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

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

Post by frederico » 1 year ago

(Updated 01/06/2020 @ 2110 PST) The image below has been verified as faked. I am keeping it up for reference purposes. As there is no evidence to suggest this was done maliciously or to deliberately mislead, no moderation will follow. Remember to always verify sources.
-ktkenshinx-
Faked screenshot of Wizards B&R update article
Show
Image
Wow I can't believe they actually did it
ciao

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

Post by robertleva » 1 year ago

Half measures. It helps it little bit sure, but it's not enough.

EDIT: Are we sure this is real? I cant find it on WOTC.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Not on Twitter as of this posting.
UR Control UR

CurdBros
Posts: 55
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by CurdBros » 1 year ago

That is an awfully short justification statement for three cards. I wouldn't be upset but I will call it fake until I see it on wizards site.

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

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

There won't be any banings today. They are aiming at next Monday.

Aazadan
Posts: 516
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Any non rotational format that has the number of eyes and rep's put in against it will struggle.

You do not need to ban out people's decks, to decrease the power level. If you are going to just accept that this is the new normal, then I would LOVE Wizards to come out and say so, so we can all stop wasting our time.
Legacy would have the same issue right now if it were a real competitive format. Being fringe is what saves it, Vintage too.

Personally, I think this is a damning critique of Wizards design philosophy for the past decade+ that large formats are simply unsustainable at a competitive level, because it means they've broken the fundamental promise of collecting cards, which is that you will have playable homes for them.

But, it is what it is and Wizards will either respond or they won't. This more than any other reason is why I believe Modern is unsustainable. See my complaints earlier about consumer confidence. Wizards has Legacy for a non competitive non rotating format, and Pioneer for something where they have a workable power level for the next decade or so. Modern being competitive has the flaws that brings, while also having an unchecked power level.

The answer set did not provide answers. And like someone said earlier, and a description I find apt... the format is on fire.

Aazadan
Posts: 516
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

CurdBros wrote:
1 year ago
That is an awfully short justification statement for three cards. I wouldn't be upset but I will call it fake until I see it on wizards site.
While there could be a further justification down the page that wasn't captured, I agree that it seems fake. That isn't how an opening paragraph would be written.

CurdBros
Posts: 55
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by CurdBros » 1 year ago

There is a b&r announcement up that seems to indicate that the pioneer format may be the only format discussed today...I'm confused as to how they are announced now :). The pioneer did state all formats would be discussed on the 13th.

User avatar
Albegas
Posts: 127
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Albegas » 1 year ago

CurdBros wrote:
1 year ago
There is a b&r announcement up that seems to indicate that the pioneer format may be the only format discussed today...I'm confused as to how they are announced now :). The pioneer did state all formats would be discussed on the 13th.
They're getting rid of fixed announcement dates. They said that it'll always be a Monday, but they don't want to be tied to fixed dates in the event of another Hogaak-esque debacle

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Oh, and the Modern Classic from this weekend.

http://old.starcitygames.com/decks/Star ... s_OH_US/1/

Bant Snowblade 1st
Humans 2nd
Sultai Death's Shadow
Bant Snowblade
Bant Snowblade
Urza Prison
Four-Color Urza
Jund 8th

Gifts Storm 9th
Devoted Devastation
Bant Urza
Simic Titan
Sultai Urza
Temur Urza
Eldrazi Tron
Four-Color Kiki Chord 16th

A quick look, show's many Oko.
UR Control UR

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

Post by Amalgam » 1 year ago

Nothing will get done unless there is a big push on social media platforms/reddit etc and it has to be loud. We can moan here till the end of time but it doesn't mean anything will get done.
This is a group effort and it makes a difference. Remember when Modern was removed from the pro tour and everyone collectively got together and pushed back on wizards? That's what it takes to make them listen
Last edited by Amalgam 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

I sent another tweet. I recommend everyone to do the same. @mtgaaron does not read our forum. This is far more influential than something like a ban/unban poll.

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

Post by Amalgam » 1 year ago

Tweets are nice but we honestly need that and more, unless it's a big push it's very easy to ignore.
Wizards is always slow to react unless it's in their face and impossible to ignore

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Amalgam wrote:
1 year ago
Tweets are nice but we honestly need that and more, unless it's a big push it's very easy to ignore.
Wizards is always slow to react unless it's in their face and impossible to ignore
What else would you suggest?

[mention]ktkenshinx[/mention] I hope you dont mind, I stole your post and turned it into a tweet.
UR Control UR

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

When twin was banned and I was angry I got on Facebook and went to Aaron's page and Ian duke's page to send them a message that I would copy and paste. Then I went to there friend lists and sent the same message to anyone I could identify as a WOTC employee. Then I went to those people's friend lists and did the same thing. I spent 2-3 hours doing this after I had my message typed up.

