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

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

Yawgmoth wrote:
1 year ago
I actually have gravitated towards Goblins (both in legacy and modern) but it plays more as a control/toolbox. I usually win through sacrifice/damage combos. I don't mind playing with creatures but winning through combat makes modern feel like very expensive Hearthstone. Even then I still enjoy myself until someone lands a Karn I wonder why I'm not playing planeswalkers. Red actually doesn't get much PW love weirdly...
Don't worry, the new set probably has a 1RR static ability "opponents can't gain life or prevent damage," starts at 4 loyalty, +2 → 2 damage to target player, +1 → 1 damage to target creature, -6 opponent loses life equal to the amount of damage taken this game. :sick:
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

stubb
Posts: 20
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by stubb » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
tempo is a fun archetype as your always on the edge of just getting blown out.
UR Delver is viable-ish again. Mystic Sanctuary gives it lots of play. I've been on RUG Delver for two years now and while I'm in no danger of spiking an SCG Open with it, it provides tons and tons of super fun play both in paper and online. You crush the %$#%$#% decks and get to struggle against midrange. Fun stuff, though.

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

As with the last time I posted, this thread and MTG social media in general moved so fast I just am not able to respond to everything. Here are some high level points based on some issues I saw:

Re: Arena, Legacy, and Modern
I believe Wizards is fully capable of making Arena their sole platform for all digital MTG formats and sets. They just don't want to right now. There's some high-level market strategy afoot which is demanding them to force a few contemporary formats down our throats. Modern and older formats are not part of this picture. They probably should be in the long-term, but there are no indicators to suggest Wizards has any plans for these formats outside of MTGO. Arena looks like it will be Standard, Limited, Historic as a bridge to Pioneer, Pioneer, and Commander/Brawl. Pauper will eventually jump in there too, but other formats will fall by the wayside.

Re: permanents vs. spells and Magic health generally
I can't emphasize this point enough. For anyone who claims Modern is in some uniquely bad shape as a result of Wizards' decisions this is not true. Contemporary Magic as a whole is in serious trouble as a result of this recent history of horrible design/dev/testing decisions. Stop giving Wizards a pass by blaming Modern or a lack of bans for whatever issues you are having with the game. This is how Wizards can distract us from the true problem and point us to Pioneer or Historic or a new Standard or whatever glittery decoy they have lined up next. The fundamental problem is at the design/dev/testing level and we need to be communicating that. Every post and social media impression about bans, how format-X sucks, or about some other pithy Magic meme detracts from this critical message. We need to be focusing on the underlying problems, not the symptoms. Answers suck, threats are too good, planeswalkers are too good, there are too many strong permanents, and stack-based Magic can't keep up.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Re: permanents vs. spells and Magic health generally
I can't emphasize this point enough. For anyone who claims Modern is in some uniquely bad shape as a result of Wizards' decisions this is not true. Contemporary Magic as a whole is in serious trouble as a result of this recent history of horrible design/dev/testing decisions. Stop giving Wizards a pass by blaming Modern or a lack of bans for whatever issues you are having with the game. This is how Wizards can distract us from the true problem and point us to Pioneer or Historic or a new Standard or whatever glittery decoy they have lined up next. The fundamental problem is at the design/dev/testing level and we need to be communicating that. Every post and social media impression about bans, how format-X sucks, or about some other pithy Magic meme detracts from this critical message. We need to be focusing on the underlying problems, not the symptoms. Answers suck, threats are too good, planeswalkers are too good, there are too many strong permanents, and stack-based Magic can't keep up.
Couldnt agree more. I've tweeted at Maro and Aaron regarding this, but I highly doubt it matters.

People still think the London Mull is good.
People think the push towards the board is good.
People dont think the Stack is important.

This is a terrible path they have started down, and we wont see the end of it for at least a year.
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

-I like the london muligan rule.
-The push towards the board is hit or miss. Some people like spells and others like creatures, you can't please everyone.
-The stack is still important but I agree it is less so right now.

