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

User avatar
Tzoulis
Posts: 314
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
winning or losing is only serving to amplify or lessen the impact of unsatisfying gameplay. I could have a 100% win rate against decks like lantern control, titanshift or dredge but i would still hate playing against these decks because the gameplay is so freaking mind-numbing.

...

the continued existence of certain decks that require 'perfect 1st 10 cards' still leaves a sour taste.
Bingo.
I'm quoting you for the sake of simplicity and my reply is not directly addressed to you.

This will never change. Not in Modern, not in Pioneer, it's even true in Legacy. It even has been true in Standard seasons and not the broken ones (Mono-B Devotion, Atarka Red etc.). Whenever a card pool reaches a point of depth, those decks will exist and you WILL need your silver bullet(s) for that match up.

This will happen with Pioneer and the discussion will be done there again, unless Wizards uses the banlist so heavy handedly that will ban anything even remotely problematic (whatever that means to them).

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

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

Tzoulis wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
winning or losing is only serving to amplify or lessen the impact of unsatisfying gameplay. I could have a 100% win rate against decks like lantern control, titanshift or dredge but i would still hate playing against these decks because the gameplay is so freaking mind-numbing.

...

the continued existence of certain decks that require 'perfect 1st 10 cards' still leaves a sour taste.
Bingo.
I'm quoting you for the sake of simplicity and my reply is not directly addressed to you.

This will never change. Not in Modern, not in Pioneer, it's even true in Legacy. It even has been true in Standard seasons and not the broken ones (Mono-B Devotion, Atarka Red etc.). Whenever a card pool reaches a point of depth, those decks will exist and you WILL need your silver bullet(s) for that match up.
Generally speaking, it would be nice if we had both the tools to address the multitude of threats, as well as the consistency aides to help us find them. For whatever f**king reason, green gets all these, and blue ones are all horribly overcosted or banned.

Just imagine if Once Upon A Time was 1U and text was otherwise identical, besides replacing the word creature with noncreature. Is that busted?

Filtering and digging all help proactive threats, not people finding answers. And every card like OUAT makes it more difficult to keep up with the speed, efficiency, and consistency with which threats can be found and deployed. Never mind that Veil of Summer exist to protect threats, rather than answer them, for 1 mana, AND DRAW A CARD. Imagine Veil had the exact same text, but was U, and named black/red as colors instead of blue/black. Is that busted?

Why does green get to repeatedly do what other colors do, but better? Especially compared to blue?

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 859
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
To FCG: I'm just explaining what my attitude towards the game is. If something like that happens to me, and I didn't catch the interaction of the opponent, the fetchlands representing damage, or the cycle land that dredges, I will know for the next game. I will take it and leave it. Try to grind and win the next game of magic. It seems to me that cfp (and i might be wrong here), is just choosing to blame modern for this and call it non interactive, with no counterplay, variance, lopsided games, and stuff. It's happening for several years now, dear cfusionpm. I remember cfp blaming Modern on an occasion that he could bolt a glistener elf sorcery speed, while the opponent was tapped out in the past(back at mtgs), and instead opting to use it at the opponent's turn only to get blown out by infect and turn 3 killed. Back then, he said "what kind of format is this? My opp turn 3 killed me after this". And we just said what the correct line was. I also remember him wanting Teferi banned, because "it eliminates interactive spells"(that's kind of right) and "it does not leave you tap aether vial at the opponent's turn", which is obviously wrong. Now, cfp might be a very, very good player. Nobody knows that, unless he plays against that person, right? For example, recently I played against Wraithpk. We were testing a little bit of Twin. Me on Twin, him on Burn. Then vice versa. Not something to brag about, but played exceptionally well, from both sides, both of us. A matchup that requires a lot of skill. Won a game, just because I had to play a Deceiver Exarch on sorcery speed, to free 1 of my mana, to hold up some interactive spell(I had only 1 mana up and I needed the second one while he was tapped out). Had I played it instant speed to tap something of him, or untap something of mine, and I would have lost the game, because in response he would have killed me and I could not negate his spell. This with me, being on 1 life. And he did something similar at other games. Now, I know he is a skilled magic player.
It's the attitude that matters. If you want to become a better player, you should focus on improving in the game and accepting that some days, you get blown out. Especially in a format like Modern. Now, all of this, if you actually want to become a better player non stop and grind GP's. I understand @cfp, if he is 0-2'ing an fnm after having travelled for quite some time, and he just wants to have fun. Playing for fun and playing to get better and better and grind GP's are two totally different things. But then, again, if he just want to have fun, and he didn't and he consistently doesn't, isn't better to just stop travelling or playing the game, since you don't enjoy it, instead of calling Modern names and bring a lot of negativity about the format, at a forum that's mostly about Modern's state? And this, happening over and over again, for 3 years, non stop?
Just bring some positivity in the game, for once. Please. Or just discuss another topic, other than why Modern is so bad, for you. We get it. You hate it.

