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

User avatar
Amalgam
Posts: 151
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Amalgam » 1 year ago

Can you imagine how twin would play out right now with Force of Negation and Veil backups? Twin would be stronger now than it was when it was banned.
FoN being able to target their removal when you play your creature and tap their only open land is huge on it's own and this is before we even get into how much veil can do.
I can understand people saying it will be good or keep up with modern but let's not even try pretend twin wouldn't be anything short of tier 1 in todays metagame and it makes it an insanely risky unban

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

Amalgam wrote:
1 year ago
Can you imagine how twin would play out right now with Force of Negation and Veil backups? Twin would be stronger now than it was when it was banned.
FoN being able to target their removal when you play your creature and tap their only open land is huge on it's own and this is before we even get into how much veil can do.
I can understand people saying it will be good or keep up with modern but let's not even try pretend twin wouldn't be anything short of tier 1 in todays metagame and it makes it an insanely risky unban
Force of Negation is not free on your own turn and Veil forces 3 colors in a deck that needs RR and UUU.

But sure. Let's actually run it through instead of doomsaying a buncha hypothetical stuff. Because pretty much all the hypothetical doomsaying so far about anything blue decks play have been horrendously and embarrassingly wrong. AV, Jace, SFM... You name it.

Meanwhile... viewtopic.php?t=16911&start=125

Edit; and Veil should be banned anyway. Cryptic Command for a single G that negates uncounterable spells is not ok regardless, irrelevant of Twin.
Last edited by cfusionpm 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Amalgam
Posts: 151
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Amalgam » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
Amalgam wrote:
1 year ago
Can you imagine how twin would play out right now with Force of Negation and Veil backups? Twin would be stronger now than it was when it was banned.
FoN being able to target their removal when you play your creature and tap their only open land is huge on it's own and this is before we even get into how much veil can do.
I can understand people saying it will be good or keep up with modern but let's not even try pretend twin wouldn't be anything short of tier 1 in todays metagame and it makes it an insanely risky unban
Having played some games vs Burn, several games vs Urza, and lots of matches vs GDS, I can honestly say that:
GDS is an atrocious matchup that did not exist back then
Urza is also a very bad matchup
Bant Snowblade seems also hard(few games against it only)

Also, I am almost certain than the backup plan of Twin is very bad now and several cards it was playing are so bad atm. Bolt seems mediocre, Electrolyze is very bad and Remand is worse than it was. Cryptic Command(when it is not played cheaper like in Urza) is worse, and there are answers for it.

You say FoN is good in the deck? It's not maindeckable. Even if it is a good sideboard cards, it's main usage is to use it against Twin on Twin's turn. Force of Vigor is a great answer we didn't have back then and all green decks can play it, while tapped out. Push is another cards we lacked back then.

Whether you like it or not, the sad truth is: Urza is a better Twin deck. If Urza is fine in today's modern(which is probably not and getting banned in January), Twin is very much safer.

On other news, today's MOCS has been won by an Urza Oko deck.
It's owner is saying: "Did a few things differently than anyone else with my Urza deck and I'd like to think it paid off. This deck really should not be legal so take advantage while you still can"
Also relevant tweet from him:
Congratulations! Do you think this deck is getting banned on January?
If yes, what card in particular?

"I would hope so, like 5 of them"


It also sounds like you are running an incredibly sub optimal twin list in today's meta. If twin was unbanned you aren't going to be playing cards like electrolize and remand anymore. Half the example that keep getting thrown around involve old 2015 builds of the deck which are horrendous un today's meta hence the results you are getting. The deck would be built very differently and far more optimally than back then. Yes it would probably be RUG colors as well

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

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
Also relevant tweet from him:
Congratulations! Do you think this deck is getting banned on January?
If yes, what card in particular?

"I would hope so, like 5 of them"


Playing 15 artifacts in an artifact deck because of Oko and Goose (along with Veil) are the real problem, not Urza.
Also, the opinion of one doesn't matter. Maybe he just ran hot, or his deck was great for that event. Either way, his build points to Oko enabling artifact synergies when he shouldn't, along with the usual gamut of fixing the deck's bad match-ups.

On the Twin discussion, I'll agree that you're building a 2015 deck in a 2019 meta. I'd go with Temur Twin (Veil, Oko, FoN etc)

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
I wanted twin to come back, but the fact that they immediately banned cat combo in pioneer means wotc does not really like this kind of gameplay. It's never coming back.
This was my read as well actually, as the final nail in the Twin coffin. Different formats, different environments, but its crystal clear that someone in Wizard's Ivory Tower is fully and completely butthurt over Twin-like game play.

