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

Mtgthewary
Posts: 219
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

Tzoulis wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Mox Opal is living on burrowed time. I think it has been said before but what makes Whirza and other artifact decks so strong is the fact that they can have explosive early kills combined with a strong mid and inevitable lategame attacking from multiple angles and combo's which make it hard to disrupt. Urza himself might be the real culprit but Mox Opal sees play in everything: Hardened Scales/Affinity/Jeskai Ascendancy/Whirza/Paradoxical Outcome. I think they are fine with Urza and co coming on turn 4 to take over the game but they are not fine with the explosive early kills because it doesn't come at a price of a weaker mid-lategame so they will probably nerf that aspect which means Mox Opal isn't safe.
Everything you said is happening, because of Urza (well, other than the Scales thing). The deck has "explosive early kills" and mid- and late dominance because of Urza, not Opal. The PO deck exists because of Urza. Cutting Opal won't stop urza coming a turn earlier (or even turn 2 with Emry-Mox Amber)

From the lot you mention the only deck that has a turn 2 kill is the Jeskai Ascendacy, and it's not dependent on Mox Opal. Also, its consistency is still up in the air and whether it is better than the regular PO lists and Whirza is debatable.

So instead of clamoring for a ban focus on what counters these decks - which have been mentioned several times in this thread. It's way too early to even think of a possible ban. If anything more unbans should be welcomed in 6-12 months.
it was bevore urza too. Looking at you Kci.

User avatar
Tzoulis
Posts: 281
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

None of the decks you mention even played KCI, so yeah. Besides, in that deck the problem was KCI itself, not Opal. Cutting Opals wouldn't have hurt the deck appreciably, (at the time) you'd only manage to %$#% on Affinity and Scales.

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 496
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

Currently I think we should leave Opal. It's borderline, but no deck is doing anything oppressive with it. That could all change at any time and I guess that's the point. One way or another Opal is probably headed for the banlist. It could take 1 year or 4 years. Just depends on what new cards get printed that push whatever deck opal is in to a bad spot.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 291
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 1 year ago

I started watching some replays of people playing the PO version. It does seems a bit over the top. I also agree that banning Opal doesn't really do much here, this is an Urza issue (IF Whirza, PO or otherwise, becomes an issue). Opal is only making the deck a turn faster, while that's incredibly good, it's also not changing much in this instance. There are a dozen other 0cmc artifacts that can replace it for the loss of a turn and the gain of something seemingly random. Ouphe and FoN don't hit Urza and he is the real mana engine. You can FoN Opal, but I think you're doing yourself a disservice.

If we were to vote tomorrow and had to pick a ban, I would choose Urza or PO. Probably PO to reconsolidate the list to just the regular Whirza which is probably more tame than the PO version and to preserve the Whirza deck as a whole.

... I haven't even seen any Emry lists.
I preordered some Strixhaven.
I guess that means I'm back.
Now I just want shops to open.

User avatar
Depian
Posts: 26
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Spain

Post by Depian » 1 year ago

Arkmer wrote:
1 year ago
Opal is only making the deck a turn faster, while that's incredibly good, it's also not changing much in this instance.
I would argue that being able to combo 1 turn faster is a pretty big deal.

I agree that Urza is the best card in the deck's core and banning it would likely lead to a time where Mox Opal is used in non-combo decks like Affinity and Hardened Scales where it's basically ok because we can deal with their strategy using classic interaction cards such as removal spells.

But I also believe it's a matter of time until another artifact combo deck pops up and it will probably be the same scenario, Opal is not core but sometimes makes the deck kill 1 turn earlier. We've already had it this issue with KCI and Mox Opal was fine for some time until Urza got printed.

Right now, there aren't many results to support a ban but as pointed out before, there haven't been any big tournaments and most pros have already expressed that they perceive Urza variants as probably the best decks in current Modern so it's likely that if there was a PT soon, Urza decks would be the most popular and maybe their performance would indicate that they are too strong, maybe not.

Right now the chart of course is to gather data and wait because nothing signals "too strong" but if Urza decks end up being too much, it will be difficult to approach how to deal with them:

a)Ban Urza → I think Mox Opal would likely be fine until another combo deck becomes good
b)Ban Mox Opal → I believe that would not stop Urza decks but it's hard to evaluaute if the speed bump would be enough (and this is based on the assumption that Urza is too good, which of course could be wrong)
c)Ban both Urza and Mox Opal → This certainly makes sure that the problem never comes back just like banning Looting and Hogaak made sure graveyard strategies are not the de facto best thing to do. The issue is that Looting and Hogaak were not very expensive cards so banning them didn't really have a great ecnomic impact, on the other hand Urza and Mox Opal are about 40% of the decks price and I could see a lot of people really angry with the price going down after a ban

If the time comes, I think c) would be the best regarding gameplay but as a company it would be the more risky move so I think Wizards would go for a) as it would give Mox Opal some time where it's good but not too good and players would not suffer a strong devaluation of their cards

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1986
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

History could repeat itself.