I hope you all get what I am saying here.

Peace, gkourou.
In my opinion, that is a good stance to have in the game. You have to first realize what you did wrong in the matches, be it play mistakes, sideboarding improperly, playing the wrong deck, or tons of other things. The last thing you should look at is variance, but it does indeed happen, even when you've done most of the other things nearly perfectly. I see Pro Players make all the right moves and still randomly lose to a scrub. Heck, I'm a scrub and have beaten several Pro Players at GPs recently. I am 4-0 lifetime vs. a player who I consider to be at least one of the 5 current top players in Magic (although most of my friends disagree). If that right there doesn't prove variance exists, then I don't know what to tell someone. But firstly, you should look at what you as a player did to contribute to that and if you could have avoided that variance. Your attitude toward the game is what helps you play better as a player.

That's awesome that you got to play against WraithPK. We are all pretty much unknowns until you have had some actual (non writing) interaction. I love it and it is definitely very special since we live so far away. I met my mtgsalvation Griselbrand buddy, finalnub or Jon Zhang for the first time at GP Vegas. These are always amazing moments and you can really tell more about someone as a player through these moments.

Good players make mistakes all the time. My friend just top 8ed a WPN tournament where the winner got a Pro Tour invitation. He said that he played Sultai Food horribly at times. But he also made some really good plays. You should never let play mistakes keep you from playing wonderfully after they have happened. Our other buddy (the Team that we usually play events with and drive to events with) has been absolutely killing it recently, but missed the Pro Tour Day 2 at 3-5. This probably is mostly due to the transition of him as a Modern player to a Standard/Limited player up against players that have done that for 10 years straight.

I understand that it can get tiring when someone complains about a format that we love. It can be easy to tell someone to "play something else." But I think this is incorrect thinking, as I've read stuff by Bocephus and Shmanka that pointed out reasons why it's not just easy to sell all Modern and dip into Legacy. They can say it better than I can. I think some people here just are saying the things that some of us keep inside most of the time. I have always missed Birthing Pod. It's gotten to the point where I miss it more than Summer Bloom and most of you can remember when I fought that ban till months/years after its dying day. It was literally me and TeysaOrlov I believe who would stand up for it. I understand now that the bans were correct, but hoped some day they could come back *cough *cough Birthing Pod. I think if anyone gets too annoyed with complaining, the best option is to avoid it or put someone on block because expressing one's feelings instead of holding them in can be much better in many ways in my opinion. I say this as someone who constantly keeps my feelings in, but I feel SAFE to express my feelings here. They don't have to be agreed with and I don't have to agree, but it feels like a safe place to say how I feel about Modern.

Damn, I didn't know I'd go so long. ...Veteran's Day morning just after I woke up...
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

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

It is as KTK said w.r.t development level, threats in general have gotten stronger, leaner, more consistent, more resilient and are ridiculously varied. There are more and more high value 'must-answer' stuff at almost every point in the curve and the answers are just woefully lacking.

WoTC threw a pretty decent bone with Force of Negation, but unlike legacy (for all its flaws), Modern lacks the level of consistency that closes the gap between threats and answers.

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

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
It is as KTK said w.r.t development level, threats in general have gotten stronger, leaner, more consistent, more resilient and are ridiculously varied. There are more and more high value 'must-answer' stuff at almost every point in the curve and the answers are just woefully lacking.

WoTC threw a pretty decent bone with Force of Negation, but unlike legacy (for all its flaws), Modern lacks the level of consistency that closes the gap between threats and answers.
WOTC: Here are a ton of super-pushed, super-powered creatures, with on-cast/ETB/LTB/activated abilities, that all must be answered or they snowball out of control.
WOTC: Oh, and here's a TON of tools to find and cast them more easily and reliably. Don't forget about fixing and accelerating your mana!
WOTC: And in case anyone tries to mess with your or your stuff, here's a 1 mana Cryptic Command to protect you and your stuff!
WOTC: Also, for the rest of y'all here's an upgraded Negate. That's what you want, right? GLHF!

