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

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Modern was and maybe still is the most popular constructed format. But if we want this format to survive and still be popular, 'acceptable' is not good enough, not when Pioneer is vastly more accessible and looks to be more enjoyable. Why would anyone pay top dollar to play an 'acceptable' format when they can pay less to play a fun format?

So yes, why not use bans/unbans more aggressively to regulate Modern?
This is something that has been lost on a LOT of Modern players, especially back in the MTGS days. People, even to this day, suggest that we need to be making ban decisions purely based on Quantifiable metrics like win rate percentages, that factors like fun have no place in the discussion. The big issue I see people forgetting is that this is a game, and a game MUST be fun, and fun is not something you can calculate on a spread sheet, if you could, Activision and EA would fire all of their game design staff tomorrow.

I think as Pioneer disrupts the Modern ecosystem going forward, people will learn the hard truth that there are plenty of hobbies out there right now, there are plenty of high quality video games being released routinely for people to spend their time on as well as other table top products where fun is prioritized, or at least has a seat at the table. In a world where multitudes of hobbies are vying your people's attention and patronage all the time, Modern does not stand a chance because of how much Wotc has pulled it's punches with ban list updates with Modern.

SaltySips
Posts: 2
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by SaltySips » 1 year ago

I do understand that without continued support, Modern will fade sometime in the future. What I fail to understand however is, what gives people the confidence that WOTC will manage Pioneer better than how they managed Modern over the last 12 months?

Are the people managing Pioneer not the same people that have been responsible for Modern's recent development?

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

SaltySips wrote:
1 year ago
I do understand that without continued support, Modern will fade sometime in the future. What I fail to understand however is, what gives people the confidence that WOTC will manage Pioneer better than how they managed Modern over the last 12 months?

Are the people managing Pioneer not the same people that have been responsible for Modern's recent development?
I'm just speaking for myself so here goes.

3 Reasons:

1) They started well, instead of arbitrarily banning a bunch of old standard terrors like in Modern, they started with the 5 KTK fetches and worked their way up. This ensures, average cards dont end up languishing on the ban list for years (Like SFM). And for now at least, they have acted swiftly to address huge imbalances.

2) The card pool is much smaller, it's less likely that something downright offensive slips through the gaps. There'll still be periods of unbalance (looking at their track record), but i'm fairly assured that it's much harder to repeat another Eldrazi / Hogaak situation.

3) There's nothing (so far) in the card pool that calls for the "battle of the sideboards" that Modern is/was infamous for.

Conclusion: What gives me the confidence is 70% because of the smaller card pool and 30% WoTC's management decisions.

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

SaltySips wrote:
1 year ago
I do understand that without continued support, Modern will fade sometime in the future. What I fail to understand however is, what gives people the confidence that WOTC will manage Pioneer better than how they managed Modern over the last 12 months?

Are the people managing Pioneer not the same people that have been responsible for Modern's recent development?
For me it is simply that Wotc has a much larger margin for error with Pioneer than it had with Modern. Pioneer has no 8th or 9th edition to contend with in terms of ban list policies for starters. From RTR on wards, Wotc has been a lot tamer with printing cards compared to how they were prior to that. There are obviously some outliers that have happened within the past 3 years or so, but those have the potential to be banned, and even if they don't I genuinely don't see those outliers creating such absurd and degenerate gameplay on the same level as Modern even if wotc is utterly incompetent and does not manage the ban list well (which is entirely possible).

Mtgthewary
Posts: 220
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

Again, pushed cards are incoming now in each set... So I don't understand why people really believe they generate a new fair eternal format? Think about, which 2 cards are banned in Pioneer? Green leyline? Veil? This both are new ones. Which we talk next? Once upon? Hmmm, seems another new shiny card... So I don't get it why you all believe, this Pioneer is good and have a future. Support? Yeah, look at oko which can be too banned maybe in some months... This support? No thanks, we need a new design in cards, more quality and not 25 new formats. We lying ourselves and support their Strategie only. So it's quite (silent?) now and all are happy 1 year, while problems are still same in each format. 1 year more time for wotc and getting our money till some of you see the real problems
Last edited by Mtgthewary 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

And they have been banned, which shows their willingless to address said pushed or busted cards. So what's the problem?

Pioneer may be good, or may end being a bust. But being better than Modern is a low bar to overcome.

