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

BeneTleilax
Posts: 725
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by BeneTleilax » 1 year ago

they tried to nerf ban hogaaak. hogaak should never have existed.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Sure, I mean sometimes mistakes are just overwhelming. The first version of Eldrazi should never exist again for example.
UR Control UR

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

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Modern is not Modern without its pillars.
I think your overall argument rests on this statement. Why exactly is Modern not Modern without its pillars? Who gets to decide what is a pillar and what is a Hogaak/Urza? Using what criteria?

We could say that the above decks are guilty of dominating lesser powered decks to large degrees, but I could just as easily apply this logic to current day Tron or Titanshift who both cannibalize "fair" decks out of the format. The main issue I see with your view, is that pillars today are not the same as pillars tomorrow, Tron in 2015 was a very different beast compared to Tron today, don't get me wrong, Tron was always favored against mid range, but when it had to use Emrakul as it's big threat, the deck itself was slow enough to at least give the illusion of a game of magic unlike today where the deck just railroads you into the dirt if your not playing some faster pile. But going by your logic, once a pillar always a pillar correct?
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
The overwhelming majority of the time we should strive to keep popular decks as functional, competitive decks, and if that means we need MORE bans, but of a lesser version (nuke vs nerf) then we should embrace that.
What role does popularity have? Hogaak was a popular deck, yet no one sad to see it banned out of existence, Urza was popular, yet no one questioned those bans either. Or are you just using popularity as a substitute for how much the community "likes" a certain deck? If so what mechanism do we as a fractured community have to determine what decks we like or not?

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
Why exactly is Modern not Modern without its pillars? Who gets to decide what is a pillar and what is a Hogaak/Urza? Using what criteria?
Because I believe the 'no rotation' aspect of the format was its greatest appeal, and when you could attach yourself to 'your deck' and keep playing it, that was the glue that held Modern as a format and community together.

Urza could be a pillar. Hogaak could have been too, much like Eldrazi has become. If something is too good however, its gotta go.
Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
The main issue I see with your view, is that pillars today are not the same as pillars tomorrow, Tron in 2015 was a very different beast compared to Tron today, don't get me wrong, Tron was always favored against mid range, but when it had to use Emrakul as it's big threat, the deck itself was slow enough to at least give the illusion of a game of magic unlike today where the deck just railroads you into the dirt if your not playing some faster pile. But going by your logic, once a pillar always a pillar correct?
Well...yes. Tron of 2015 is not Tron of today, but you can still say 'Tron' and people understand what is happening yes? You could still say Affinity, before Opal died, and understand what it means, you could even say G Affinity, and the more 'in the know' understood that to be Scales.

I'm not concerned with the lesser decks really. There will always be Tier 1 and Tier 2. As long as there is no T0 (Amulet now) thats just the nature of a competitive game.
Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
What role does popularity have? Hogaak was a popular deck, yet no one sad to see it banned out of existence, Urza was popular, yet no one questioned those bans either. Or are you just using popularity as a substitute for how much the community "likes" a certain deck? If so what mechanism do we as a fractured community have to determine what decks we like or not?
There is a difference between 'overwhelmingly the best deck' and 'popular archetype'. People still play UWx, and will forever, even if it sucks. That is a pillar. People will audible to a busted deck (Hogaak/Eldrazi) if its overwhelming the rest of the field. That is not a pillar.

Obviously, this is all subjective.
UR Control UR

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

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Because I believe the 'no rotation' aspect of the format was its greatest appeal, and when you could attach yourself to 'your deck' and keep playing it, that was the glue that held Modern as a format and community together.
I mean this is a great bumper sticker quote, but does it actually pan out in reality? I think the community response to 99% of Modern bans has been ubiquitously positive, does this not on some level contradict your statement? Even the bans that killed their respective decks like KCI were met with positivity.