Ian duke actually responded to me, but it didn't site anything specific I said so it was probably a copy/paste response he sent to several people. Most people I messaged didn't respond or said things like, "I work in the mail room and have no power over that decision." But I'm sure people were talking about it in thier offices the next day because I must have sent that to 40 or more people.

I also messaged popular content producers my same message, Cedric Phillips, Gerry Thompson and others. Gerry T responded and effectively just told me to calm down and twin may return one day.

I then went on Twitter during the eldrazi protour and keep tweeting about how bad the format looked, they needed to fix the ban list and promoted everyone selling there good cards before they get banned too. I tagged mtgaaron and included #'s like the pro tours #, and others to try to get alot of views from the WOTC employees.

Some people would call what I did harassment, or call me an obsessed crazy person, but I don't. I was very upset at the time. And I know they took heat from many people over the twin ban, not just me, but it is worth noting ancestral visions and sword of the meek were both unbanned at the very next announcement. I didn't get twin back but they did notice player displeasure and made some changes.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 1 year ago

@idsurge I just saw your tweet about cards to consider banning and you named nature's claim as one of them. That is not the first time I've seen that card mentioned as a ban target but I do not understand the idea behind banning nature's claim. It seems to me that there are many many easy replacements for it so the ban would do little good. Could you, or anyone else, please explain the reason to ban specificly that card to me please?

Yawgmoth
Posts: 170
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Yawgmoth » 1 year ago

Tweeting at WotC is definitely more effective than whining about things here. But we need to have a clear message/request. The problem is that even the dozen or so regular posters on this thread cannot reach a consensus about what they want changed in Modern.

A handful of people tweeting about random cards they want banned/unbanned is nothing more than the regular rabble that makes up mtg social media. This is very easy to ignore; WotC and most players do this every day.

A bunch of people all asking for the same thing stands a much better chance of getting noticed.

I think we need to ask WotC for a statement about the future of Modern. Once we know what WotC thinks Modern is, then we can start asking them for specifics. If they are going to stop supporting the format in 6 months then who cares if they ban card XYZ?

Am I wrong? Don't we need this first before we can start thinking about what specific changes to ask for? I tried to bring this up a few pages back but it got buried in 3 days worth of ban Oko/urza/opal unban Twin tail chasing.

TLDR: how can we ask WotC for changes to Modern without knowing what Modern means to WotC?

Aazadan
Posts: 516
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
@idsurge I just saw your tweet about cards to consider banning and you named nature's claim as one of them. That is not the first time I've seen that card mentioned as a ban target but I do not understand the idea behind banning nature's claim. It seems to me that there are many many easy replacements for it so the ban would do little good. Could you, or anyone else, please explain the reason to ban specificly that card to me please?
Basically, the argument is that while cards like that, which take out artifacts and enchantments are intended to help fair decks deal with combo, them being low mana, with drawbacks (if any) that combo decks don't care about, causes them to actually help the unfair decks they're supposed to fight.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Aazadan wrote:
1 year ago
metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
@idsurge I just saw your tweet about cards to consider banning and you named nature's claim as one of them. That is not the first time I've seen that card mentioned as a ban target but I do not understand the idea behind banning nature's claim. It seems to me that there are many many easy replacements for it so the ban would do little good. Could you, or anyone else, please explain the reason to ban specificly that card to me please?
Basically, the argument is that while cards like that, which take out artifacts and enchantments are intended to help fair decks deal with combo, them being low mana, with drawbacks (if any) that combo decks don't care about, causes them to actually help the unfair decks they're supposed to fight.
Yep, thats exactly it. When the removal for the hate is cheaper than the hate, its just too easy to splash. When Green is also in some of the problematic decks anyway, or can be, its just too easy to use.
UR Control UR

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
1 year ago
@idsurge I just saw your tweet about cards to consider banning and you named nature's claim as one of them. That is not the first time I've seen that card mentioned as a ban target but I do not understand the idea behind banning nature's claim. It seems to me that there are many many easy replacements for it so the ban would do little good. Could you, or anyone else, please explain the reason to ban specificly that card to me please?
I am a huge proponent of what I am calling "nerf-bans," i.e. bans that hit decks at their fringes without hurting core deck elements. You can still play a lot of broken strategies without Claim. See Tron, Infect, Dredge, and others. But then you can't have a 1 mana, effectively no-extra-cost answer to some of the best hate pieces. There's a HUGE difference between Claim and the significantly less efficient Naturalize (and variants). Wizards can ban out overly-efficient answers from sideboards that disproportionately help busted decks (looking at you too, Force of Vigor). This will rein in powerful but potentially unhealthy decks while still allowing them to be played.
Yawgmoth wrote:
1 year ago
Tweeting at WotC is definitely more effective than whining about things here. But we need to have a clear message/request. The problem is that even the dozen or so regular posters on this thread cannot reach a consensus about what they want changed in Modern.