What already happened... Hogaak went bananas. Ban Bridge = not enough, then they ban Hog and Loot + "apologize" with sfm unban.

What might happen... PO goes bananas. Ban Opal = not enough, then they ban Urza + "apologize" with green sun zenith unban.

Sorry, just some wishful thinking. Still hoping for freedom of gsz from the banlist. ^__^
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

stille_nacht
Posts: 23
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by stille_nacht » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
The data and numbers represented on MTG Goldfish do not reflect reality or the "meta" of Modern in any meaningful way.

The vast, vast majority of their numbers are pulled from League data, and League data is actively and purposely skewed in such a way that it misrepresents a deck's popularity or meta share.

For example, let's say Wizards recorded the results of 100 decks that 5-0'd a league. 97 of them were Deck A, and there was 1 each of deck B, C, and D. Wizards publishes the data such that A, B, C, and D are all represented equally, because they only represent different decks once. In this case, decks A, B, C, and D would have a meta percent of 25%, 25%, 25% and 25%, instead of the actual 97%. 1%, 1%, and 1%.
So the numbers purposely push up representation of small, rogue decks, and purposely push down percentage of large, popular decks. Decks will never show a large percentage because multiple listings of the same deck are simply not reported.

So not only are the numbers not accurate, they are purposely misleading and skewed. They should honestly be removed from the site to avoid confusion.
Knowing this, would it be reasonable to assume that actually Burn has > 18% representation and Tron has > 25% representation? Or is the skew generally so unstable that it's not very useful to look at altogether.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

There is still value in it. You can still get a general idea of the deck's form, its population %, and the ebb and flow of the meta.
UR Control UR

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 217
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

Just further cements how bad Modern Horizons actually is for Modern. First Hogaak now Urza next Wrenn?

I think they will first go with the cheap option and ban Paradoxical Outcome and wait where it goes from there since it hardly comes at any opportunity costs and no collateral damage. All other cards would retain their value since they see ton of play in other decks and they would keep other artifact/Urza strategies alive.

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 291
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 1 year ago

I don't think Wren is that bad in Modern. I can see the irritation in Legacy with Wasteland, but I haven't lost to a Wren emblem yet despite facing off with three of them.

She's a really good walker but far from bannable. Suffice to say, things exist that fight her adequately.
I preordered some Strixhaven.
I guess that means I'm back.
Now I just want shops to open.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 1 year ago

I think banning Paradoxical Outcome would be the best option if this deck ends up being too much. Nobody else plays the card, so there's no splash damage, and Urza decks go back to the Whirza builds, which while strong didn't feel like they were too much for Modern.
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
Tzoulis
Posts: 281
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

They didn't ban Imp from Bridgevine/Hogaakvine, because the deck didn't play it. Also, I like that you've come to the predetermined conclusions that:

1. Opal is the offending card in both the deck and Modern
2. Whirza/PO decks ARE a problem
3. The decks don't have any counterplays so they'll dominate the meta.

Yet you're willing to playtest the validity of a possible Twin list in the current meta - however it is now. Are you blind to this severe bias you're exhibiting?

deimos035
Posts: 9
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by deimos035 » 1 year ago

The problem with Opal ban is that it hurts Scales and Affinity, which (considering the amount of potential artifact hate exisitng in the pool) would be a shame. I don't know if banning Opal would be enough to stop Urza/PO decks from being the offenders, it would just be another poor ban choice, the same way they banned bridge instead of straight up going for Hogaak.

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1986
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Just further cements how bad Modern Horizons actually is for Modern. First Hogaak now Urza next Wrenn?

I think they will first go with the cheap option and ban Paradoxical Outcome and wait where it goes from there since it hardly comes at any opportunity costs and no collateral damage. All other cards would retain their value since they see ton of play in other decks and they would keep other artifact/Urza strategies alive.
Modern Horizons is a pandora's box of strong cards, as expected since they bypassed the powering down of Standard. WoTC gave us many new toys, but one toy proved too strong which is Hogaak. On a less serious thought, I can't forget what someone on reddit said that "Hogaak" sounds like the name of a person you can meet in an event. :grin:

Agreed that Paradoxical Outcome seems to be the right ban if things go out of control with the Urza deck.
Arkmer wrote:
1 year ago
She's a really good walker but far from bannable. Suffice to say, things exist that fight her adequately.
I'm glad Wren can be hit with celestial purge, the same way purge hits liliana and bob.. as these three cards are often found together in jund style decks. Exiling does not add to the size of their goyf.
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: 496
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

Calls for W6 bans are laughable at this point. Calls for PO ban are VERY premature. We need to actually see some oppression, not just a bunch of people SAYING its going to be good.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 291
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
Arkmer wrote:
1 year ago
She's a really good walker but far from bannable. Suffice to say, things exist that fight her adequately.
I'm glad Wren can be hit with celestial purge, the same way purge hits liliana and bob.. as these three cards are often found together in jund style decks. Exiling does not add to the size of their goyf.
Purge continues to be head and shoulders above the other color hate of the same scope. I wish there were some equality among them. Flashfreeze is pretty close, but the colors just don't warrant it most of the time.