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

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I again want to emphasize this is a Magic problem, one approaching a significant crisis, not just a Modern problem. It's so bad that historically tight-lipped Aaron Forsythe is actively discussing increased bannings on Twitter. He's literally polling the audience about this, likely because R&D is increasingly frustrated with formats and struggling to manage rapidly evolving metagames.



Forsythe attributes this to information exchange and iteration (i.e. many tournaments). It is imperative that we, as a community, do not allow this redirection. The problem is not more information. This gets back to the ridiculous decision to restrict MTGO data in an era where there is endless data. MTGO data restrictions have done basically nothing to stop formats from getting solved. The post-Field Standard got solved in less than a month. More MTGO data would not have prevented that but might have helped players adapt to a changing metagame. Similarly, more tournaments and iteration isn't the problem either. There have been strings of Modern metagames with no emergent, broken deck despite endless MTGO iteration.

This is because the real problem is at the Play Design and Design/Development level. The new cards are creating problems. Standard is at 11 bans currently with 1-2 more on the horizon. There should be no clearer red flag than this. Green is dominant across both Modern and Standard as a direct result of these bad design/dev decisions, and every time the community clamors for bans, it pushes R&D to put on band-aids instead of pushing for the real solution. Card design needs to change to encourage interaction and generic answers, the cards that make Magic fun and distinct from slugfests like Hearthstone. This disastrous change in design philosophy has directly contributed to instability across all contemporary Magic formats. Pioneer will be next if this is not solved, and the long-term health of the game for players who enjoy the kind of old-school Magic counterplay we all know and love is imperiled.

I implore people to stop framing this as an issue of bans, formats, specific metagames, etc. This is a design-level issue which the community needs to speak out against.
Personally I don't think they have the well, balls, to do what needs to be done to REALLY fix modern. For starters, all of the perfectly fine cards (SFM, JTMS) that have been rotting on the ban since Day 1 need to come off. ALL of them. Next, start banning the decks that are degenerate BEFORE they oppress the fking format for months. If that means making a weekly banlist announcement for every format going forward then so be it. They need to AGGRESSIVELY ban cards that from unfun strategies, period.

Finally for RnD, and I cannot stress this enough, STOP giving those exact same degenerate strategies (dredge, artifact combo, land control, etc) NEW %$#% cards! Looking back on Hogaak I REALLY want to know what they could have possibly been thinking. Even if the card wasn't as stupid broken as it was, WHY would you want to support a strategy like that in Modern Horizons, a set that was designed SPECIFICALLY for the format?? I don't expect them to never make a mistake, but this was like throwing gasoline on a house fire while the whole community of Modern watches their house burn down.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

Veil banned in Pioneer: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... nouncement

I think this is an awesome change for Pioneer and hope it leads to similar changes in other formats. Cards like Veil are ridiculous and strongly disincentivize counterplay and interaction. Wizards signaled a small but significant shift in this decision by acknowledging the importance of natural metagame forces to police metagames. If control decks AND discard sucks, these decks get too strong. Hopefully we see Veil banned in other formats for similar reasons; green does not need this kind of support. Veil is also the kind of super-surgical ban that doesn't hurt collection value or deck investments. Great decision overall!
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Veil banned in Pioneer: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... nouncement

I think this is an awesome change for Pioneer and hope it leads to similar changes in other formats. Cards like Veil are ridiculous and strongly disincentivize counterplay and interaction. Wizards signaled a small but significant shift in this decision by acknowledging the importance of natural metagame forces to police metagames. If control decks AND discard sucks, these decks get too strong. Hopefully we see Veil banned in other formats for similar reasons; green does not need this kind of support. Veil is also the kind of super-surgical ban that doesn't hurt collection value or deck investments. Great decision overall!
I find it extremely interesting that they allow Once Upon A Time to remain. Oh well, there's always next week.

Notably about Modern, I find this line particularly interesting: "aggro and ramp decks still remain overrepresented in the competitive metagame at the expense of midrange and control." I wonder if that sentiment extends to Modern, or if we're just left out to rot, like Legacy.