A handful of people tweeting about random cards they want banned/unbanned is nothing more than the regular rabble that makes up mtg social media. This is very easy to ignore; WotC and most players do this every day.
I think it's a lot more than a handful at this time. There is an outrageous degree of ban discussion in my Twitter feed from most prominent pros who are still even talking about Modern. Add in Reddit's ban mania (also feels higher than usual) and the vastly diminished amount of Modern content available in the last 1-2 months with a GP literally a few days away, and it's clear there's a huge push for bans. When this happened with Standard's Oko fiasco, Wizards banned four cards in the span of about a month even though people all disagreed about what to ban. We saw the same with the energy nightmare a few years ago. We'll see a similar response with Modern and some combination of Oko/Veil/Urza/Mox/Lattice/etc. will get banned. The specific bans aren't terribly important as long as they are hitting egregious offenders (e.g. Oko) and addressing offensive decks (e.g. Urza).
A bunch of people all asking for the same thing stands a much better chance of getting noticed.

I think we need to ask WotC for a statement about the future of Modern. Once we know what WotC thinks Modern is, then we can start asking them for specifics. If they are going to stop supporting the format in 6 months then who cares if they ban card XYZ?

Am I wrong? Don't we need this first before we can start thinking about what specific changes to ask for? I tried to bring this up a few pages back but it got buried in 3 days worth of ban Oko/urza/opal unban Twin tail chasing.

TLDR: how can we ask WotC for changes to Modern without knowing what Modern means to WotC?
At the same time, you and I are on the same page. I stand by what I said earlier: Wizards MUST release some form of format direction statement/vision/mission update/etc. about Modern. This needs to happen ASAP and it needs to align roughly with the swift banlist decision. As you said, bans are totally irrelevant if player confidence remains where it is and Modern keeps hemorrhaging players every time unhealthy decks emerge. Wizards needs to rebuild Modern capital and commit to supporting and managing the format. If they don't do that, it's a format death sentence.

To that end, I am finalizing a Modern Metrics post that I will soft-launch here prior to full release on Reddit. These types of articles have been helpful in the past at putting a voice to Modern issues. I have no direct evidence that they lead to action, but some of my past articles have proceeded those changes and/or been directly in dialogue with a change that happened shortly after publication. If nothing else, it will get a larger subset of the visible Modern community talking about key problems and not distracted by bans.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

Aazadan
Posts: 516
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

Yawgmoth wrote:
1 year ago
Am I wrong? Don't we need this first before we can start thinking about what specific changes to ask for?
Probably less changes because everyone wants different things, and more for Wizards to clarify a format direction, goals, what they consider acceptable, and their long term plans (especially once Pioneer hits Arena).

Among other issues outside of porting Modern over which is a serious concern, at some point Arena is going to be the main/intended way to play Standard online, and with Modern cards all coming from Standard this is going to create a card availability issue on MTGO.

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

There's gotta be a smaller, less competitive store where ex-twin players can go. Just slot in 4 kiki-jiki and call it a day. There's always those stores that just offer a more casual atmosphere with just booster packs as prizes. Bogles Merfolk and others have fallen behind in the meta too. Birthing pod players moved on to collected company.

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

I don't get why Konami and Bushiroad are understood to be evil but Wizards gets held to some different standard. Something changed around 2016 with Battle for Zendikar. I think people should adpot a more short term focus to this game and it's formats.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
There's gotta be a smaller, less competitive store where ex-twin players can go. Just slot in 4 kiki-jiki and call it a day. There's always those stores that just offer a more casual atmosphere with just booster packs as prizes. Bogles Merfolk and others have fallen behind in the meta too. Birthing pod players moved on to collected company.
...what does any of that solve? You realize that if Modern was actually good, we 'ex-twin' players would be playing some other good deck? Do you have any idea the number of decks some of us have built and played when Modern was actually playable?

Nothing being discussed in this thread has anything to do with casual play so I can jam Kiki and win.

If you think Modern's actually fine, thats certainly your opinion, but cast a wider net. Look around. Read.

Very very few people who live and breath this stuff daily, think Modern is 'fine'.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 160
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

My last 2 post were more or less vaguely aimed at ban/unban discussion of twin and pod. As well as people's frustrations over getting a favorite deck banned.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”