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

stubb
Posts: 20
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by stubb » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Although I have to say it felt bad watching T3feri completely destroying Jund's ability to interact.[/b]
The card is an absolute abomination to not only Modern, but Magic in general. It is awful design and promotes awful gameplay. Unfortunately, cards don't get banned for creating terrible and obnoxious games.

His true strength is reflected in the $50 MTGO price tag jump. Cutting off your opponent from responding to anything you do is incredibly powerful.
Agree. I don't mind when red or green get "can't be countered" effects, because that gives those kind of decks a tool to fight control. But when you give control a tool to fight all instants, that just seems egregious and promotes Duel Deck Magic, except it's one-sided.

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

I can't see how predicting a middling → above average performance from SFM is considered playing the lottery even considering the 'play burn in a new meta' thing.

Modern is a powerful format with a wide card pool and an abundance of strong cards and strategies that beat creatures and artifacts, aka the 2 permanent types that long-time Modern players should be most accustomed to dealing with.

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 216
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

Burn has a very consistent turn 4 kill and has the exact same gameplan vs any deck. When everyone is running suboptimal builds still trying to figure out the best configurations its logical for Burn to do well in such meta. The moment everyone figures out SFM sucks or can't just be jammed into every deck the sooner Burn will start losing again.

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 484
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Burn has a very consistent turn 4 kill and has the exact same gameplan vs any deck. When everyone is running suboptimal builds still trying to figure out the best configurations its logical for Burn to do well in such meta. The moment everyone figures out SFM sucks or can't just be jammed into every deck the sooner Burn will start losing again.
Is Burn really a bad match up though? I'm not sure about that. Right out of the box swinging with Batterskull on t4 is a play that will win the game in most cases. The rest of the deck can be devoted to making that happen. Force of negation is a thing here, the card can be protected.

Play online in an MTGO league. SFM is being jammed like crazy.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 216
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
Is Burn really a bad match up though? I'm not sure about that. Right out of the box swinging with Batterskull on t4 is a play that will win the game in most cases. The rest of the deck can be devoted to making that happen. Force of negation is a thing here, the card can be protected.
SFM is horrible vs Burn. Its slow and clunky and eats up too much mana while what you really want to do the first 3 turns is kill off their creatures, counter their burn spells or gain life to drag them into midgame. Skullcrack prevents the lifegain and they can also just kill the Germ token and you are left with a Squire and a dead card on the battlefield on turn 3-4. Burn has too many tools and is too fast for Batterskull even with protection. Every answer Burn has costs 1-2 mana so they can play multiple a turn if needed so 1 FoN won't save you. Also things like Searing Blaze, Searing Blood, Destructive Revery don't lose them tempo nor a card. If you can attack with Batterskul on turn 4 than the Burn player has a terrible hand and you would have won anyway.

Lord Seth
Posts: 18
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Lord Seth » 1 year ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
Is Burn really a bad match up though? I'm not sure about that. Right out of the box swinging with Batterskull on t4 is a play that will win the game in most cases. The rest of the deck can be devoted to making that happen. Force of negation is a thing here, the card can be protected.
SFM is horrible vs Burn. Its slow and clunky and eats up too much mana while what you really want to do the first 3 turns is kill off their creatures, counter their burn spells or gain life to drag them into midgame. Skullcrack prevents the lifegain and they can also just kill the Germ token and you are left with a Squire and a dead card on the battlefield on turn 3-4. Burn has too many tools and is too fast for Batterskull even with protection. Every answer Burn has costs 1-2 mana so they can play multiple a turn if needed so 1 FoN won't save you. Also things like Searing Blaze, Searing Blood, Destructive Revery don't lose them tempo nor a card. If you can attack with Batterskul on turn 4 than the Burn player has a terrible hand and you would have won anyway.
Depends somewhat on the Stoneforge deck itself. If it's being played in Death & Taxes or Hatebears, I feel it's much better equipped against Burn because you have Giver of Runes to protect the Stoneforge--and even if not for Giver of Runes, your opponent was going to aim that Searing Blaze at something, so it's not like you're worse off than if you had played almost any other 2-drop. As for Skullcrack... well, that only works for one turn.