Its simply not a topic worth discussing, especially given this formats troubled future.

PS: These Urza/Oko/Astrolabe decks are an absolute abomination, and cards (cardS) will be banned.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 168
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

Is Veil of Summer really that evil? We've had guttural response for years. The only reason you're seeing veil so much is because it's also good against black decks. This card is dead in so many matchups.

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
PS: These Urza/Oko/Astrolabe decks are an absolute abomination, and cards (cardS) will be banned.
Remember when Twin was banned for stifling Blue diversity. Wonder what WoTC thinks of Oko now when almost every blue deck is splashing green for Oko (and to a lesser extent veil)
Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
Is Veil of Summer really that evil? We've had guttural response for years. The only reason you're seeing veil so much is because it's also good against black decks. This card is dead in so many matchups.
Is this a serious question or have you just not read what the card does?

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

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

I hope they stop this urza nightmare on January. It's not ok people still running around, playing this busted unfair deck, telling everyone it's OK. Another mtgo result for the people which don't like paper results. I hope it's not again cherrypicking if I say : how often it needs to win?

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Remember when Twin was banned for stifling Blue diversity. Wonder what WoTC thinks of Oko now when almost every blue deck is splashing green for Oko (and to a lesser extent veil)
I know thats what they said, but I honestly believe that was a lie, and its been proven beyond doubt, that it was not Twin that was 'stifling blue diversity' it was that complete and utter lack of a functional deck at the root of Blue, UW, UR, or UWR.

I mean do we all forget (and I doubt most people still around even played then) that Grixis was limping along for years, and some 'pros' continued to try and force it over and over and over and then told us that Jace would save us as it was just TOO good for Modern?

Comical. Embarrassing even from a professional perspective.

Oko legit stifles diversity. Its been played in BURN decks. BURN.
Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
Is Veil of Summer really that evil? We've had guttural response for years. The only reason you're seeing veil so much is because it's also good against black decks. This card is dead in so many matchups.
Yes. Simply look at what the card does.

1. We draw a card if someone even dares to think that stack based interaction is a good idea. We do this btw, for 1 Mana. This is a near automatic 2 for 1 based on the following.

2. We prevent anything we are casting, from being counter if Veil resolves. You can even just pre-cast Veil if you wish to say 'nah'.
3. We prevent any interaction which targets us (Discard, GY interaction, anything at all which says 'Target Player') from functioning.
4. We prevent any U or B interaction which targets ALL OUR STUFF, from functioning. Lands? Artifacts? Creatures? Graveyard? Nope.

I mean the card is so hilariously offensive, if I still played Modern, I would put it in one of the few remaining decks that is a joy to play for me (Knightfall) and...just spit in the face of anyone trying to stop me from going off.
UR Control UR

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

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
Is Veil of Summer really that evil? We've had guttural response for years. The only reason you're seeing veil so much is because it's also good against black decks. This card is dead in so many matchups.
Just compare the text of Dispel to Veil of Summer. Then compare the text and casting cost of Cryptic Command to Veil of Summer.

For good measure, re-read Guttural Response, and notice the piles of text it's missing. Namely "draw a card" and "your spells can't be countered" and "your permanents can't be targeted."

That sh*t just ain't right. :sick: :woozy: :explode:

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

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
Is Veil of Summer really that evil? We've had guttural response for years. The only reason you're seeing veil so much is because it's also good against black decks. This card is dead in so many matchups.
I don't know if it's that evil, but the card is an order of magnitude stronger than typical color hate cards. Several orders of magnitude stronger than Guttural Response.

Counter (even uncounterable spells) plus draw for one mana is very, very good. This card would be above average and still playable for it's intended use at 1G, so that should put into perspective how good it is at half that mana cost.

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

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

Mtgthewary wrote:
1 year ago
I hope they stop this urza nightmare on January. It's not ok people still running around, playing this busted unfair deck, telling everyone it's OK. Another mtgo result for the people which don't like paper results. I hope it's not again cherrypicking if I say : how often it needs to win?
By the Gods, you're annoying... Urza is a strong deck, it'll win events, get that through your biased mind. You've been harping against Urza since August/September and you ignored context then and you've been ignoring it for the past weeks.