User avatar
Simto
Posts: 323
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Veil banned in Pioneer: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... nouncement

I think this is an awesome change for Pioneer and hope it leads to similar changes in other formats. Cards like Veil are ridiculous and strongly disincentivize counterplay and interaction. Wizards signaled a small but significant shift in this decision by acknowledging the importance of natural metagame forces to police metagames. If control decks AND discard sucks, these decks get too strong. Hopefully we see Veil banned in other formats for similar reasons; green does not need this kind of support. Veil is also the kind of super-surgical ban that doesn't hurt collection value or deck investments. Great decision overall!
I find it extremely interesting that they allow Once Upon A Time to remain. Oh well, there's always next week.

Notably about Modern, I find this line particularly interesting: "aggro and ramp decks still remain overrepresented in the competitive metagame at the expense of midrange and control." I wonder if that sentiment extends to Modern, or if we're just left out to rot, like Legacy.
No way they'll ban Once Upon a Time (or Oko for the matter) any time soon. They want people to keep buying packs from the latest release. It's only if something gets REALLY REALLY broken they'll pull a fast or emergency ban like with Hogaak and Felidar Guardian when it came out.
It's money first, then health of a meta.

But yeah, there's always next week hehe. Pioneer won't settle for a while.

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

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

Simto wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Veil banned in Pioneer: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... nouncement

I think this is an awesome change for Pioneer and hope it leads to similar changes in other formats. Cards like Veil are ridiculous and strongly disincentivize counterplay and interaction. Wizards signaled a small but significant shift in this decision by acknowledging the importance of natural metagame forces to police metagames. If control decks AND discard sucks, these decks get too strong. Hopefully we see Veil banned in other formats for similar reasons; green does not need this kind of support. Veil is also the kind of super-surgical ban that doesn't hurt collection value or deck investments. Great decision overall!
I find it extremely interesting that they allow Once Upon A Time to remain. Oh well, there's always next week.

Notably about Modern, I find this line particularly interesting: "aggro and ramp decks still remain overrepresented in the competitive metagame at the expense of midrange and control." I wonder if that sentiment extends to Modern, or if we're just left out to rot, like Legacy.
No way they'll ban Once Upon a Time (or Oko for the matter) any time soon. They want people to keep buying packs from the latest release. It's only if something gets REALLY REALLY broken they'll pull a fast or emergency ban like with Hogaak and Felidar Guardian when it came out.
It's money first, then health of a meta.

But yeah, there's always next week hehe. Pioneer won't settle for a while.
I'm just astonished by how ludicrously powerful OUAT is. In the context of Modern, I took the plunge and built a Sultai Shadow pile of cards after selling my mtgo flip Jaces for like $80 profit and seeing that Goyfs are $5 online. Been playing it for several matches now, and it feels better, more robust, and more consistent than GDS ever did. It doesn't have as fast of a nut draw, but the trade off is that it feels considerably more consistent and it never feels like like I am drawing air and whiffing. Between Traverse and Once, I can frequently keep hands that I would never have been able to if only limited to blue cantrips and baubles. It's really absurd how good these green cards are.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 859
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
I'm just astonished by how ludicrously powerful OUAT is. In the context of Modern, I took the plunge and built a Sultai Shadow pile of cards after selling my mtgo flip Jaces for like $80 profit and seeing that Goyfs are $5 online. Been playing it for several matches now, and it feels better, more robust, and more consistent than GDS ever did. It doesn't have as fast of a nut draw, but the trade off is that it feels considerably more consistent and it never feels like like I am drawing air and whiffing. Between Traverse and Once, I can frequently keep hands that I would never have been able to if only limited to blue cantrips and baubles. It's really absurd how good these green cards are.
I just had a conversation with someone I play with occasionally on FB about why he thinks that Veil of Summer is a better ban than something like OUaT. He seems to really like the ban. :-o

On another note, I told a close friend that Once Upon a Time will hit $25. He believed that it would probably go down to $5. I told him that I don't care if it's a rare in a widely opened set, this card is just super insane and you'd have to be crazy not to own your own set. Right now, it's still slowly on its way up, despite more Throne being opened ever day. It's getting close to $20.
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
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
I find it extremely interesting that they allow Once Upon A Time to remain. Oh well, there's always next week.
I'm totally fine with them taking their time to ban the right cards at this stage of Pioneer development. They have literal weeks of MTGO iteration to work with before relevant paper events and the "official" Pioneer rollout in 2020. I'd rather them go one card at a time and surgically remove issues than hit lots of stuff right away because outspoken critics want them gone. Pioneer's popularity will experience no negative impact from this initial wave of bans and broken decks. But if Pioneer has issues in its 2020 rollout, that will be more problematic.

