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

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

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

dogwave wrote:
1 year ago
I had to make an account just to say this:

This thread and the majority of the people posting on it are the laughing stock of a large amount of modern-related discord servers. It might be tough to hear, but the absurd hot takes constantly getting posted on here are screencapped and posted in various discords. You people are delusional and clearly do not like Magic: The Gathering. Constant complaining about things that aren't deserving of complaints, constant absurd hot takes that nobody can take seriously. No matter what WOTC will do, the complaining will never end. Just because your trash midrange pile can't beat actual Modern decks doesn't mean that there should be any changes to modern, Your midrange deck will always suck, get over it.
Threads like the Splinter Twin gauntlet probably aren't helping our cause, but as someone said earlier I think the real problem is the immovable opinions. Compelling discourse should occasionally change someone's mind, but it never happens. Maybe that is a product of how polarized and tribal our society has become. We have become conditioned into turning every topic into a all or nothing, life or death is on the line type of issue.

As if somehow changing your opinion on something small like MTG is some kind of "slippery slope" that might lead to thoughts outside of the approved group think model that person has been caste into. We can't have that now can we?!
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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

Lord Seth wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
Or are you just going to continue selling us some crap about how this deck is "fine;" just like people did with Eldrazi,
I don't recall anyone saying that about Eldrazi during Eldrazi Winter. Well, I think bocephus (back when he posted on MTG Salvation) might have, but he often seemed to be contrarian for its own sake.
just like people did with Phoenix,
Phoenix was fine.
just like some even did with Hogaak?
Who was claiming that with Hogaak? Maybe some were at first but it didn't take too long for it to be obvious how problematic he actually was.

And contrariwise, I remember when people were screaming about how Humans and EldraziTron were broken and something from those decks needed to go.
1. You just listed one who did, and did so very vocally over the entirety of Eldrazi Winter. There were small pockets of people saying "yeah, me too" who were basing their experiences on their local meta and ignoring Modern as a whole.
2. Phoenix was not OK, or rather Looting was not OK, and Looting was the main contributing factor to Phoenix putting up competitive dominance numbers that rivaled both Pod and DRS Jund, and overshadowed every aspect of Twin in every category (which was also banned for competitive dominance).
3. "Just adapt" and "Play more GY hate" was a common response I saw throughout early Hogaak dominance. While the overall consensus was that it was not OK eventually, I believe I remember a number of people saying it was fine after losing Bridge. And in fact, I was openly mocked for something like 2 pages for even suggesting that alternate builds post-Bridge were still incredibly powerful.
4. Good thing I was not one of them! While I hate both of those decks because they insult everything I stand for and the core of my being (such as making all your spells able to attack and the fact that Eldrazi gets to survive and thrive at all), but I don't believe ever calling for either of them to be banned. I think I may have once said something along the lines of "If something is banned, E-Tron may become the next best thing and may become a problem," but that's a very different stance (that ended up being totally wrong). Though, ironically, was the same comment I made about Urza with regards to a Hogaak/Phoenix ban.
robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
Threads like the Splinter Twin gauntlet probably aren't helping our cause, but as someone said earlier I think the real problem is the immovable opinions. Compelling discourse should occasionally change someone's mind, but it never happens. Maybe that is a product of how polarized and tribal our society has become. We have become conditioned into turning every topic into a all or nothing, life or death is on the line type of issue.

As if somehow changing your opinion on something small like MTG is some kind of "slippery slope" that might lead to thoughts outside of the approved group think model that person has been caste into. We can't have that now can we?!
I would be happy to change my opinion on things, so long as people provide compelling arguments, logically sound evidence, and enough support to justify their opinions. The problem specifically with Splinter Twin is that nearly every single argument and piece of evidence to support its initial ban or continued ban has pretty much been debunked in every possible way. There is no leg to stand on and there is nothing that has been produced to justify it whatsoever, outside of "this guy at WOTC doesn't like it." Which, while that may be true, is a horrible, arbitrary, and ultimately useless piece of justification.