Mtgthewary
Posts: 220
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

Yeah, yugioh style. Hey, we generate 2452 mistakes, sell cards and after we Bann them and community is happy. What you think happened with yugioh and this strategy? By the way, they still don't ban correctly. Veil and leyline instead of nykthos, because they need it on theros. Yeah, seems great and carefully with Pioneer. They changed nothing in the philosophy! Bridge instead hoogak says hello. The future is every 5 year another new format... That's all. Yes, sell your modern pool, but not because of Pioneer, it is because wotc and magic is not a safe place anymore. Use only cards for playing and don't collect them. Maybe this is really better
Last edited by Mtgthewary 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

Mtgthewary wrote:
1 year ago
Yeah, yugioh style. Hey, we generate 2452 mistakes, sell cards and after we Bann them and community is happy. What you think happened with yugioh and this strategy? By the way, they still don't ban. Veil and leyline instead of nykthos, because they need it on theros. Yeah, seems great and carefully with Pioneer. They changed nothing in the philosophy! Bridge instead hoogak says hello. The future is every 5 year another new format... That's all.
I'm not going to sit here and argue that Wotcs recent design failures and practices are sustainable, they aren't. What I'm saying is that them printing broken things and banning them is better than them printing broken things and not banning them. It may very well be that this unsustainable practice that Wotc has fallen into will lead to the long term downfall of magic, that is entirely possible. But in the interim, people are looking for better, more engaging gameplay than what Modern can give them with all of the degenerate decks that have not been banned.

Mtgthewary
Posts: 220
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

But this is not what we need. I don't want another 1-2 years full of fun and then nothing or nothing playable anymore. Give me a little bit less fun, but give it forever to me.

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

Mtgthewary wrote:
1 year ago
But this is not what we need. I don't want another 1-2 years full of fun and then nothing or nothing playable anymore. Give me a little bit less fun, but give it forever to me.
Okay but it doesn't matter if that is the concession you want to make if the other people at your LGS aren't willing to. Again, not arguing that Wotc rotating entire formats can be considered sustainable, I do not think it is, but players want fun gameplay, and this is the method Wotc is choosing to potentially fulfill that request, regardless of all of the long term damage this method might cause.

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

Mtgthewary wrote:
1 year ago
Yeah, yugioh style. Hey, we generate 2452 mistakes, sell cards and after we Bann them and community is happy. What you think happened with yugioh and this strategy? By the way, they still don't ban correctly. Veil and leyline instead of nykthos, because they need it on theros. Yeah, seems great and carefully with Pioneer. They changed nothing in the philosophy! Bridge instead hoogak says hello. The future is every 5 year another new format... That's all. Yes, sell your modern pool, but not because of Pioneer, it is because wotc and magic is not a safe place anymore. Use only cards for playing and don't collect them. Maybe this is really better
That may be so.

But for many, they're done waiting for Modern to be good. Right now there is a more enjoyable and affordable alternative, so they're going to play that instead. It's not about what Pioneer will be in 4 or 5 years time, that's not the point. It's about what players enjoy more NOW.

Pioneer could be crap in 5 years time, but even then there's no guarantee Modern will be any better.

All bias aside, I'd gladly play a format that's enjoyable now and bad in 5 years over a format that's barely acceptable now and just as bad in 5 years. Assuming the end result is the same. I'll take the enjoyment now thanks.

As for the YGO strategy? Not that I particularly like it but they're one of the top 2 TCGs in Japan together with Duel Masters while still being top 3 worldwide, so their strategy is actually pretty successful with regards to their target audience.
Mtgthewary wrote:
1 year ago
But this is not what we need. I don't want another 1-2 years full of fun and then nothing or nothing playable anymore. Give me a little bit less fun, but give it forever to me.
So is that your gripe? You want Pioneer, a format that many currently enjoy more than Modern to fail for so that other players can languish with you in a barely enjoyable format. That's sad.

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

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

The thing with your line of thinking [mention]True-Name Nemesis[/mention] is that they're doing well NOW, where they have a blank slate and banning every week (so far). A few year down the line they won't do that, Pioneer will fall into Modern's position with established archetypes and pet decks or whatever. From that point onwards, each pushed card (a la hogaak/eldrazi or what have you) WILL be contentious, WILL bring baggage and other whining. We can't judge whether Pioneer is a "good" format now, we'll judge it a year or later down the line, after the "grace period" (if you will) will be over.

The same problems that plague Modern, will plague Pioneer, because it's a modern design problem, not the modern card pool necessarily. Also, after a few years people will want to reexamine banned cards, and we'll have long winded discussions on that that Felidar Guardian should be unbanned because it's not as degenerate as the format has become.

All of that is predicated on the idea that they will manage the Pioneer ban list as they have done with the Modern one, with careful consideration (at least for most bans) and VERY slow unbannings.