Artifact destruction like Smash to Smithereens can be a problem if they draw it, though.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 177
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Burn has a very consistent turn 4 kill and has the exact same gameplan vs any deck. When everyone is running suboptimal builds still trying to figure out the best configurations its logical for Burn to do well in such meta. The moment everyone figures out SFM sucks or can't just be jammed into every deck the sooner Burn will start losing again.
Is Burn really a bad match up though? I'm not sure about that. Right out of the box swinging with Batterskull on t4 is a play that will win the game in most cases. The rest of the deck can be devoted to making that happen. Force of negation is a thing here, the card can be protected.

Play online in an MTGO league. SFM is being jammed like crazy.
SFM + Batterskull by itself is not good enough to beat Burn, because your SFM is almost never surviving to activate its ability, and even if you do you've used 4 mana and 2 turns, and don't actually get to attack with your lifelinker until turn 4. There was a match on camera that was UW Stoneblade vs. Burn, and the UW player got to untap with his SFM on turn 3, and chose to cast Timely Reinforcements instead of putting the Batterskull into play. Had he deployed the Batterskull instead, he would have lost the game, with what we knew was in the Burn player's hand. Two turns later he Snapped back Timely, and only then did Batterskull lock up the game.
Modern
ubr Grixis Shadow ubr
uwg Bant Stoneblade uwg
gbr Jund gbr

Pioneer
urIzzet Phoenixur
rMono-Red Aggror
uwAzorius Controluw

Commander
bg Meren of Clan Nel Toth bg

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 484
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

Straight burn might be fast enough, but I'm seeing much more prowess-y stuff that has interaction points. In fact I can't recall the last time I faced pure burn.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1940
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

SFM is white, and white is the color with plenty of anti-burn cards. Burn can take game 1, but game two should be more even.
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
robertleva
Posts: 484
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
SFM is white, and white is the color with plenty of anti-burn cards. Burn can take game 1, but game two should be more even.
Right? Thanks I thought I was going crazy for a sec.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
Bearscape
Posts: 213
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Bearscape » 1 year ago

Veil of Summer really hid under the afermath of WAR and MH1 and is I think going to be the most influential new card from M20 for eternal formats. Hitting discard, removal and countermagic all at once against the colors that care most about card advantage is absurd. The floor of just cycling it after your opponent played any black or blue spell also makes it rarely dead. I'm almost exclusively a blue player so I am very biased, but I think the card is too much and a poor design in a similar fashion to Teferi Time Raveler.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
SFM is white, and white is the color with plenty of anti-burn cards. Burn can take game 1, but game two should be more even.
Right? Thanks I thought I was going crazy for a sec.
I think what people were getting at, is that those decks aren't winning because of stoneforge, but in spite of stoneforge. Batterskull is still slow and clunky, requires almost all your mana turn 2 and 3, leaving you unable to meaningfully interact, and your Kor meeds to live, not super likely in DirectDamage.dec. To win, you'd have to rely on several other things (and/or your opponent stumbling) in order to keep yourself alive most of the time. Batterskull is then a nice thing to drop after other resources have been exhausted stabilizing.

User avatar
Ym1r
Posts: 153
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Ym1r » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
SFM is white, and white is the color with plenty of anti-burn cards. Burn can take game 1, but game two should be more even.
Right? Thanks I thought I was going crazy for a sec.
I think what people were getting at, is that those decks aren't winning because of stoneforge, but in spite of stoneforge. Batterskull is still slow and clunky, requires almost all your mana turn 2 and 3, leaving you unable to meaningfully interact, and your Kor meeds to live, not super likely in DirectDamage.dec. To win, you'd have to rely on several other things (and/or your opponent stumbling) in order to keep yourself alive most of the time. Batterskull is then a nice thing to drop after other resources have been exhausted stabilizing.
Sure, but this is really not an argument. What you are describing has been the case for control decks for a while now. It's not like UW, with the inclusion of SFM, shifted from wrecking burn decks in the early turns to "we have to survive until we land a threat". If SFM was a one-card-kill-all it wouldn't had been unbanned.