The bigger problem in design is the overall power level of new cards. Hogaak was gross, urza is gross, some static abilities on PWs, oko, OUaT, W&6 and cheap eldrazi were all gross in one format or another. Designing new high power cards to impact older formats is certain to create some power imbalances.
Also, the B&R list has 2 GLARING errors: UNBAN BRIDGE & TWIN!

Yawgmoth
Posts: 170
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Yawgmoth » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote: Re: permanents vs. spells and Magic health generally
I can't emphasize this point enough. For anyone who claims Modern is in some uniquely bad shape as a result of Wizards' decisions this is not true. Contemporary Magic as a whole is in serious trouble as a result of this recent history of horrible design/dev/testing decisions. Stop giving Wizards a pass by blaming Modern or a lack of bans for whatever issues you are having with the game. This is how Wizards can distract us from the true problem and point us to Pioneer or Historic or a new Standard or whatever glittery decoy they have lined up next. The fundamental problem is at the design/dev/testing level and we need to be communicating that. Every post and social media impression about bans, how format-X sucks, or about some other pithy Magic meme detracts from this critical message. We need to be focusing on the underlying problems, not the symptoms. Answers suck, threats are too good, planeswalkers are too good, there are too many strong permanents, and stack-based Magic can't keep up.
That is all absolutely true. I only play Modern so my issues with the format are synonymous with my issues with contemporary magic as a whole. Anything I don't like about Modern is even more extreme in formats like Pioneer and Standard because of newer problem cards/game design.

As far as trying to communicate with WotC I think you are right. In this thread I have been trying to get people to concretely describe what types of responses we want to see. Banning X or unbanning Y is just a bandaid on a much bigger problem. Can we imagine what a "better response" would be?

Given how much access players have to game designers (via social media) I think it is possible to get something done if we have concrete goals. Asking for them to fix Modern is not the same thing as asking for a specific card or effect. With Modern Horizons they have the perfect product for introducing specific effects into the format without messing up standard/pioneer etc.

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
. The fairest the format is, the fairest the London mulligan is, the unfairest the format is, the unfairest the London Mulligan is.
If Tron can make that much unfair use of it, is it really London Mull's problem, or Tron's problem?
This is a really interesting interpretation, and I find myself having a hard time disagreeing. But I also have had very mixed experiences with it myself. With synergistic, proactive decks like my Grixis/Sultai Shadow builds, it allows me to reliably have explosive and cohesive hands, because individual card selection is more important than raw card advantage. But whenever playing with UW or UR, every mulligan seems to still hurt, because I just need a lot of cards, not necessarily any particular ones.

So the London Mulligan feels like it disproportionately helps synergistic, combo, and explosive decks, while being much less helpful to midrange and control decks.

IE: Tron mulligans to 4 and has turn 3 Karn. I mulligan to 4 and might have a counters or removal spell, and maybe the lands to cast them. Wheeee.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

I've played (in Dom/Guilds) Standard, where I've been 'dead' by Turns 3/4 easily against Mono White and Mono Red Aggro. That was a fair format, but the boost in consistency is just too much.
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
So the London Mulligan feels like it disproportionately helps synergistic, combo, and explosive decks, while being much less helpful to midrange and control decks.
This is absolutely an issue, and it will FOREVER be an issue, in all but Limited. The London Mull does not help fair decks find answers, because there is literally no competitive linear deck that cannot bring in answers of their own, as SURPRISE, most answers must be played on the board and therefore are at risk at all times.

I do not joke, that more than Walkers, more than pushed creatures, and more than the discouragement of spells/stack, the London Mulligan is the single worst thing to happen to Magic in years, as it absolutely encourage's the kind of magic that leads to repetitive, explosive, 'game is essentially over' board states, that have already degraded the game considerably.