Similarly, there's a lot of "I told you so," like when AV was unbanned and did nothing, like when Jace and BBE were unbanned and did little to nothing (or in Jace's case, nothing without MASSIVE help from LOTS of other cards), or like when Stoneforge was unbanned and has so far done nothing. All of us that have said for a very long time that all of these were OK are 100% justified. Even Sword of the Meek was fine until Urza, and now the best builds don't even play it. GGT was fine for a year and a half until WOTC broke it with 3 new cards (2 enablers and a really really good payoff). Turns out a lot of stuff on that banned list is probably fine. Mostly because WOTC breaks the format into pieces every few months with new cards that are all more powerful and more broken than a lot of the stuff that is or was on the banned list.

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

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

I watch nrg series on twitch at the moment and the stream was angry about waiting time, so they excused and explained it is because of urza decks in the tournament each time (no joke). They wait 20 minutes after timeout because of them , bevore next match can start streaming. As example they sayed last game a urza player had 2 permanents in play and 2 cards in hand and after his 1 turn it was 20 permanents. It seems more and more this decks cause logistical problems too in tournaments, because it is not the first time I heared such story's. It is not only power of it

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

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
The problem specifically with Splinter Twin is that nearly every single argument and piece of evidence to support its initial ban or continued ban has pretty much been debunked in every possible way. There is no leg to stand on and there is nothing that has been produced to justify it whatsoever, outside of "this guy at WOTC doesn't like it." Which, while that may be true, is a horrible, arbitrary, and ultimately useless piece of justification.
See here is a perfect example of the problem. Let me first start by saying I respect you and have liked a bunch of your posts here previous to this. Your problem is you cannot see the forest for the tree my friend. Let me explain.

Everything you posted is true. But it means nothing because you are missing the most important part about Splinter Twin. Splinter Twin is %$#% annoying to lose to. End of story.
Warning for censor evasion (posted edited).
-ktkenshinx-
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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
Everything you posted is true. But it means nothing because you are missing the most important part about Splinter Twin. Splinter Twin is fking annoying to lose to. End of story.
I'm sorry, but that is not relevant whatsoever to whether or not something should be banned. If that were the case, probably half of Modern decks should be banned. :laugh:

Ironically, I think it is considerably LESS annoying to lose to Twin than say, watching someone play a non-deterministic game of solitaire I have to watch for minutes on end, while I sit and twiddle my thumbs waiting to see if I get another turn or not. At least against Twin, either I have an answer and I leave them in a crippled position, or I don't have an answer and I get to shuffle up and go to the next game. :thinking:

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

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
Everything you posted is true. But it means nothing because you are missing the most important part about Splinter Twin. Splinter Twin is fking annoying to lose to. End of story.
I'm sorry, but that is not relevant whatsoever to whether or not something should be banned. If that were the case, probably half of Modern decks should be banned. :laugh:

Ironically, I think it is considerably LESS annoying to lose to Twin than say, watching someone play a non-deterministic game of solitaire I have to watch for minutes on end, while I sit and twiddle my thumbs waiting to see if I get another turn or not. At least against Twin, either I have an answer and I leave them in a crippled position, or I don't have an answer and I get to shuffle up and go to the next game. :thinking:

Annnnd the cycle continues...

Yeah, I get why he said what he did. You have got to be open to some one else's perspective, ESPECIALLY if that person shares the perspective of the "silent masses" or whatever you want to call the majority.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

Twin is annoying so end of story..... That is the weakest arguement I've ever heard against twin or any other card. There are lots of annoying decks that dont need a ban(8 rack?), and worst of all annoyance is subjective. I am now going to stop discussing the value or credibility of robertleva's point.