The right thing to ask is whether SFM provides a better mid-game for these decks, one that would allow you to actually turn the corner at a critical point where you are past the point of "oh my god I have to survive T1-3". The comparison should then be with cards that act in a similar way. I would argue that, in the case of controls vs aggressive decks, SFM is currently the best tool to turn the corner. Up until now we were doing it with Jace/T5feri, which both are ok, but they do require a heavier set up (i.e. clean board), and to completely tap out on your turn (for the case of Jace your opponent's turn as well). With SFM, however, landing her T4/5 allows you to hold up counter/removal and have a creature in the board that can block if needed.

I played against a friend playing burn, and it was a close MU, but every time I had access to SFM, things felt significantly better than previous iterations of UW. I didn't have to rely on drawing ALL my counters or ALL my removals based on which half their deck was drawn. I also didn't have to rely on my 1-off Timely Reinforcements. Rather, I had a threat that at T4, had I survived properly (not completely overtaken my opponent with permission), I could safely cast SFM and have the game for longer.

Calling SFM aggressively mediocre, as you have done at several point, is, I think, way of an exaggeration. For once we don't know that, although I will concede that it's your personal feeling/experience. However, "not format defining/breaking" doesn't make a card aggressively mediocre. If that was the case, then literally any card that isn't banned or is Opal/Stirrings is aggressively mediocre. Heck, even Tarmogoyf can then be described as aggressively mediocre. I would say, based on personal experience, on evaluating the card, and on watching SCG/looking at MTGO Challenge/MCQ results that as it stands, SFM seems likely appropriately leveled for Modern. It will see play, it will found 2-3 good homes, possibly in at least 1 T1 deck, and we will be happy with the addition, much like we are with Jace.
Counter, draw a card.

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 484
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

I agree with nearly everything Ym1r wrote. SFM has given the UW shell a turn 2 play that replaces itself, and requires an immediate answer. Now you add in Force of Negation to protect it and we have a really solid plan.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

I know it's just one tournament, but I think the SCG Open results of Burn rising to the top while Stoneforge Mystic decks barely made a ripple have somewhat proven that Stoneforge Mystic doesn't necessarily beat a deck with 4 Lightning Bolt, X Searing Blaze, 3-4 Lightning Helix, and SB artifact destruction. I am going to reiterate that it is one tournament, however.

Anyway, Burn vs. any flavor of UW is close to 50/50 and usually determined in games 2 and 3 by Timely Reinforcements, Snap Timely Reinforcements and the nail in the coffin - Circle of Protection: Red. It may not be seen in a large tournament, but all of the locals, including ones who have been on the Pro Tour, are running 1-2 of these in the SB.

*What I'm saying is "don't let anyone convince you that UW vs. Burn is any worse than 40/60 either way."
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

Lord Seth
Posts: 18
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Lord Seth » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
I know it's just one tournament, but I think the SCG Open results of Burn rising to the top while Stoneforge Mystic decks barely made a ripple have somewhat proven that Stoneforge Mystic doesn't necessarily beat a deck with 4 Lightning Bolt, X Searing Blaze, 3-4 Lightning Helix, and SB artifact destruction. I am going to reiterate that it is one tournament, however.
You correctly note it's just one tournament, but I don't think we can even count it as that much. Circumstances make this even less likely to be predictive of the metagame. The Hogaak ban was a given, but the Faithless Looting ban and Stoneforge Mystic unban were very surprising, and I doubt anyone had done much testing for what effects those changes could have on the format. So faced with these changes giving an uncertain metagame, everyone suddenly had less than a week to figure out what deck to play. With such limited time, I expect people eschewed trying to do real experimenting with Stoneforge Mystic and instead just use decks that were known quantities. It further means that those who did try to use Stoneforge Mystic will be using experimental decks that are more likely to not be tuned properly.

Even the decks with Stoneforge Mystic that did manage to do well, namely the UW Control decks, were decks that were decent choices even if the unban hadn't happened. (I suppose the weird BW deck that ran Stoneforge was a new idea, though). And then we also get the fact that due to the big price spike, Stoneforge Mystic would've been harder to get ahold of than normal.