The 'well if someone is too strong ban it' excuse is simply not valid. Would you ban Mono W Knights? Mono R Aggro? Of course not.

It's just a matter of time until more people actually think about the impact, and what kind of Magic is better for the game.

Wizards will not stop designing synergistic cards. How stupid would they be to do that? Combo's, Synergy, these are integral parts of the game.

As such, the ability to literally sculpt your opening hand, what we would call CHEATING a few short years ago, will always provide an unnecessary boost to these strategies.

And all because one of the good ol' boys lost in a PT by mulling to the abyss. Sad stuff.
UR Control UR

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
gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
. The fairest the format is, the fairest the London mulligan is, the unfairest the format is, the unfairest the London Mulligan is.
If Tron can make that much unfair use of it, is it really London Mull's problem, or Tron's problem?
This is a really interesting interpretation, and I find myself having a hard time disagreeing. But I also have had very mixed experiences with it myself. With synergistic, proactive decks like my Grixis/Sultai Shadow builds, it allows me to reliably have explosive and cohesive hands, because individual card selection is more important than raw card advantage. But whenever playing with UW or UR, every mulligan seems to still hurt, because I just need a lot of cards, not necessarily any particular ones.

So the London Mulligan feels like it disproportionately helps synergistic, combo, and explosive decks, while being much less helpful to midrange and control decks.

IE: Tron mulligans to 4 and has turn 3 Karn. I mulligan to 4 and might have a counters or removal spell, and maybe the lands to cast them. Wheeee.
I think the London Mulligan has accomplished what its goals were - players found SB hate easier and players found nut hands easier. That's it. This explains why I said a couple of pages back that Modern literally has devolved into finding hate and nut hands in every game I play nowadays. It's part of the reason I don't enjoy it as much, at least for me.

*This was amplified for me during Hogaak, when Bridge from Below was banned. After sideboarding against the mirror it came to this -
1. Do I have Nature's Claim or Assassin's Trophy for Leyline of the Void? No, then I lose to it. Yes, 1 piece, then it's possible to lose to 2 Leyline of the Void, but I have to take a chance. If I can't kill Leyline, then I'm attacking with 1/1s and 2/1s.
2. Do I have Leyline of the Void for the opponent? Do they have Nature's Claim or Assassin's Trophy for it? If they don't, they are attacking with 2/1s and 1/1s. I think I can beat that.
3. Do I have a nut hand with Hogaak? Yes, but can I beat Leyline?
4. Do they have a nut hand with Hogaak? Yes, but can they remove Leyline?
5. Is my hand bad, but can kill hate? Can it recover in time?

Now, this is a lot of thought before the games and there's nothing wrong with that. And I realize that the London Mulligan's problem is amplified during broken stuff going on, but it also reveals the issues much more.

London Mulligan is great! No, I meant for Limited only. The issue is that WotC doesn't want to make different rules for different formats because it can be confusing to players.
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
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

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
*This was amplified for me during Hogaak, when Bridge from Below was banned. After sideboarding against the mirror it came to this -
1. Do I have Nature's Claim or Assassin's Trophy for Leyline of the Void? No, then I lose to it. Yes, 1 piece, then it's possible to lose to 2 Leyline of the Void, but I have to take a chance. If I can't kill Leyline, then I'm attacking with 1/1s and 2/1s.
2. Do I have Leyline of the Void for the opponent? Do they have Nature's Claim or Assassin's Trophy for it? If they don't, they are attacking with 2/1s and 1/1s. I think I can beat that.
3. Do I have a nut hand with Hogaak? Yes, but can I beat Leyline?
4. Do they have a nut hand with Hogaak? Yes, but can they remove Leyline?
5. Is my hand bad, but can kill hate? Can it recover in time?