Anyway, I think Wren's hidden text is that her emblem actually costs -8 and that exiling their yard temporarily removes the emblem. Every time I've seen someone get her to 7 loyalty, they bin her right away and then do nothing with it for a few turns. Sure it'll be effective when they get some more lands, but considering they just fetched some 5 turns in a row they have significantly fewer to go through. I feel like that play pattern will correct itself over time as those at my LGS realize what correct looks like, but it's good to realize that you probably have one more turn than you think you do and pressure might push them to pop her sooner than maximum advantage.

I know it's got plenty to do with the deck I'm playing, but for the most part, I've ignored Wren and not been punished too hard. The worst of it has been that they don't miss land drops. Makes it really tough to keep tempo sometimes.
robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
Calls for W6 bans are laughable at this point. Calls for PO ban are VERY premature. We need to actually see some oppression, not just a bunch of people SAYING its going to be good.
Agree. It's just the nature of the thread to be this way.
I preordered some Strixhaven.
I guess that means I'm back.
Now I just want shops to open.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
Calls for W6 bans are laughable at this point. Calls for PO ban are VERY premature. We need to actually see some oppression, not just a bunch of people SAYING its going to be good.
This is all just speculative talk. I agree that there's no reason to ban W6, I don't even understand why people are talking about that. It's a strong card, and Jund is a strong deck now because of it, but neither are oppressive.

It's definitely too early to say for sure that the PO Urza deck is bannable, but I don't think it's crazy to speculate that it might be. Whirza was already arguably the best deck in the format, and now people are saying this PO build is even better. If it turns out to be fine, then nothing needs to get banned, but I don't see any problem with us discussing what should be banned if it turns out not to be fine.
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

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 217
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

I didn't say W6 will or should be banned next announcement (I do believe the card is unhealthy in the long term because it only hits other fair decks but that is another discussion). What I am saying is if Urza gets banned then W6 would step up the tier list and could be the next thing on the chopping block because right now the only thing that is really suppressing W6 are the Urza decks that completely play around it.

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

Hey, I was looking over the ban list again today and I came to the conclusion we are running out of cards that we can reasonably expect an unban for.

1 bridge from below
2 splinter twin
3 green Sun's zenith

After those we are looking at Preordain, punishing fire and other cards with lower likelthoods of being unbanned that we talk about occasionally. I have fairly extreme views and would be ok unbanning a hand full of more cards, but I think the list above is all we can EXPECT to one day be unbanned.

User avatar
The Fluff
is this so?
Posts: 1986
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Gradius Home World
Contact:

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

I had this thought for awhile now. Why is Hypergenesis banned, but similar cards.. Restore Balance and Living End are not banned. Is hypergenesis completely broken compared to the other two?
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
Simto
Posts: 261
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

I think the term "Fair Decks" should be banned

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

I also think hypergenesis could be unbanned, I believe it would be very similar to living end, but it is very unlikely to ever be unbanned IMO.

User avatar
Wraithpk
Posts: 181
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Connecticut, USA

Post by Wraithpk » 1 year ago

There's a big difference between Hypergenesis and Living End. 1) Living End requires setup. You have to put your cyclers in the graveyard to pop them back out with a Living End. Hypergenesis does not, it just requires keeping a good hand and getting to 3 mana to cascade into it. 2) Living End is vulnerable to graveyard hate, and Hypergenesis is not. Hypergenesis is only really vulnerable to counter spells, and you better have one for every cascade they attempt, or you lose. 3) Living End doesn't just win the game when it resolves, and Hypergenesis generally does. Sometimes LE does win the game on their next turn, but sometimes you're able to fight through it. Hypergenesis is often killing you on the turn when it resolves because they play fatties that give their other fatties haste. Even if you don't lose that turn, you probably can't win through a turn 2 Emrakul, the Aeons Torn.

It's a super busted combo piece. As with other things on the banned list, like Blazing Shoal, you have to ask yourself what the upside is here. Either it's unplayable in Modern today (very unlikely), or it's spawning a new Turn 4 violating combo deck. There just isn't a world where Hypergenesis is a playable card and it's healthy for Modern.
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

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year 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.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1110
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
Hey, I was looking over the ban list again today and I came to the conclusion we are running out of cards that we can reasonably expect an unban for.

1 bridge from below
2 splinter twin
3 green Sun's zenith

After those we are looking at Preordain, punishing fire and other cards with lower likelthoods of being unbanned that we talk about occasionally. I have fairly extreme views and would be ok unbanning a hand full of more cards, but I think the list above is all we can EXPECT to one day be unbanned.
Considering that there is really no positive benefit to Bridge from Below in any circumstances, I have a hard time finding any justification for it ever coming back; whether it was banned justly or not. It doesn't really promote good gameplay or allow for use in anything other than a narrow Tier 2 deck, now that Hogaak is gone.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”