I think if we wait another week or two we'll see tournaments that will give a better indicator of what Stoneforge Mystic's impact on the metagame will be after people have had more of a chance to test it out.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Calling SFM aggressively mediocre, as you have done at several point, is, I think, way of an exaggeration. For once we don't know that, although I will concede that it's your personal feeling/experience. However, "not format defining/breaking" doesn't make a card aggressively mediocre. If that was the case, then literally any card that isn't banned or is Opal/Stirrings is aggressively mediocre. Heck, even Tarmogoyf can then be described as aggressively mediocre. I would say, based on personal experience, on evaluating the card, and on watching SCG/looking at MTGO Challenge/MCQ results that as it stands, SFM seems likely appropriately leveled for Modern. It will see play, it will found 2-3 good homes, possibly in at least 1 T1 deck, and we will be happy with the addition, much like we are with Jace.
But that's the thing, UW was already one of the best decks, so putting that package in an established, good deck, is at best a lateral movement (especially since you have to remove interactive cards to make toom). Most of my playtesting with her over the last week (about 50 or so matches) has been with various other builds trying to see if she's good enough to make these decks better. Mostly she hasn't. Or at least not in a big, meaningful way. So putting her in a good deck didn't really have a meaningful impact, and putting her in middling decks have had low to medium upgrades.

Most importantly though, there is absolutely a ceiling to Stoneforge, and a lot of times, that ceiling is aggressively mediocre. This is Jace hype all over again. Banned for irrelevant sins of a completely different format. Just about average power level and nowhere near busted. I don't expect much to change. She'll be a part of the format, like Jace, but not break anything, also like Jace.

User avatar
Ym1r
Posts: 153
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Ym1r » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
But that's the thing, UW was already one of the best decks, so putting that package in an established, good deck, is at best a lateral movement (especially since you have to remove interactive cards to make toom). Most of my playtesting with her over the last week (about 50 or so matches) has been with various other builds trying to see if she's good enough to make these decks better. Mostly she hasn't. Or at least not in a big, meaningful way. So putting her in a good deck didn't really have a meaningful impact, and putting her in middling decks have had low to medium upgrades.

Most importantly though, there is absolutely a ceiling to Stoneforge, and a lot of times, that ceiling is aggressively mediocre. This is Jace hype all over again. Banned for irrelevant sins of a completely different format. Just about average power level and nowhere near busted. I don't expect much to change. She'll be a part of the format, like Jace, but not break anything, also like Jace.
I disagree with the comment about UW. For once, there is a chance that you put cards in an already established deck and these cards make it better. UW control was actually pretty good before the Jace unban. However, the Jace unban DID have a positive impact in UW control. New cards, of course, played an extra role, but Jace also came to UW to stay, as the most played PW in the deck. It was not T5feri in the end that made UW control viable (most lists running 1 T5feri), it wasn't Search for Azcanta, but it's Jace that became the mainstay. It took a while, but in the end, you can't really think of UW control currently without Jace in it. Jace might not have been format defining or broken, but he definitely is deck defining.

Now, wiil that be the case with SFM? We don't know, but there is chance, and I would say a pretty strong one, that she makes UW control even better. Much like W6 made Jund, an already good deck, even better, I think (and we'll be here to see if it's right or wrong) that there is a good chance that SFM makes UW better than it already is.

Finally, my main problem with your argumentation is that you are pushing extremes (yet again). You are saying that the cards either has to be "aggressively mediocre" or "near busted". Can't a card just be good? Jace is a good card. He is not busted (otherwise they would ban him again), nor he is aggressively mediocre (otherwise he wouldn't be played in one of the best decks of the format). There are plenty of good cards, that are not busted not mediocre. Another example of this is Liliana of the Veil. There have been times when she was completely unplayable. There have been times when she shined. Currently only 1 deck plays LotV. But that doesn't make her a mediocre card. The card is good by all measures, and that's why she sees play when possible. I believe this will be the case with SFM.
Counter, draw a card.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