And to preempt people, I like Pioneer, but it's still too early for me to even consider playing a deck there and it's too early to even consider it a good or bad format. I also believe that the fragmentation between Modern and Pioneer will not be AS big as people think. Team events will likely have Modern + Pioneer + Standard. Modern is still a very popular format and a good chunk of its card pool is playable in Pioneer, so Modern players can build a pioneer deck relatively easily, but they won't be playing in a format as powerful as Modern (which I assume many people like).

Mtgthewary
Posts: 220
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

Tzoulios, great explanation! True name, you could say wotc is the problem because they manage cards and banninngs, but it seems for you it's enough if they give you a new format, even problems still stay same and Design mistakes too. What should wotc learn from this? If you want happy people, if you want selling cards, manage old formats bad and generate a new one... So they can say they are happy now like you did. We really think this is enough and acceptable? We want mass over quality?

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

[mention]Tzoulis[/mention] Nothing wrong with my line of thinking. It's the same as yours. I believe whatever you say will happen sooner or later whatever they do, It's the nature of power creep and non-rotating formats. I simply stated my reasoning as to why Pioneer would be easier for WoTC to manage because of the smaller card pool.

I'm just talking about it from an enjoyment perspective, and I only speak for my own opinions and the players close to me.

Pioneer is more enjoyable than Modern NOW. That's all. It doesn't matter what Pioneer may be a 1,2,3,4,5 years or whatever down the road. If I'm enjoying Pioneer more than Modern right now, I'm playing pioneer. And my only concern with the Pioneer ban list is what cards are on it come the turn of the year.

I'm not in this hobby or any other hobby of mine to think about what I may or may not enjoy a few years down the road. I loved Modern when I got into it in 2013. I'm not enjoying it too much right now. But that doesn't mean that my previous years of enjoying Modern was wasted. Same goes for Pioneer.

What kind of format Pioneer is going to be in a few years time just isn't a concern for me or any player who's not enjoying Modern right now.
Mtgthewary wrote:
1 year ago
So they can say they are happy now like you did. We really think this is enough and acceptable? We want mass over quality?
Yes to me this is acceptable.

In 2019 before Pioneer, we did not have mass and we did not have quality. Now with Pioneer, we have mass and we have the potential for quality. Even if that potential goes unfulfilled, we have a different more accessible format for people looking to exit standard. This is a nett positive for me.

Either way, this is just another way for people to play and enjoy Magic, don't know why you're so intent on hating Pioneer.

Edit:
For anyone who enjoys Modern and has a community that enjoys Modern - great, Pioneer will hardly affect you.
For anyone who isn't finding the same enjoyment - now there's an alternative for them.

It's a win-win for both sides. I don't get what's this attitude of begrudging people playing something different that they enjoy more.

Mtgthewary
Posts: 220
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

I don't hate Pioneer, I hate what wotc is printing since several time. It is bad design on each format

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

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Edit:
For anyone who enjoys Modern and has a community that enjoys Modern - great, Pioneer will hardly affect you.
For anyone who isn't finding the same enjoyment - now there's an alternative for them.

It's a win-win for both sides. I don't get what's this attitude of begrudging people playing something different that they enjoy more.
we have a small modern community here who enjoys modern. Decided to dip into pioneer since we have most of the cards already. Only need adjustments here and there on one of my weaker modern decks. ^__^

right now, the only negative effect of pioneer on me is the death of tarmogoyf. Literally ate away all profits from sfm and sword sales.
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

Mtgthewary
Posts: 220
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

No surprise :(

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
Dark times for modern, sadly. Urza decks ~ 30% of the metagame across 4 different variations and big mana ~25%?
So, if one wont play an urza deck(this should be a mistake), he should play big mana.
Midrange at 10% on a GDS deck that received many powerful tools and happens to beat the deck to beat.
0% control, 0% jund midrange, aggro only represented by a reach burn deck. White is terrible as always.

I am sorry if this post is utterly pessimistic, but something needs to happen for this. I just cant accept that traditional jund + uwx control are going extinct.
Unfortunately I do not see any of these problems fundamentally changing, even if Urza eats a ban, Tron will still exist in the format and will still club midrange decks over the head.

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

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
PS: What is a Stoneforge Mystic??
I've been saying SFM was hot trash for at least 2 years. Do I get to gloat yet? :crazy:
PS2: Unban twin, pod. Ban sth from the urza deck.
:) :grin: :love: :party:

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

Probably a hot take but Modern is probably a little too far gone even if design philosophy swings around and distributes power fairly between threats and answers because outside of a MH-type set, Modern-level answers have to be dripped into Modern through standard.

Bans will be needed, followed by said fair distribution of power between threats and answers in new sets.