Get over your hatred for the card/deck and see that Oko and Veil are ruining the format, not Urza.
gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
All that said, I am leaving my prediction here about January's B&R:
Urza, Lord High Artificer
Oko, Thief of Crowns
Veil of Summer
I mean... Urza isn't any more broken than any other T1 deck, Veil and Oko just push it over the edge. As for banning Lattice, I don't really care, It gives a reason to play Karn TGC it's not any different to other T4 kills.

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

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
The Fluff wrote:
1 year ago
I wanted twin to come back, but the fact that they immediately banned cat combo in pioneer means wotc does not really like this kind of gameplay. It's never coming back.
This was my read as well actually, as the final nail in the Twin coffin. Different formats, different environments, but its crystal clear that someone in Wizard's Ivory Tower is fully and completely butthurt over Twin-like game play.

Its simply not a topic worth discussing, especially given this formats troubled future.

PS: These Urza/Oko/Astrolabe decks are an absolute abomination, and cards (cardS) will be banned.
my Twin deck is in a plastic bag inside the closet. Fully expect to never be able to play it in modern again.

___________________

on more positive things. Looking forward to the new cards that THB will bring for modern.

Maybe the new planeswalkers will be good? :)
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
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

I know that 2019 was the year of ban mania, both legitimately and through unwarranted player outcry, but we really need to stop discussing bans and unbans. Modern has a much more existential threat in Pioneer's presence on Arena and Modern's (so-far) absence on that platform. I also know that many people are tired of fighting these larger battles and just want Wizards to unban some Modern cards so their format experience is a little better. These short-term fixes are not going to preserve your collection value or keep you happy for long. The graver threat to Modern is now, and has been since the Pioneer announcement, its absence from Arena and Wizards' pledge to bridge Historic into Pioneer on their premier platform. Until Wizards addresses this in some way, and until players understand this is the foundational threat, all the other topics need to be distant, secondary issues.

Bans are likely important to stabilize Modern. So are unbans, better answers, an overall shift in the design philosophy, etc. But none of this matters if Wizards isn't supporting the format. See Legacy for an example of a format that I believe many ban/unban proponents would want Modern to become, but also a format that withers without sustained Wizards support. There are currently no significant differences between Modern and Pioneer. They have the same identity, except one is getting supported in Wizards' most important product in over a decade and one is dwindling without that support.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
Mikefon
Posts: 29
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Modena (Italy)
Contact:

Post by Mikefon » 1 year ago

Oko, veil and OUAT are all at 40+% of decks in every recent top of Modern tournament posted. I don't know if it is sufficient for a modern ban. For Pioneer was enough...
About modern support: I have to agree with what [mention]ktkenshinx[/mention] said even if it's painful. Without arena it will become a niche format. The best we can hope for is that it becomes as legacy is now.

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I know that 2019 was the year of ban mania, both legitimately and through unwarranted player outcry, but we really need to stop discussing bans and unbans. Modern has a much more existential threat in Pioneer's presence on Arena and Modern's (so-far) absence on that platform. I also know that many people are tired of fighting these larger battles and just want Wizards to unban some Modern cards so their format experience is a little better. These short-term fixes are not going to preserve your collection value or keep you happy for long. The graver threat to Modern is now, and has been since the Pioneer announcement, its absence from Arena and Wizards' pledge to bridge Historic into Pioneer on their premier platform. Until Wizards addresses this in some way, and until players understand this is the foundational threat, all the other topics need to be distant, secondary issues.

Bans are likely important to stabilize Modern. So are unbans, better answers, an overall shift in the design philosophy, etc. But none of this matters if Wizards isn't supporting the format. See Legacy for an example of a format that I believe many ban/unban proponents would want Modern to become, but also a format that withers without sustained Wizards support. There are currently no significant differences between Modern and Pioneer. They have the same identity, except one is getting supported in Wizards' most important product in over a decade and one is dwindling without that support.
What's the point of this?

I think you have it the other way round. They need to fix the format before even considering bringing it to MTGA or whatever for future support.

It makes no sense to support a format when even the enfranchised players are so disenchanted with it.

Fixing the format - the bans/unbans and design philosophy that are necessary to do so has to come 1st to bring stability, otherwise there's no point in further supporting it on any platform.

They are a business, they need to know they're getting good returns before giving this support to Modern.

Why would WoTC want to waste resources supporting a fundamentally broken format where a large portion of the player base has been dissatisfied for the better part of a year?

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 makes no sense to support a format when even the enfranchised players are so disenchanted with it.
This is the crux as I see it. Why would I want to play in a format where my only reasonable competitive options are to buy into a deck that will be banned or play a deck that creates play patterns I find repetitive, boring, and unsatisfying?