Now, this is a lot of thought before the games and there's nothing wrong with that. And I realize that the London Mulligan's problem is amplified during broken stuff going on, but it also reveals the issues much more.
The issue I have with this take is that these are all decisions made before and between games, and diminish any meaningful actions and decisions within the game. Games then devolve into "do they have it?" And with the London Mulligan, it's a fair assumption to make that they pretty much always do. And they'll have the answer to your hate too.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Exactly, and that system is somehow better? All it has done, is allow for even further refinement of these linear decks. In what fathomable way is this rule benefiting constructed formats?

'I can do the same thing every game.'

Thats it.
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

Some more high-level takes:

Re: London mulligan overall
Most things that reduce variance for all decks is a good thing. London Mull (LM) fits in that category. I strongly disagree with CFP's assertion that proactive decks have BOTH the answer to your hate AND the proactive threat. That doesn't even make sense mathematically, let alone in practice. Tron isn't mulling to 4 to get both Karn/Urzatron and Claim in the first few turns of the game. The problem is that the answers aren't good enough to keep proactive decks down for long and/or the interactive decks play threats that are too slow to end games before proactive decks recover. As I said before, this is not a Modern problem. This is a contemporary Magic problem. LM allows everybody to find what they need to execute their gameplan. It's just that proactive decks across all contemporary Magic formats are way better than reactive ones, and the resolved threats are just so decisive and lethal that you are actively disadvantaging yourself by not playing them.

Re: interactive vs. reactive strategies
Standard, Pioneer, and Historic (to say nothing of Modern) are super hostile to interactive, stack-based Magic. Look at the recent results of these events and tell me with a straight face you see Legacy-style interaction. Or even 2015 Modern style interaction. You don't because answers stink and proactive threats are just better. It just feels worse in Modern because every one of these new broken proactive threats has a dozen more homes it could slot into, which disproportionately improves the proactive decks at the expense of struggling reactive ones. This is also true of decision-making. Watch recent Standard or Pioneer events and, for the most part, games are basically over in the first few turns. It just takes longer for these games to literally end.

Re: Tron vs. more significant Magic problems
This anti-Tron campaign needs to stop. It's neither supported by any data I have seen AND, even worse, it distracts from a much realer problem in Magic and Modern. For reference, look at these win rates from recent paper events since August: https://mtgmeta.io/metagame?f=modern. Tron has a considerable N=480 matches in the paper event sample and it averages a sub 50% MWP. Stop complaining about this deck. Stop letting Wizards get away with murdering the entire game with Timmy-centric proactive cards while we meme away on social media about "WOW" and other petty complaints. I think all of us agree as Spikier players that Magic is best when we have lots of meaningful interaction points, instants, surprises, and overall decisions in games. We don't want to play Hearthstone. Every time we squabble about these trivial issues like Tron or Urza or Oko or Veil we are just obscuring a far graver problem about design/dev/testing moving away from that kind of historical Magic we all fell in love with.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
Re: London mulligan overall
Most things that reduce variance for all decks is a good thing. London Mull (LM) fits in that category. I strongly disagree with CFP's assertion that proactive decks have BOTH the answer to your hate AND the proactive threat. That doesn't even make sense mathematically, let alone in practice. Tron isn't mulling to 4 to get both Karn/Urzatron and Claim in the first few turns of the game. The problem is that the answers aren't good enough to keep proactive decks down for long and/or the interactive decks play threats that are too slow to end games before proactive decks recover. As I said before, this is not a Modern problem. This is a contemporary Magic problem. LM allows everybody to find what they need to execute their gameplan. It's just that proactive decks across all contemporary Magic formats are way better than reactive ones, and the resolved threats are just so decisive and lethal that you are actively disadvantaging yourself by not playing them.
What possible answers can be printed? How utterly pushed do we need to go, to balance proactive vs reactive, with the London Mulligan?