If fair power distribution can't happen then it'll just be broken thing after broken thing one year after another in Modern.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Lol the SCG results should surprise nobody. The lack of traditional control and BGx should surprise nobody. The lack of SFM should surprise nobody.

War + MH1 ruined what was left of the format.

And no cfusionpm, you have to wait a year or two, when some other cards make SFM playable, so ppl can say we are wrong.
UR Control UR

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

I can't emphasize enough that the community conversation must shift away from bans and towards the abject failures of design, development, and Play Design this year. I get that people want Modern (Standard, Pioneer, Legacy...) to be "fixed" and that might mean a number of bans on 2019 cards. But that cannot be the focus of our conversation. If it is, it is easier for Wizards to hide the fundamental design-level issues under a veneer of continued bans. It is also easy for them to write articles and release statements about increased bannings, rather than acknowledge these foundational design issues they are having across sets and formats. We need more people Tweeting at Wizards, posting to Reddit, writing articles, discussing in forums/Twitch, etc. about the design/development issues. Not bans. A louder outcry about design issues will lead to Wizards acknowledgement of the issue and potential change at the Play Design level.

Does this mean we don't need bans? Probably not. A number of formats do need bans because Wizards has %$#% up so badly throughout this year. But that topic must always be secondary to the design/development issues. Arguments should be phrased like "Wizards messed up in these ways. Short-term fix may include bans A, B, and C. But more importantly, we need short- to long-term solutions in the design/development areas to include X, Y, and Z." Don't let Wizards get off the hook for this disastrous policy of pushed threats and diluted answers because some survey once told them that players don't like their proactive stuff answered on the cheap. Make sure we know both that their mistakes must be banned AND (more importantly) they need to revise a number of processes to prevent these mistakes from happening in the future.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

Tomatotime
Posts: 197
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I can't emphasize enough that the community conversation must shift away from bans and towards the abject failures of design, development, and Play Design this year. I get that people want Modern (Standard, Pioneer, Legacy...) to be "fixed" and that might mean a number of bans on 2019 cards.
This statement to some extent implies that Modern's problems with degenerate gameplay started in and are exclusive to 2019, they are not.
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
But that cannot be the focus of our conversation. If it is, it is easier for Wizards to hide the fundamental design-level issues under a veneer of continued bans. It is also easy for them to write articles and release statements about increased bannings, rather than acknowledge these foundational design issues they are having across sets and formats.
They already did this back in Kaladesh when they gave us Fatal Push, they had long form articles going over how they strayed from the correct path and answers were too weak compared to threats and they promised to learn from it, they did not. What makes you think that them admitting fault once more will change anything?
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
We need more people Tweeting at Wizards, posting to Reddit, writing articles, discussing in forums/Twitch, etc. about the design/development issues. Not bans.
A gripe I personally have with this is that it is well known that Wotc considers Reddit it's centralized discussion platform, unfortunately Reddit is literally designed to be an echo chamber, the platform does not actually support debates with unpopular opinions nor does it support long form discussions due to the rotating nature of Reddit (again, a website design feature). Twitter also does not make this much better considering the character limit makes it very difficult for people to get their point accross.
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
A louder outcry about design issues will lead to Wizards acknowledgement of the issue and potential change at the Play Design level.
I don't know how relevant Play Design actually is to the current state of affairs, in a recent livestream with Melissa and Paul Cheon they, in no uncertain terms explained that they were instructed to push Oko, for whatever reason people want to believe. At this point if Play Design is nothing more than a for show team of people who "double check" R&D's work, then it serves no purpose than to reassure and placate the masses.
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Does this mean we don't need bans? Probably not. A number of formats do need bans because Wizards has %$#% up so badly throughout this year.
Again, there are plenty of cards with legitimate bannable potential that were not printed this year.
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Don't let Wizards get off the hook for this disastrous policy of pushed threats and diluted answers because some survey once told them that players don't like their proactive stuff answered on the cheap.
Curious, which survey results are you speaking of? Did they talk about it on any of their platforms?

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

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
I actually agree here with tomatotime. Tron seems to be an underlying issue of modern that does not get banned, because every year modern is broken and the broken decks have a bye against tron.
I dont care anymore; i am about to start playing a format that no-one cant go turn 3 karn and its lights out.
Same with all of those 8th/9th version cards + mox opal + urza.

I know most of you disagree; data say tron is fine. Data sometimes lie. This is not to say ktk is wrong also. He is not.
You can do T3 Ugin/Atarka with a dedicated ramp/irencrag feat deck, and almost certainly T4. You won't get away from ramp/fires of invention/golos decks in Pioneer.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Correct me if I am wrong, but those decks cannot mull to 3, and then play Tron on turn 3.
UR Control UR

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”