The short term memories here are astounding. Not only did many pros, writers, and content creators believe that Stoneforge should have remained banned because it's too good and too powerful, many users here said that very thing to. That is objectively untrue, which is the entire point of everything I have been saying. You and I are in agreement that it is not busted, which means all of those people are most certainly wrong. Just like the people who said Jace was going to warp the format for being too good.
Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
It was not T5feri in the end that made UW control viable (most lists running 1 T5feri), it wasn't Search for Azcanta, but it's Jace that became the mainstay.
This I disagree with 100%. Jace is by far the worst planeswalker in all of the UW deck. He is worse than both Teferis and Narset the vast majority of the time. Many of us have discussed endlessly about why UW became good, and it wasn't Jace, it was about a half dozen or so other new cards, and big Teffy was absolutely one of those defining new cards. Jace was played, but it was about the 5th or 6th most meaningful addition. I also think diluting UW Control to run Stoneforge is a mistake. Reworking UW into some kind of midrange creature deck could be successful, but without any meaningful large tournaments, we won't really know for months and months. So we can just continue to quibble back and forth to see who's stories and anecdotes and experience matters most.
We don't know, but there is chance, and I would say a pretty strong one, that she makes UW control even better. Much like W6 made Jund, an already good deck, even better, I think (and we'll be here to see if it's right or wrong) that there is a good chance that SFM makes UW better than it already is.
The difference between W6 and Stonefoge is huge. Not only does Stoneforge need mana to do anything meaningful, what it does is not nearly as fast or impactful as W6. Sure, anything can happen, but these two cards are nothing alike.

At the end of the day, Stoneforge is some other card used for grindy midrange and control decks; one more thing in a laundry list of things that are good in grindy midrange and control matches. And just like other cards that are good in those scenarios, she is absolutely meaningless to the majority of top Modern decks. But unlike other cards good in those scenarios, she is unbelievably easy to answer.

She is aggressively mediocre, and I fully stand by that opinion.

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

Aggressively mediocre might be a stretch. She's average.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Aggressively mediocre might be a stretch. She's average.
I guess I'm not sure how others define aggressively mediocre. She is not amazing, she is not terrible, she is very very down-the-middle. When she's good, she's pretty good, when she's bad, she's really bad. Her ceiling cap is entirely dependent on how much the opponent cares about a Sword or a Batterskull. And there's not a lot of decks that seem to care about that (or have a hard time answering it). Her floor is Squire.

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

Lord Seth wrote:
1 year ago
I think if we wait another week or two we'll see tournaments that will give a better indicator of what Stoneforge Mystic's impact on the metagame will be after people have had more of a chance to test it out.
This is a great position to take on the issue and I wish we saw more of this online. It's way too early in the new format to draw any strong conclusions about metagame development. This is true of both SFM's position in the metagame and the position of all the decks that directly/indirectly benefit/lose from the 08/26 changes. Single Challenge, MCQ, and/or SCG Open T8s (or even T32s/Day 2s) have never necessarily been indicating of anything. Healthy Modern metagames can see warped T8s and warped Modern metagames can see healthy T8s. People on this site, Reddit, Twitter, Twitch, and the overall content-sphere need to back off the conviction of their predictions and opinions; they are disproportionate to the strength of the evidence we have.
Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Finally, my main problem with your argumentation is that you are pushing extremes (yet again). You are saying that the cards either has to be "aggressively mediocre" or "near busted". Can't a card just be good? Jace is a good card. He is not busted (otherwise they would ban him again), nor he is aggressively mediocre (otherwise he wouldn't be played in one of the best decks of the format). There are plenty of good cards, that are not busted not mediocre. Another example of this is Liliana of the Veil. There have been times when she was completely unplayable. There have been times when she shined. Currently only 1 deck plays LotV. But that doesn't make her a mediocre card. The card is good by all measures, and that's why she sees play when possible. I believe this will be the case with SFM.
On the one hand, I will say the best Modern cards tend to be degrees of busted. That's also true of Legacy cards; the entry power-level is super high for these formats. On the other hand, I agree there are also merely "good" cards in all formats, Modern included. JTMS is a good card. Scooze is a good card. Lava Spike is a good card. Overall, the spectrum of playability is probably pretty wide when we consider all cards, even if we ignore the truly unplayable Modern stuff. At the low end, we have super niche Modern "playables" that are used in Tier 4 FNM decks or casual MTGO queues: a lot of tribal cards are in this category. At the high end, we have multi-deck staples like Stirrings and Opal, or the bannable %$#% above that. There's a TON in the middle and I wouldn't even know where to start quantifying or qualifying all of these elements.