If I could posit a different idea for a moment. I believe the value of Modern (in the eyes of the community) has been the shear variety of decks that you can play in it. I think the social media rise of figures like Saffron Olive with his "Against the Odds" series have shown this. Another example is if you look at old tournament vods, compared the viewership of [insert Jund vs UW control] vs [Slivers vs Anything at all] as well as the enthusiasm of the casters involved, it becomes clear, that what the community really likes about the format is the ability to play niche or under dog decks, walk into a tournament, and do well. I don't think the community has some emotional connection to arbitrary pillars like you do, thats just my assessment.
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
I'm not concerned with the lesser decks really. There will always be Tier 1 and Tier 2. As long as there is no T0 (Amulet now) thats just the nature of a competitive game.
And yet as I'm sure your aware, the gulf in power between T1 and T2 decks has grown greatly over the years. At what point do T1 decks simply crowd out T2 decks?

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 163
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

once upon a time feels like a problem card

also, preordain should never be unbanned. after goldfishing oddball decks online, i'm convinced the best decks aren't particularly powerful but just consistent. preordain doesn't even force you to build around it like faithless looting or ancient stirrings do. i think it would slot into nearly every deck.

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

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
nce upon a time feels like a problem card

also, preordain should never be unbanned. after goldfishing oddball decks online, i'm convinced the best decks aren't particularly powerful but just consistent. preordain doesn't even force you to build around it like faithless looting or ancient stirrings do. i think it would slot into nearly every deck.
I mean...The best decks ARE powerful, decks like Tron exile lands, exile opponent's boards, etc etc, compared to decks like Jund....which don't. Clearly consistency is a facet of strong decks, but power is still the clear determining factor.

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 163
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

Power doesn't impress me, there's tons of janky combo decks that are powerful but are too inconsistent or slightly worse than already existing combo decks.

jitte, pod, and can trips shouldn't come off the ban list, unless the playerbase wants a legacy lite feel. twin was a very strong deck but probably shouldn't have been banned. everyones preferences are different but i think some cards are pushing the limits

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
I mean this is a great bumper sticker quote, but does it actually pan out in reality? I think the community response to 99% of Modern bans has been ubiquitously positive, does this not on some level contradict your statement? Even the bans that killed their respective decks like KCI were met with positivity.
KCI was one of those 'overwhelming best decks', and outside a very small contingent, was hated.
Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
And yet as I'm sure your aware, the gulf in power between T1 and T2 decks has grown greatly over the years. At what point do T1 decks simply crowd out T2 decks?
Absolutely. The London Mulligan only further amplifies this gap. I dont know if you were on MTGS, but I have said for a very long time that the top end of the format needs a kick in the kneecap.

Your point re: Format Diversity is correct as well, but the beauty of the format was that it used to cater to both. You had format pillars, and you had fringe diversity, and you used to be able to get away with playing either.

Modern's not been there for a long time, which is why nerf ban's to cut down the top end need to be considered.

If you remove the top decks completely you are not helping diversity, you are just changing what the top is.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 163
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

i'm starting to come around to the idea of getting storm out of the format. some turns take too long to navigate. does anyone have a lot of experience playing against it online? they maybe could have banned manamorphose back when arclight phoenix was top tier.

london mulligan seems fine, no? gets rid of death spiral mulligans and non-games.

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

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Your point re: Format Diversity is correct as well, but the beauty of the format was that it used to cater to both. You had format pillars, and you had fringe diversity, and you used to be able to get away with playing either.
The issue is that this co-existence was on some level doomed to fail at some point simply due to design space. Lets look at Tron since that is the more hot button issue, Tron itself limits design space for high cmc colorless cards in the same way that Pod was axed (in part) due to it limiting design space for low cmc creatures with ETB triggers. As time goes on, Tron was always doomed to go from strong to brutal because what are Wotc going to do, never print big colorless cards ever again in case it breaks Tron? Of course not. This moment you desire of tenuous co-existence between pillars and niche decks was never going to last in my opinion.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Then ban the new cards that come in which break that admittedly tenuous balance.

There factually was a time when Storm, Burn, Tron, BGx, URx, Elves, and more coexisted. There is no reason we could not get back to it.
Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
london mulligan seems fine, no? gets rid of death spiral mulligans and non-games.
And no, it is not fine. It will inevitably continue to lead to more and more bans as it amplifies the power inherent in a select few cards every set, and leads to a decrease in variance which has continued to showcase those cards.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 163
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

wouldn't be surprised to see eldrazi temple go. i think eldrazi tron is showing itself to be the real deal, regular tron seems fine, its 3 different lands plus the payoff card in order to work.