Just because a card is banned in one week, doesn't mean Wizards is ignoring other related cards. Veil's banning does not mean OUT or Oko or other cards are safe. It's just one of many surgical options they are taking, and Veil is a great one because it directly removed interactive metagame regulators from the format.
Simto wrote:
1 year ago
No way they'll ban Once Upon a Time (or Oko for the matter) any time soon. They want people to keep buying packs from the latest release. It's only if something gets REALLY REALLY broken they'll pull a fast or emergency ban like with Hogaak and Felidar Guardian when it came out.
I sort of disagree with this because Oko and/or OUT/Nissa are virtually guaranteed bans next week. Standard is an ungodly mess due to terrible Play Design and other card design/development decisions. This will force them to ban a flagship mythic next week. That said, if they don't pull the trigger on Oko, there is going to be unprecedented player uproar. It will virtually confirm suspicions players like you have regarding the economic incentives to ban/not ban cards, and it will lead to even more horrible Standard and Arena months to come. I'm still predicting the Oko ban next week even if the execs and marketing folks don't want it. Oko is relevant in other formats and will retain some value. This naturally affects Modern health because it opens the doors to Oko being bannable in even more formats (he's gone in Brawl and soon to be Standard), and because it casts further doubt on the awful Play Design strategy in the past months.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
Simto
Posts: 323
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

I can only be positively surprised in that aspect hehe. I just have no doubt that every choice they make is with dosh as the top priority. But I mean, as a company, who can blame them lol, people need to make money for their jobs.

Mapccu
Posts: 89
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Mapccu » 1 year ago

They can make money without breaking the game in two. Teferi hit the same price tag as Oko, at the same frequency in packs, and never divided the metagame like this into two distinct tiers. In fact lots of mythics or chase cards have hit that $40-50 USD/ea. mark without being this obnoxious. Even baby Jace, when coco was the clear best deck, wasn't putting up these kinds of numbers. His price tag dwarfed Oko at his height.

Do I think not banning him is driven by bottom line mindset? Yes, but at a cost to player confidence. Mine is about shot...and I drop quite a bit of money on this game every year. Actually the majority of my fun/spending money has historically been funneled into magic almost solely. This is where most of my friends were hanging out anyway.

Prices are dropping steadily on the secondary market for Oko buylist prices. I mean, 3rd parties are stuck in a pretty crap spot. You let Oko run rampant and you can't move the majority of secondary market inventory because everything is largely irrelevant. That being said, they're rightly suspect of buying into too many copies because they have to ban it at some point.

I couldn't even move a border-less alt art Oko like two weeks ago (before the championship). The store, and some of players that normally buy into cards, wouldn't even give me 50% cash for the store price. Heck I offered the store 40% of their price (they normally do 50% for cash) and they were sitting on too many already. I finally just buylisted it to SCG.

Given how piss poor the 12 months of modern have felt to a lot of people on these forums, you gotta wonder who is playtesting over there. Hogaak was clearly not an okay card. I mean...there are only 3-4 decks in modern that can even cast him on t2-3...freaking playtest the decks. If someone comes up with something completely off the wall then sure...I get missing these things. The problem is that these cards are slotting right into clear best strategies and just shredding through the meta. Phoenix was borderline to me...but it definitely teetered on the edge from time to time for un-fun play patterns. Again, it slotted into storm with really just a a change in win conditions...easy play testing.

These mistakes are alienating me from the game. They need to get back in gear.

I'm skeptical the pioneer bans will yield any changes for the better in modern tbh.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 859
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
I find it extremely interesting that they allow Once Upon A Time to remain. Oh well, there's always next week.
I'm totally fine with them taking their time to ban the right cards at this stage of Pioneer development. They have literal weeks of MTGO iteration to work with before relevant paper events and the "official" Pioneer rollout in 2020. I'd rather them go one card at a time and surgically remove issues than hit lots of stuff right away because outspoken critics want them gone. Pioneer's popularity will experience no negative impact from this initial wave of bans and broken decks. But if Pioneer has issues in its 2020 rollout, that will be more problematic.