User avatar
Simto
Posts: 251
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Copenhagen

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

I'm sitting here watching the Mythic Championship and I'm thinking to myself how glad I am switching to Modern, because holy %$#% it's boring!
I used to be a big fan of Standard, but it's just so boring now. The actual Mythic Championships are also just a chore to follow in general from all the commercials cuts and hosts talking and talking and talking. I'll sit through most of it if the gameplay itself is interesting, but too bad there won't be a big modern tournament for a while as far as I know :(

Either way, I'm really glad I got into Modern, but I still cry when I look at card prices lol. oh well.

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

Post by Ym1r » 1 year ago

Aaaaaaaaaaaaand once again this thread has come full circle. Ban whatever is good at a given point (from Shadow to Tron to Urza), unban Twin because it never should had been banned. It really has become exhausting to follow this thread, and I like discussing this topic. Can't imagine if you don't and you just want to discuss metagame....
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

Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Aaaaaaaaaaaaand once again this thread has come full circle. Ban whatever is good at a given point (from Shadow to Tron to Urza), unban Twin because it never should had been banned. It really has become exhausting to follow this thread, and I like discussing this topic. Can't imagine if you don't and you just want to discuss metagame....
To be fair, outside of Urza (which we do not have adequate data on, and will not for months on end), the only deck I adamently argued should or could be banned was Phoenix. And I backed it up with a numbers analysis with other diversity bans of the past. I called for its ban because of its repeated, continued, dominant success, even in the face of targeted hate. It deserved to go and I'm glad Looting is gone.

Unfortunately, without meaningful MTGO data, with the last several months of GPs worthless in terms of context, only 1 GP the rest of this year, and only 1 so far scheduled for next year, we just don't have anything else to base health on, other than anecdotes, stories, and then the false, curated, misrepresenting MTGO info that pretends that everything is healthy.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
But it means nothing because you are missing the most important part about Splinter Twin. Splinter Twin is fking annoying to lose to. End of story.
Honestly this is not wrong. It's even become a bannable metric.

"We're sensitive to community feedback that the combination of polarized matchups, complex interactions, and long turns can lead to unenjoyable gameplay and viewing experiences."

If a deck like 8rack became the 'best deck' it too, would be banned.
UR Control UR

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

Post by Lord Seth » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
1. You just listed one who did, and did so very vocally over the entirety of Eldrazi Winter. There were small pockets of people saying "yeah, me too" who were basing their experiences on their local meta and ignoring Modern as a whole.
If your argument is just that someone, somewhere was saying that Deck X was actually fine... well, okay, I'm sure you'll always be able to find someone who believes something, no matter how silly. My point was that it was an extremely fringe group and the only person I knew of who advanced that claim was the same guy who was convinced Valakut was overpowered and needed to be re-banned.
2. Phoenix was not OK, or rather Looting was not OK, and Looting was the main contributing factor to Phoenix putting up competitive dominance numbers that rivaled both Pod and DRS Jund, and overshadowed every aspect of Twin in every category (which was also banned for competitive dominance).
Unlike Pod and Jund, Phoenix didn't get to being 20-30% of the metagame for months on end. There was a time period where it may have outdone Twin but it, much like EldraziTron and Humans, dropped down later on to a more reasonable level.

Maybe Faithless Looting was a problem in the context of the larger format, but it wasn't a problem in Phoenix.

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

Lord Seth wrote:
1 year ago
Unlike Pod and Jund, Phoenix didn't get to being 20-30% of the metagame for months on end. There was a time period where it may have outdone Twin but it, much like EldraziTron and Humans, dropped down later on to a more reasonable level.

Maybe Faithless Looting was a problem in the context of the larger format, but it wasn't a problem in Phoenix.
We don't actually know that. We have not had an accurate picture of metagame presence since WOTC began curating MTGO data to falsely represent diversity nearly two years ago (and random samplings had already been cut in half six months before that).

WOTC does not want us to know what is popular or what is good, they want us to think that all decks are equally prevalent and equally viable. In their announcement, they specifically say that their goal is to show what's possible, not what's popular. Which means people with trash piles that fumble their way through a 5-round, non-swiss event get to feel like the same importance as a dominant, top tier deck.