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

Post by Tomatotime » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Then ban the new cards that come in which break that admittedly tenuous balance.
I'll be honest, at the shear rate that Wotc is releasing new product nowadays, as well as their new straight to Modern avenue which I'm sure they will be returning to, I just don't think this is actually a feasible solution. Mixed with the fact that Wotc has up to this point taken the banning approach of 'too little, too late' I don't see what profit there is in keeping problem cards like Tron around and eventually trimming around the edges as if it were a rose, a rose that most people in the community hate having around in the first place, and I say that using not just my anecdotal evidence but the way that the community talks about the deck on platforms like reddit and such.

Mtgthewary
Posts: 219
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Mtgthewary » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
wouldn't be surprised to see eldrazi temple go. i think eldrazi tron is showing itself to be the real deal, regular tron seems fine, its 3 different lands plus the payoff card in order to work.
Please think about bevore posting such strange things. Eldrazi Tron was death for 1 year. Noone played it... Only green Tron was king. So this is the part people should think about bevore talking about strange bans. You can kill it again easy like it was if you ban little karn. Why you want to destroy as example my eldrazi stompy without Tron or karn? There is no reason like it was in mox opal or looting

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

Post by Yawgmoth » 1 year ago

Rather than an in an experiment, which might only destabilize things further, I think that a better approach would be to beta test a Modern 2.0 format in a controlled way. Game/program developers do this all of the time. In the case of programs, usually publishers will offer advanced access of a "beta" version to a subset of long time/heavy users.

In theory, they could run Modern 2.0 beta leagues and/or side events at major tournaments using pools of pro players and stores with large groups of regular Modern players. In this context they could initially unban lots of things and then actively monitor the situation and re-ban as needed. If this new version is fun/interesting then these players/bloggers etc will be excited and write/talk about it and then other players/stores might start trying it. If it turns out to be a dumpster fire after 1yr (or whatever time) then they could end the experiment without tanking the format. This would protect average Joe Modern players from economic instability/ buying into a deck only to have it banned soon after.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Tomatotime wrote:
1 year ago
I'll be honest, at the shear rate that Wotc is releasing new product nowadays, as well as their new straight to Modern avenue which I'm sure they will be returning to, I just don't think this is actually a feasible solution. Mixed with the fact that Wotc has up to this point taken the banning approach of 'too little, too late' I don't see what profit there is in keeping problem cards like Tron around and eventually trimming around the edges as if it were a rose, a rose that most people in the community hate having around in the first place, and I say that using not just my anecdotal evidence but the way that the community talks about the deck on platforms like reddit and such.
Here's the thing. If you ban the decks people 'hate' out of Modern, there wouldnt be a format to play. There is no identity to this format, we have been talking about it for weeks.

If you remove the decks which are unique to Modern, that give it a soul, you may as well play Pioneer, and Modern is forgotten.
Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
wouldn't be surprised to see eldrazi temple go. i think eldrazi tron is showing itself to be the real deal, regular tron seems fine, its 3 different lands plus the payoff card in order to work.
???? No. I swear to god you are Colt.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 163
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

if you guys feel that trons win rate isn't problematic and the format has other problems then i won't argue against that too much. i was under the impression that e-tron was everywhere online and people didn't like it. i would also rather have green tron in the format than eldrazi tron, at least it's a little softer to pithing needle effects and land hate. it also feels like big-mana/graveyard decks are starting to be over represented right now. and lol no, i'm not colt

User avatar
Ed06288
Posts: 163
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

@ktkenshinx
The Great Modern Unban Experiment
Ancient Den, Birthing Pod, Great Furnace, Green Sun's Zenith, Ponder, Preordain, Punishing Fire, Seat of the Synod, Splinter Twin, Tree of Tales, Umezawa's Jitte, Vault of Whispers

i'm hesitant on pod, jitte, and can trips. without going into detail, that list is alright overall.