I will say that phrases like "aggressively medicore" do not really help us evaluate anything. It's pejorative enough that it's jabbing at the card, but still acknowledging some degree of playability. I feel like I've heard someone on Twitch or read an article where some content producer uses this all the time, but I can't remember who they are right now. Either way, it's the kind of canned evaluation that just muddles evaluations, not clarifies them.
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
The short term memories here are astounding. Not only did many pros, writers, and content creators believe that Stoneforge should have remained banned because it's too good and too powerful, many users here said that very thing to. That is objectively untrue, which is the entire point of everything I have been saying. You and I are in agreement that it is not busted, which means all of those people are most certainly wrong. Just like the people who said Jace was going to warp the format for being too good.
I'm on the same page with you for this. As someone who ended most articles with "PS. Unban SFM" in 2018 and 2019, I totally agree many personalities/authors/players were wildly overestimating SFM's potential. I agree it's annoying these personalities, even Forsythe himself with that awful Tweet about SFM/UWx decks, were wrong for so long. Same with JTMS, BBE, AV, etc. That said, we don't know SFM's final impact yet, so it's not entirely clear where the card will fall. Odds are good it will just be another good addition to a powerful format.
At the end of the day, Stoneforge is some other card used for grindy midrange and control decks; one more thing in a laundry list of things that are good in grindy midrange and control matches. And just like other cards that are good in those scenarios, she is absolutely meaningless to the majority of top Modern decks. But unlike other cards good in those scenarios, she is unbelievably easy to answer.

She is aggressively mediocre, and I fully stand by that opinion.
This is where I don't agree. We simply don't know how SFM will impact the overall SFM-deck vs. other-deck picture at this time. It's also where I think you are contradicting some statements we normally agree on. For instance, we are normally both on the same page that Challenge T8s don't matter. We know SCG Opens aren't always (often) representative. We know Leagues are curated. We know one week of data doesn't mean anything. This is something I know you have specifically agreed to in the past and rightfully so. What I'm confused about is why you are sudden;y so certain about SFM's evaluation when we're in week one of a totally new metagame without even a solo GP in sight for months. This seems like the textbook definition of strong claims disproportionate to available evidence.

I also don't understand where this "aggressively mediocre" terminology is coming from. It's very unclear and seems like a needlessly extreme synonym for "average" or "good." Where does this term come from and what does it mean? Why even use it? This strikes me as a similar problem to the one I point to above: needlessly extreme claims-making. This is a rampant MTG/Modern problem right now and I'm seeing it with this term. Not everything needs to be "busted" or "broken" or "aggressively mediocre" or "toxic" or "unplayable trash" or all the other extreme opinions I routinely see in the online content sphere. Some things can just be "good" or, better yet, "good in certain contexts." These kinds of measured, limited characterizations are often more accurate and supportable than the hyperbolic ones.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I also don't understand where this "aggressively mediocre" terminology is coming from. It's very unclear and seems like a needlessly extreme synonym for "average" or "good." Where does this term come from and what does it mean? Why even use it?
Because people spent literal years telling us how broken and absurd and "too good" Stoneforge was for Modern. Call it tongue in cheek, but it's definitely not wrong or inaccurate. I've been jamming games with her in just about every free moment I have had the past week, and have felt varying degrees of whelmed which don't include 'over.'

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I also don't understand where this "aggressively mediocre" terminology is coming from. It's very unclear and seems like a needlessly extreme synonym for "average" or "good." Where does this term come from and what does it mean? Why even use it?
Because people spent literal years telling us how broken and absurd and "too good" Stoneforge was for Modern. Call it tongue in cheek, but it's definitely not wrong or inaccurate. I've been jamming games with her in just about every free moment I have had the past week, and have felt varying degrees of whelmed which don't include 'over.'
Yes, I am not sure where those people are. I had friends that said, "Stoneforge Mystic will never be unbanned." Friends... Between Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic, I know which one is stronger. Yet, Jace was unbanned first. That right there let me know that Stoneforge Mystic and probably other cards will come off as well. Sure, it took eons, yes it took Forever for the Kor to come off, but it is now legal to stay!
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

Green Sun's Zenith seems pretty safe.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”