Huzzah.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

I think twin would be good, maybe tier 1, but not teir zero and that is ok. There is room for multiple teir 1 decks and we don't say they should all be banned because they are tier 1, we say teir one is ok as long as we have diversity.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

I swear, people forget the fact we used to have actual diversity, and tier 2 decks could actually hang with top dogs.

Modern was good once.

The only way, literally the only way, is to gut the worst offenders, and free Twin.
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

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I know that 2019 was the year of ban mania, both legitimately and through unwarranted player outcry, but we really need to stop discussing bans and unbans. Modern has a much more existential threat in Pioneer's presence on Arena and Modern's (so-far) absence on that platform. I also know that many people are tired of fighting these larger battles and just want Wizards to unban some Modern cards so their format experience is a little better. These short-term fixes are not going to preserve your collection value or keep you happy for long. The graver threat to Modern is now, and has been since the Pioneer announcement, its absence from Arena and Wizards' pledge to bridge Historic into Pioneer on their premier platform. Until Wizards addresses this in some way, and until players understand this is the foundational threat, all the other topics need to be distant, secondary issues.

Bans are likely important to stabilize Modern. So are unbans, better answers, an overall shift in the design philosophy, etc. But none of this matters if Wizards isn't supporting the format. See Legacy for an example of a format that I believe many ban/unban proponents would want Modern to become, but also a format that withers without sustained Wizards support. There are currently no significant differences between Modern and Pioneer. They have the same identity, except one is getting supported in Wizards' most important product in over a decade and one is dwindling without that support.
What's the point of this?

I think you have it the other way round. They need to fix the format before even considering bringing it to MTGA or whatever for future support.

It makes no sense to support a format when even the enfranchised players are so disenchanted with it.

Fixing the format - the bans/unbans and design philosophy that are necessary to do so has to come 1st to bring stability, otherwise there's no point in further supporting it on any platform.

They are a business, they need to know they're getting good returns before giving this support to Modern.

Why would WoTC want to waste resources supporting a fundamentally broken format where a large portion of the player base has been dissatisfied for the better part of a year?
This take is wrong and will not save Modern. We have two clear historical examples of this. The first is 2016 Modern, which was largely unhealthy for most of the year, resulting in an Eye ban after a horrible February and March, and then a GGT/Probe ban after a horrible September through December. It also had the polarizing, confidence smashing Twin ban. Despite all this, Modern endured and indeed continued to thrive after Wizards fixed the format. Why? Because it was supported and the only nonrotating game in town. Players were willing to deal with a %$#% year because Modern's long term future was still secure. Takeaway: bad Modern metagames don't matter as long as the overall format has long term security.

The second example is recent Legacy. Legacy has seen overall excellent metagames for the past few years, with a few hitches in between. I know most of the enfranchised players in this thread praise the blue-focused, interactive, decision-heavy gameplay of contemporary Legacy. And yet, the format has a shrinking player base and continually dropping support. It has very little airtime and coverage even on independent Twitch channels. Format health doesn't save Legacy because Wizards is intent on letting the format fade away. Takeaway: healthy formats are insecure if Wizards doesn't support them.

Wizards support is now, and has always been, THE determinant of format health and security. That's why Frontier crashed and burned, along with Tiny Leaders. That's why Legacy initially took off in the 2000s, and way Commander has exploded in recent years. If your format isn't on Wizard's agenda, it's a goner.