We sort of have large paper events to pull some numbers from, but those are influenced by this misleading data. Plus, they themselves often too infrequent and too insignificant of data points to draw any real, meaningful information from (especially in real time).

Anecdotally, Phoenix was everywhere and winning a lot of stuff all the time. For all we know, it's "true" number was likely in the 20%+ range, but since we common folk can't actually prove that, we just have to leave it up to guessing. Either way WOTC acted on Looting, and Phoenix was one of the top Looting offenders (along with Creeping Dredge after Hogaak). As someone who owned and played Phoenix, with a signed foil set of Lootings, I say good riddance.

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

Every Modern deck is annoying to lose to. Do you think my opponents today liked when I resolved a 6/6 flier for 5 mana that let me look at the top 10 cards and put 7 of them in my hand? I doubt it. Maybe it doesn't technically win on the spot, but when we are both nearly empty handed and a single 6/6 wins the game, the other cards are just icing on the cake or extra salt in the wound.

1. Bogles is annoying to lose to. Do you have interaction? Wrong kind, now you lose.
2. Valakut is annoying to lose to. Couldn't quite get lethal last turn? Search for Tomorrow into Shift, 18 damage to you, thanks for playing.
3. 8 Rack is annoying to. All you do is make me discard and play turns 2, 3, and 4 Smallpox. Did I have Obstinate Baloth? No, I lose. Yes, I win. My sideboarding consists of siding out anything over the mana cost of 3 because Smallpox in conjunction with Rack effects won't let me get there for the most part.

Being an annoying deck is not necessarily a reason to ban a Modern deck. It is a function of Modern. My Eldrazi opponent didn't like when I swung for 20 damage and she had to chump block with a Thought-Knot Seer on turn 2. Literally no one has ever lost a game of Modern (possibly Magic) where it hasn't been annoying, unless someone was actively trying to lose. I feel badly for people that think losing in Modern is fun to do. In some ways, I wish I could have part of that attitude, but in some ways, what am I trying to do then?
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
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

If any of those decks became 'best deck' they would be banned FCG. On the scale of 'obnoxious' there are levels. Thats how it is now.
UR Control UR

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
If any of those decks became 'best deck' they would be banned FCG. On the scale of 'obnoxious' there are levels. Thats how it is now.
True.

Then what is allowed to be the best deck? Turns? Burn? Better not be Burn. That deck is probably one of the most annoying decks to me and only me personally and I take joy in bringing decks to tournaments that STOMP Burn whenever I feel like it's coming.
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

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

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

Legend wrote:
1 year ago
I prefer Pod, Twin, and DRS unban rather than more bans.
Pod: I don't understand what Pod is still doing on the banlist. I am not sure even Devoted Druid would play it. The format is whay too fast and unforgiving for midrange value creature decks.

Twin: Not going to comment.

DRS: Would make hardly an impact and that says a lot about Modern as a whole right now. If would further solidify the top tier status of non-interactive big mana decks and combo decks ( I count Urza variations as combodecks). DRS is a midrange card that suffers the same problem Wrenn has. It destroys other fair decks while not being relevant vs the toxic decks. Everyone would jump on Jund and quickly realize it still loses to everything it losses against today and everyone ends up sleeving up Tron/Urza/Amulet/Devoted Druid. Nobody wants to play a fair game into turn 1 DRS, turn 2 Liliana, turn 3 Bloodbraid.

GSZ: Maybe it makes Infect and Boggles more consistent but other than that hardly does anything.

I think Leovold would have made a fine addition to Modern since its good vs Urza decks and Jund/UW(B) control.