Just because a card is banned in one week, doesn't mean Wizards is ignoring other related cards. Veil's banning does not mean OUT or Oko or other cards are safe. It's just one of many surgical options they are taking, and Veil is a great one because it directly removed interactive metagame regulators from the format.
Simto wrote:
1 year ago
No way they'll ban Once Upon a Time (or Oko for the matter) any time soon. They want people to keep buying packs from the latest release. It's only if something gets REALLY REALLY broken they'll pull a fast or emergency ban like with Hogaak and Felidar Guardian when it came out.
I sort of disagree with this because Oko and/or OUT/Nissa are virtually guaranteed bans next week. Standard is an ungodly mess due to terrible Play Design and other card design/development decisions. This will force them to ban a flagship mythic next week. That said, if they don't pull the trigger on Oko, there is going to be unprecedented player uproar. It will virtually confirm suspicions players like you have regarding the economic incentives to ban/not ban cards, and it will lead to even more horrible Standard and Arena months to come. I'm still predicting the Oko ban next week even if the execs and marketing folks don't want it. Oko is relevant in other formats and will retain some value. This naturally affects Modern health because it opens the doors to Oko being bannable in even more formats (he's gone in Brawl and soon to be Standard), and because it casts further doubt on the awful Play Design strategy in the past months.
In some ways, I feel badly for discussing Pioneer, but it seems at least somewhat relevant. If this is the case (which I can't argue that those should be banned next week), then why are the bans happening in this current order. Most of us know that there is no way that Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx should be allowed to exist right now when everyone knows it will be eventually banned anyway (sort of like that Arisen Necropolis dude). The order of these bans don't make sense to me. If the more offending cards are banned, then cards like Leyline of Abundance and Veil of Summer could eventually be okay. Veil has some problems going for it. I can admit that. But Leyline of Abundance is completely fine if the card Nykthos is banned. There is no way that card breaks things on its own.

The other point that I have is that bans hurt consumer confidence. There are people who bought the whole Copy Cat deck for themselves and their teams. Yes, maybe they should have known it would get banned. But how soon? They may have thought they had a whole month to play it before anything happened. People bought the card Leyline of Abundance or Veil of Summer. Did they think that their card would get banned before OUaT, Nykthos, or Treasure Cruise? If they didn't think their card would get banned before those, are they idiots? I hope not or I'm an idiot. I am an idiot for thinking that Leyline of Abundance and Veil of Summer would not get banned before Treasure Cruise. I'm assuming I'm not the only idiot in the world?

And I know that WotC said they would do bans every week, so only the first wave should have hurt players. So does this mean that I should not buy into any good deck? Should I just borrow or rent cards? Because once something gets banned, there is then another boogeyman. Then after that boogeyman is banned, then another one is too good. And so on and so on. We've seen this in Modern, but it is much more devastating when it happens on a WEEK to WEEK basis.
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
Simto
Posts: 323
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

[mention]FoodChainGoblins[/mention] That's the problem all formats essentially have. The format has one top deck that destroys everything and people cry out for bans. The problem gets banned but then a new top deck destroys everything and people cry out for more bans. And so it goes hehe.

I think the difference is people who are hyped on Pioneer are just using what they already have until the format and bans have settled a bit. Everybody's just having fun brewing and playing whatever they feel like right now except the people grinding for the top I guess hehe.
Last edited by Simto 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

worldsaverinc
Posts: 18
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by worldsaverinc » 1 year ago

Green is a color of power, but not a color of a lot of answers. If more answers get printed like they have for legacy and vintage, would green have any place in the format?

Green gets better the less there are answers and worse as more answers open up as blue is directly opposite of this. Blue gets better when there are more answers in the format. Green for the longest time was one of the worst colors on the scene. It had in modern Tarmogoyf? However, green was powered up with Collected Company strategies, things like Traverse, Scapeshift became better, etc.

Maybe Green is too strong, but I don't want it to disappear. It probably won't disappear now. However, if too many good answers or more general answers get printed, Green disappears.

I am glad Green is up, however, I realize it might be too strong and would like other colors to rise and have their day in the sun. I don't want Green to disappear. I would like though Green to diversify from the lands-based/creature-combo to more creature-aggro based, but again that happens less there are answers too which force it to lands/creature-combo.

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

Post by The Fluff » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
The other point that I have is that bans hurt consumer confidence. There are people who bought the whole Copy Cat deck for themselves and their teams. Yes, maybe they should have known it would get banned. But how soon? They may have thought they had a whole month to play it before anything happened.