There is no way the London Mulligan benefits reactive decks to the same degree as proactive ones, so whats it going to take to remove the incentive to play these linear decks?
UR Control UR

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

Imo, the cards coming out are just an amplification of Battlecruiser Magic. Here is the newest article I could find about Battlecruiser Magic.

https://www.channelfireball.com/all-str ... -standard/

Basically what it comes down to is that cards utilize less synergy because synergy is only good when you have a few cards together. But some cards don't work that well on their own, thus players don't like this. Players like to use their Mythic rare that they just pulled in their booster and they want it to be effective … now. Battlecruiser Magic has been around for quite a while. I feel like it's been around for at least 8 years and the google search shows articles as old as 10 years ago.

I have a friend who told me how Battlecruiser Magic is going to be the downfall of Magic eventually. I forgot what he said. I hope to talk with him again soon and I know I promised to get the info from him before. I am a smart guy, but he's much more analytical in his thinking and can see the big picture pretty well. I will try to talk with him about it soon so I can at least show his theory.

*FWIW, Battlecruiser Magic does indeed attract newer players. It gets players into the Magic player base. But it is not what keeps people playing Magic, so there needs to be a MIX of things at R and D (which there is, but it needs to be a better mix).
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
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

I like the london mulligan because it made finding leylines easier. It's what caused me to buy a playset of leyline of the void. And planning to buy a second playset for another deck, once funds are more available. It also made easier that I had some kind of answer in hand when going against a combo deck. So overall, the new mull rule is a positive change for me.
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
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
I like the london mulligan because it made finding leylines easier. It's what caused me to buy a playset of leyline of the void. And planning to buy a second playset for another deck, once funds are more available. It also made easier that I had some kind of answer in hand when going against a combo deck. So overall, the new mull rule is a positive change for me.
Do you not see that it also provides the decks you wish to answer a more streamlined and explosive game 1, and COUNTER answers in games 2/3?

There is no way any increase in reactive answers, can make up for the deficit you are already in.
UR Control UR

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

That's fine. My deck is Esper, it's already packed with answers to several things game 1.
It's simply an arms race in the sideboard games 2 and 3.
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
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

And do you think it actually improves your deck's position, relative to the roughly 2% increase in consistency for these explosive decks?
UR Control UR

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

[mention]idSurge[/mention]

hmm, what explosive decks exactly are you referring to? Btw, on having answers game 1.. I'm referring to decks I often encounter locally... Grixis Shadow, Temur goyf, Elves, SFM variants, Tron variants, goblins, classic affinity, ur storm, several kinds of eldrazi, and mono black control. No Urza over here. I'm fine with the london mulligan playing against the decks over here. Pretty much the hardest ones for me are those that have splash white for Rest in Peace, because RiP make my Zombie fish and Tasigur sad. Also game 1 I'm often overwhelmed by tribal, but lick them with damnation and languish game 2. ;)
Last edited by The Fluff 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
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

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 224
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

I have been in a longterm abusive relationship with Modern. I love my deck but hate the format for the past 2 years. I am not the only one. The truth is Wizards will only look at attendance. If the numbers for GP´s keep staying low they will pull the plug sooner than expected and we might see more GP/PTQ Modern changed into Pioneer for 2020. They will say they have listened to the community and want to offer what people want so they give us more Pioneer and less Modern. Then they will blame it on format fatigue, Pioneer hype, etc, when in fact the reason Modern has taken a nosedive is due to mismanagement of the format by Wizards themselves. Their constant lack of self-criticism and accountability is the biggest problem and you cans see that throughout whole MTG 2019. They say they care about Modern when in fact they only care about Modern's players wallets and now that the wallets are empty they turn around and say "well sorry it looks like the majority doesn't want to play Modern any more so will adept to demands and scrap Modern tourneys".

Saying you care and acting upon it are 2 completely different things. What has Wizards done the past 3 years to show us they care for Modern? Nothing. Complete mismanagement of the B&R list, refusing to test the few cards from new sets that are deemed to have an impact upon first sight and finally releasing a set called 'Modern Horizons" which cards cater more towards Commander and feel like they have hardly been properly tested for Modern.