User avatar
frederico
Posts: 6
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: xe /xim
Location: Italy

Post by frederico » 1 year ago

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... uncement?s

No changes. For the best, in my opinion, modern feels pretty great atm.
ciao

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

I haven't fully processed this article yet, but my first and second impressions are that Pioneer represents a significant threat to long-term Modern health if it takes off.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 19-10-21?c

The format will be Return to Ravnica forward, and the only banned cards right now are the fetchlands. I expect we'll see the banlist evolve to include both Modern-banned cards (TC/DTT) and Standard-banned cards (energy with Oko sounds fun) in the future. For now, I'm more interested in discussing the health of Modern relative to this format. It's possible Magic formats are not zero-sum games, and that Pioneer can coexist with Modern. Historic is likely going to fade into Pioneer on MTG Arena over time, so that's not really a player worth discussing. But I think we'll also see a decline in Modern relative to Pioneer depending on tournament support. Interesting times ahead.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 287
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 1 year ago

Seems like WotC has learned some lessons and gone with (essentially) no ban list in the new format. Keeping the fetches out seems like a fairly high priority goal in the new format, I know they've described shuffling as something they'd like to get out of the format. Of note in land cycles, fast lands are missing the allied colors; I would expect a reprint in the next Mirrodin set as they are named for the plane. I can't think of any notable reprint targets off the top of my head.

I wonder if they'll eventually make a new format once Pioneer is closer to Magic's Beginning that it's newest set. Just something odd to consider.

All that is probably best suited to a new format section though.

@the B&R:
No changes is nice to see, but I wish there was a blurb about what they're watching or even just a general "we are seeing a rise in X broad archetype". Something to establish awareness of the format, even if nothing big is actually happening.
I've boxed my cards up for long term storage.

Maybe I will return... Maybe not.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
For now, I'm more interested in discussing the health of Modern relative to this format. It's possible Magic formats are not zero-sum games, and that Pioneer can coexist with Modern. Historic is likely going to fade into Pioneer on MTG Arena over time, so that's not really a player worth discussing. But I think we'll also see a decline in Modern relative to Pioneer depending on tournament support. Interesting times ahead.
If this format is successful, I see it as a big blow to Modern. There is enough power in the last several sets to give people the 'I like to do strong things' feel, and the decks will be far cheaper.
UR Control UR

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

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

Pioneer will get it population from current Modern players, thus splitting the population. I'm not sure what this means for MTG, all I can say is I feel like they are throwing in the towel on the format and giving up on trying to balance it. They are reinventing it with this arbitrary starting point, but in 10 years Pioneer will suffer from the same problems that affect Modern now.

This isn't a solution, its a band aid. It would make more sense to bring back Extended than it would to make a format that directly competes with modern. All they are doing is buying themselves a few years. Soon you will have the State of Pioneer threads with people screaming about this or that card oppressing the format. Sigh.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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

Looks like they're leaving Modern out to die, like Legacy. Not cool.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
I'm not sure what this means for MTG, all I can say is I feel like they are throwing in the towel on the format and giving up on trying to balance it. They are reinventing it with this arbitrary starting point, but in 10 years Pioneer will suffer from the same problems that affect Modern now.
This is probably true as well, but given a long enough time line, a large enough card pool, perhaps its just the nature of the beast and a non-rotational format must eventually collapse?

Apparently this thread is the joke of the Modern online world, but from my perspective its hard to say that Modern has been a healthy format for nearly 2 years, its been one problem after another, and instead of just gutting it and cleaning house, they say 'well if people like it, they can keep it' and then everyone else who wants something different, something closer to Guilds of Ravnica/Dom Standard?

Well, we have Pioneer.

I do believe, its a net negative for Modern.
UR Control UR

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

Post by Ym1r » 1 year ago

robertleva wrote:
1 year ago
All they are doing is buying themselves a few years. Soon you will have the State of Pioneer threads with people screaming about this or that card oppressing the format. Sigh.
This will be true for absolutely any format that will be made. Every standard format has it, extended had it, modern has it, legacy has it, vintage has it, pauper has it. There is an exactly 0 chance that there will be a format where everyone will be happy and no card will be seen as problematic. So I don't think it's about "buying themselves a few years". If anything, they point to the fact that this might be the sustainable model for the future, a non-rotating format that rotates every 10 or so years.
Counter, draw a card.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”