And I know that WotC said they would do bans every week, so only the first wave should have hurt players. So does this mean that I should not buy into any good deck? Should I just borrow or rent cards? Because once something gets banned, there is then another boogeyman. Then after that boogeyman is banned, then another one is too good. And so on and so on. We've seen this in Modern, but it is much more devastating when it happens on a WEEK to WEEK basis.
certainly did not expect CopyCat to be banned. Fortunate that I have only bought one Saheeli Rai and one cat a year ago. I do wonder what is wotc barometer for measuring.. on when their new format is already stable enough to stop banning things in pioneer?
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
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 325
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
I do wonder what is wotc barometer for measuring.. on when their new format is already stable enough to stop banning things in pioneer?
They did say that at the start of 2020 they will be aligning the Pioneer B&Rs with regular B&Rs. I think things will start to slow down around that point... Or at least hope. Though there was a twitter poll about what players would like to see as far as ban announcements are concerned (to include "no change"). When I saw it, the front runner was "scheduled, more frequently" with second place being "ad hock" and third being how things are currently run. Seems to still be the case. Link

User avatar
pierreb
Posts: 276
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Up North

Post by pierreb » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
Because once something gets banned, there is then another boogeyman. Then after that boogeyman is banned, then another one is too good. And so on and so on. We've seen this in Modern, but it is much more devastating when it happens on a WEEK to WEEK basis.
Simto wrote:
1 year ago
That's the problem all formats essentially have. The format has one top deck that destroys everything and people cry out for bans. The problem gets banned but then a new top deck destroys everything and people cry out for more bans.
The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
I do wonder what is wotc barometer for measuring.. on when their new format is already stable enough to stop banning things in pioneer?
I expect that eventually the format will settle down. Wizards clearly stated that they ban based on win % they observe on MTGO and arena. It's not rue that there is always another bogeyman. At one point, you get a roster of roughly equal top decks. Given that there is no big pioneer tournament yet, banning on a weekly basis is certainly better than the alternatives. People should have a good idea of what cards are powerful and are very likely to get scrutinized. Many people already own these cards, so there is no real loss to them. Only those fully buying in on a weekly basis get hurt, but they should know the risk.

While I understand the glacial pace of bans (only 1 card this week) I do wonder if this choice wont come back to bite them as there are multiple cards that are clearly on the line. They may end-up having to pick up the pace of bans as we get closer to real tournaments?

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Simto wrote:
1 year ago
FoodChainGoblins That's the problem all formats essentially have. The format has one top deck that destroys everything and people cry out for bans. The problem gets banned but then a new top deck destroys everything and people cry out for more bans. And so it goes hehe.

I think the difference is people who are hyped on Pioneer are just using what they already have until the format and bans have settled a bit. Everybody's just having fun brewing and playing whatever they feel like right now except the people grinding for the top I guess hehe.
But it wasn't always this way.

As long as you have 2 archetypes which are decent against each other, soft to different things, you can hit a stable point.

BGx vs URx policed Moderns golden age and should be the ultimate goal of Pioneer. It's too late for Modern without what others call format nuking ban waves, but Pioneer just needs a bit of cultivation to bring back a format that is actually competitively diverse.
UR Control UR

User avatar
pierreb
Posts: 276
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Up North

Post by pierreb » 1 year ago

Burn, human, GDS and UW police modern very well.

(The first makes sure you're not allowed to durdle. The second goes wide and fast but is entirely creature-based. The third is mid-rangy (its creatures are big but only come down turn 3+, if even that), disrupt the hand and has some soft counters and a few 2-for-1. The last is modern's version of classic control.)

That modern no longer sports your pet decks doesn't make it unpoliced or bad.

The only real problem deck right now is urza, and it is no even eldrazi-winter bad, just very good but still beatable.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

They don't police it. If they did, we would not have decks reaching the % of the meta we did, or bans being needed.
UR Control UR

User avatar
pierreb
Posts: 276
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Up North

Post by pierreb » 1 year ago

OK, then I don't understand what decks policing a format means.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Prevent degenerate decks from dominating.
Prevent linear decks from dominating.
Prevent any one deck, from dominating.
Provide a core to the format, or pillars, around which the other archetypes can still find space to leverage the meta.

BGx (Jund/Junk) and URx (Twin, Grixis Control) did this. Part of me wants to write something really long and general about this dynamic, but I doubt it really (ok it doesnt) matters to most people, so I'll spare you from my diatribe. :p

Regardless, there is now a State of Pioneer. Peace!
UR Control UR

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”