They have done nothing but serious and irreversible damage to Modern and now that the players are leaving in mass to play Pioneer they will use that as an excuse to turn away from Modern and come up with excuses rather than evaluating how they have managed Modern for the past 3 years.

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

I personally don't think that most people believed that Bridge from Below was the correct ban. I myself asked people if a turn 2 8/8 trample in a deck that can't win by milling you out is okay. It seemed like people didn't want to answer; they wanted WotC to handle it. Bridge from Below was legal in Modern for many years. Hogaak was the new card and the best card in the deck by far. I personally did not EVER side out the card, even if I knew it was correct sometimes, because the power level is too busted. I was willing to sideboard suboptimally for the power of a single card (4 of).

I should say that after seeing WotC's handling of Pioneer, I could be incorrect in saying that Modern should have started out with no bans and then they could do bans along the way. If WotC was always going to be super reactive when it comes to bans, like banning every Monday, then Modern would have been worse that way. I respect the restraint that WotC showed this past Monday by NOT banning cards like Treasure Cruise and Smuggler's Copter, cards that we all know are not long for the Pioneer world. But it's nice to get a chance to play with them for a while again. :smile:
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

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 224
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
But, got to ask this, what would be the ideal management of the B&R list for ya
Firstly they need to (re)define the rules of Modern and secondly apply does rules actively, timely and consistently. If Modern is a turn 4 format they should actively apply that rule or change it.

Take Neoform for example. Will that deck ever add a positive net outcome to the format? Its straight up degenerated and therefore should ban Allosaurus Rider because it would cause the least damage to other decks. Secondly Eye of Ugin should have been banned right upon the release of all the Eldrazi's. Did you really needed a PT to confirm it was busted? Faithless Loothing should have banned sooner. It dominated and warped the format for wayyyy to long. If there was ever a case to emergency ban a card it has been Hogaak. First they failed with the wrong ban and then the format was kept hostage until the next announcement. Meanwhile several big tourneys got ruined. This story has repeated itself so many times the past 3 years.

Then we have the unjustified conservatism towards unbans. What was doing SFM all this time on the banlist? A 4/4 lifeling on turn 3, which costs 4 mana spread over 2 turns and has several ways of being interrupted, meanwhile the other decks were winning by turn 3. Preordain while printing OUaT. Birthing Pod?? Relic of the past. JTMS made almost no impact. All I know is that everything they think to know about Modern has been proven wrong over and over and over again and that is why we need new people in charge who are better in touch with Modern.

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

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
All I know is that everything they think to know about Modern has been proven wrong over and over and over again and that is why we need new people in charge who are better in touch with Modern.
This is the scary thing; Play Design was supposed to address exactly stuff like this. And instead we got Creeping Chill, Phoenix, Urza, Hogaak, T3feri, Narset, Karn, Oko, and the aforementioned OUAT, among other things.

Aazadan
Posts: 547
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

[mention]iTaLenTZ[/mention] Honestly, I think Pioneer is more busted than Modern, and even harder to fix. Due to how many cards we have access to, it's more likely Modern can be fixed with fewer cards, while Pioneer needs far more options to fix everything.

That said, I think that if you're into stack based battles and fighting over information rather than board states, that Modern is going to become less and less welcoming of that play style over time.

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

Aazadan wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ Honestly, I think Pioneer is more busted than Modern, and even harder to fix. Due to how many cards we have access to, it's more likely Modern can be fixed with fewer cards, while Pioneer needs far more options to fix everything.

That said, I think that if you're into stack based battles and fighting over information rather than board states, that Modern is going to become less and less welcoming of that play style over time.
This may be true because Modern got this way due to Standard sets AND Modern Horizons. Pioneer only got like this due to Standard sets.

But here's the kicker... wait until there is a Pioneer Masters set. :party:
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

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”