people cut back their GY hate because "banning Hogaak will bring back great, interactive, and engaging games of Modern." At least it will make my middling Unearth decks better?
That T16 is awful.

That said, we should not and cannot judge Modern beyond Hogaak so long as Hogaak is legal. We have no idea what post-WAR/MH1/M20 Modern looks like and even have a new set, Throne, right around the corner. Hogaak's influence is just so warping. Anyone who claims they know what Modern will look like after a probable ban is either misleading themselves and/or the audience. Between Teferi, Karn, Narset, W6, FoN, Urza, and numerous other cards, Modern's top-tier has dramatically different tools to evolve in new directions in a post-Hogaak world. I'm all for emergency banhammering the %$#% out of this offensive Hogaak nonsense, but will completely push back against the hyperbolic, ungrounded assessments of post-Hogaak Modern. There is simply no strong evidence to support claims about fundamental, underlying Modern problems.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
I think you are probably right, but the thing with Hogaak, is it does actually have interesting lines, its just too strong. I can see why Wizards wanted to at least try and salvage it, but in 20/20, yeah it needed to go.
Absolutely it is very interesting, and crazy powerful. The Most fun game i played at my MCQ last week was the hogaak mirror match. It was great with all the peices moving back and forth from the grave and attacking/recasting/blocking/recasting with hogaak. It really was fun and different, but that will wear off.
But it is clear now hogaak is going to get the axe and that leaves me looking at bridge from below and saying, like I've said from the begining, they banned the wrong card. BBE vs DRS, except hogaak is way better than DRS so the whole process has been faster and more extreme. The turn two combo and the current dominance are problems both solved by banning hogaak and that leaves the bridge ban as redundant and IMO unnessesary.

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 2115
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 2 years ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
In summary, Hogaak represents a unique situation we have never seen before. We have exceptionally dominant performance numbers and a major impact on sideboards/graveyard hate (admittedly, not necessarily limited to Hogaak). More alarmingly, however, this is the continuation of a failed/insufficient ban decision in July 2019 to address a deck that was already proven to be broken. It continues to overperform and break Modern events, justifying an emergency ban under both its performance and previous emergency ban precedents. I would fully support this move by R&D, and also don't think it sets a dangerous precedent in the future. Hopefully, Wizards doesn't create a situation where a deck is both super broken AND continues to be broken after a failed initial ban decision.
have read the article that you linked. Agreed with what you said about resolve Hogaak issue first before discussing judgment on non-Hogaak elements.
_____________

About looting.. still feel that this little red card is the hidden boogieman of the format, but I'm now willing to wait and see first what happens once Hog has been dealt with..
Image
AnimEVO 2020 - EFZ Tournament (english commentary) // OE 2016 // POF 2018
want to play a uw control deck in modern, but don't have Jace or snapcaster? please come visit us at the Emeria thread

User avatar
Bearscape
Posts: 230
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Bearscape » 2 years ago

There's nothing hidden about Looting being busted, IMO. It was busted well before Hogaak was even released.

But yeah, I think we're basically at the same spot we were at the last ban cycle; just sitting out the weeks until the hammer hits Hogaak. It's kind of funny that 2 months after the release of Modern Horizons and a month after the London Mulligan, we still have no clue how they'll shape modern

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
That T16 is awful.

That said, we should not and cannot judge Modern beyond Hogaak so long as Hogaak is legal.
And this is why the ban should happen in within the hour.
UR Control UR

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
That T16 is awful.

That said, we should not and cannot judge Modern beyond Hogaak so long as Hogaak is legal.
And this is why the ban should happen in within the hour.
The most important hour will be tomorrow morning. Wizards needs a day to meet and talk, so the earliest this would probably happen is tomorrow with the regularly scheduled articles. But yes, they should act. Will they? As we've all discussed and admitted, it's unlikely. Can and should they? Yes.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

Wasnt the ban on Bridge on a Monday? It should be done at 8am PST.

I absolutely will embarrass myself on Twitter if they dont do it before 9am PST. :p
UR Control UR

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”