There is no guaranteed way to ban or unban our way out of this current Modern metagame. It might take multiple rounds of changes over multiple tournament cycles. New sets are going to continue to break formats due to awful Wizards design decisions. It will take time to resolve this and there's no consensus even among enfranchised online veterans about how to do this. But none of that matters if Wizards won't support Modern on Arena. The format will hemorrhage players in a way we have never experienced as they lose format and investment confidence, jumping over to Historic/Pioneer or Commander or just losing game interest entirely. If Wizards let's Modern fade out of 2020 esport/Arena relevance, it won't matter how healthy or bad the format is. It will just die out.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
This take is wrong and will not save Modern. We have two clear historical examples of this. The first is 2016 Modern, which was largely unhealthy for most of the year, resulting in an Eye ban after a horrible February and March, and then a GGT/Probe ban after a horrible September through December. It also had the polarizing, confidence smashing Twin ban. Despite all this, Modern endured and indeed continued to thrive after Wizards fixed the format. Why? Because it was supported and the only nonrotating game in town. Players were willing to deal with a %$#% year because Modern's long term future was still secure. Takeaway: bad Modern metagames don't matter as long as the overall format has long term security.
Hard disagree. You are overstating players' tolerance to a bad year while neglecting certain factors. 2016 and 2019 were utter crap, 2017 and 2018 were mediocre but acceptable, even good in some small patches. Now tell me again how confident players are in Modern after multiple bad years and also now that there is an actual affordable alternative.
ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
The second example is recent Legacy. Legacy has seen overall excellent metagames for the past few years, with a few hitches in between. I know most of the enfranchised players in this thread praise the blue-focused, interactive, decision-heavy gameplay of contemporary Legacy. And yet, the format has a shrinking player base and continually dropping support. It has very little airtime and coverage even on independent Twitch channels. Format health doesn't save Legacy because Wizards is intent on letting the format fade away. Takeaway: healthy formats are insecure if Wizards doesn't support them.
Shrinking player base? Perhaps, have never seen any numbers to support this other than the age old arguments of limited supply of reserve list cards.
Continually dropping support. Yes, no more GPs and SCG Opens does hurt a bit. But let's be real, Legacy has always been a niche format supported mainly by grassroots organisers and players.

On the various magic subreddits, there are independent shops and organisers around North America putting in the work to organise their own 1Ks/2Ks and such to fill in the void. Heck, someone even organised a 20k event in March which has already sold out.

In Europe, Card Market is still supporting Legacy, Japan's major shops like Hareruya are still supporting Legacy, heck even China is continuing to support Legacy with their Orlov Series. These events also happen multiple times a year.

The dedication that Legacy players have towards the format is something far above what players have for any other format. It's not something that WoTC can kill off just by not providing tournament support.

Edit: Counterpoint to your 'takeaways'

WoTC does not need to provide tournament support for Legacy when independent organisers are stepping up, they just need to loosely manage the banlist every now and then when something super egregious pops up. It's a mostly hands off approach. They still make plenty of money off it from MTGO. There's no downside for them here.

While your approach of giving Modern MTGA support has downside. Like what we already know, they need to change their design philosophy (which might take a long time to see print), and they need to do so while managing their current %$#%-ups. AND they still need to manage expectations while they 'fix' Modern(assuming they even want to). They won't be seeing any good ROI in doing any of these, not worth the trouble.

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

Post by pierreb » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
I know that 2019 was the year of ban mania, both legitimately and through unwarranted player outcry, but we really need to stop discussing bans and unbans. Modern has a much more existential threat in Pioneer's presence on Arena and Modern's (so-far) absence on that platform.
...
We had twin players, you are joining their ranks as a repeat-posters! Stop it! :)

There are good reasons to ignore these rants (many already stated):
  • We have little weigh to influence Wizards.
  • Wizards will not abandon Pioneer just because we're unhappy about it.
  • The only way Pioneer will fail is if the format is awful. It may end-up being awful.
  • There is no gain in it being awful if modern is even worse.
  • In any case, the best scenario for modern still remains improving its health.
  • The only reason Wizards would ever have to support modern on arena is if it is healthy, loved by players and popular.
In short, we are powerless against the forces behind Pioneer. We can only try to ensure modern gets better.

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 168
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

Veil of Summer has been disappointing for me. The card itself can still be countered, making the line of text "your spells can't be countered" pretty useless. I usually sandbag the card in hand until I'm ready to go off with a scapeshift or an ugin the spirit dragon, only to be met with a double stubborn denial, or cryptic command plus metallic rebuke. Shadow of doubt has also been used to blank scapeshift even with a Veil in hand. The fact that it's good against discard feels irrelevant as titanshift and tron are already great against discard. The only bad matchup I can see it swinging in my favor are the shadow decks. The card should also be a welcome addition to legacy where they can finally counter hymn to tourach without playing blue.

The only place where I feel it can be abused is in 4 or 5 color good stuff decks, where astrolable makes it easy to splash green to win the mirror. Or in gb/x sideboards. I don't feel ramp decks benefit as much from it. I always thought cavern of souls was a bigger deal.

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 168
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

To elaborate some more, I feel that oko decks can apply decent pressure early on. And between the usual 6 counter spells and mystic sanctuary, I think ramp decks can use Veil of Summer as a crutch to pull out some wins. I understand that Oko decks can also use Veil of Summer themselves but I wonder if just banning Oko fixes part of the problem.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
The card should also be a welcome addition to legacy where they can finally counter hymn to tourach without playing blue.
This is not a benefit. This is a huge error.
UR Control UR

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”