User avatar
Simto
Posts: 282
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

Ed06288 wrote:
1 year ago
if you guys feel that trons win rate isn't problematic and the format has other problems then i won't argue against that too much. i was under the impression that e-tron was everywhere online and people didn't like it. i would also rather have green tron in the format than eldrazi tron, at least it's a little softer to pithing needle effects and land hate. it also feels like big-mana/graveyard decks are starting to be over represented right now. and lol no, i'm not colt
The banning of Lattice has more or less kicked Eldrazi Tron out of Tier 1 for the moment. I see more regular/old school Green Tron lists pop up now without Creator Karn. They just use 4 Once upon a time now in that slot.

Isn't Jitte way too brutal for modern? I think it was the SCG tour or something that had a no ban list tournament and the top 8 was pretty much just eldrazi tron with jittes. It looked pretty nasty and that's coming from someone who loves nasty eldrazi lol.
The entire game is focused on the jitte as soon as it lands (that's at least my experience) and if Lattice gets a ban for "it's not fun so %$#% it" then Jitte is way worse lol.

But then again, I can see an argument for having a mass unban. I think it worked pretty well for Pioneer. Starting with a clean slate you know?
Could it work for modern?

DarthDrac
Posts: 22
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by DarthDrac » 1 year ago

I'd leave Ponder on the ban list, Preordain on the other-hand is fine. Birthing Pod and Splinter Twin, have too much emotion attached to them, if they were unbanned and then re-banned it would create more uproar and likely cost the format more players... Don't get me wrong I still have 4 Pods, I've occasionally put 1 in a commander deck, I just think that people (not just this forum) feel too strongly about them.

Green Sun's would literally only be run for Dryad Arbor, arguably I'd rather be rid of Arbor, since it save Bogles from sacrifice effects.

I think Modern needs to be honest about itself, either it is a turn 3 format, so then Twin and Pod are fine or it's a turn 4 format. At the moment I'd say it is closer to turn 3, with Pioneer filling the turn 4 role. The London mulligan makes janky combos more reliable, but like every mulligan Thoughtsieze and Inquisition sort of keep it in check.

Modern is the Tron, Blood Moon, Chalice of the Void and Ensnaring Bridge the format (mono-red prison the format...), this is the thing we as Modern players need to embrace, without these weird old cards, it's just Pioneer.

User avatar
Bearscape
Posts: 220
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Bearscape » 1 year ago

I'd be skeptical the blue cantrips and Jitte would improve Modern, but it is "The Great Modern Unban Experiment" and not "The Great Let's Finally Unban Cards We All Know Would Be Fine" after all so I'd like to see that play out. I honestly think just the concept of such a big shakeup would do more good to modern than the cards involved, just to revitalize people's interest. Banning Veil and OOaT is still higher on my needs list though.

Also, I'm kind of surprised I haven't seen Underworld Breach shredding the format in half yet.

User avatar
Mikefon
Posts: 29
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Modena (Italy)
Contact:

Post by Mikefon » 1 year ago

Artifact lands may bring back Affinity, a "pillar of the format" erased by last (needed) ban. I think it wouldn't be a big problem. Urza may get a boost but with cards like stony silence and collector ouphe that could keep them in check they may be a good addition to the format.
P & P may bring a xerox deck to a high tier status for sure, but I can't see the problem. Currently there isn't a really competitive xerox startegy in modern. And xerox decks help a lot keeping in check unfair strategies.
I think there won't be any uproar if cards were unbanned and then banned again backed up by data. Most of the uproar about twin, pod etc. are due to the feeling that those cards didn't deserve the ban.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

We don't have enough free cards to make xerox a thing do we? It was (as I was right at the time) looting that fueled Phoenix.

It's no surprise that deck died with that ban.

What good is digging when you are out of mana and dead to board.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Albegas
Posts: 137
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Albegas » 1 year ago

I'm not even sure Urza wants the artifact lands. They can't be fetched, they can't pay for Astrolabe, and they don't really help Urza ramp once he lands. They make the construct bigger, but that seems like a minute boon for a slew of drawbacks. I also agree that we at least need Preordain back, if not both it and Ponder. Just about every deck that can run them is T2 or worse, including Storm

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”