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

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

ThatStoryTeller wrote: I actually think inverter could be a decent deck in modern (granted, both spells work at sorcery speed for 6 mana, but its over the course of a few turns, and force of negation exists), albeit with a few hoops to jump through like the lack of dig through time, but the format has access to the escape instants in blue and black that facilitate similar results, as well as thought scour and gurmag angler. It would take a lot of sculpting and refining to make a reality, but its a solid idea here. Patrick Chapin thinks pioneer is turning into a lesser modern and needs more bans on this deck in particular, but Id def say optimize it to be tested against the top decks.
The deck existed in Modern already, for a brief time, shortly after that Jace was printed. But instead of Inverter of Truth, it used Leveler, which although is an additional mana, is a quicker win condition (doesn't shuffle GY back into library) and is a bigger body. It also is colorless, so it doesn't force any second color, allowing the deck to be mono blue, or splash any second color it wants. It never really gained any traction outside of "Oh, that's neat" because the Trons and Titans and Dredges of the format kept overwhelmingly destroying anything that wasn't up to that power level.
FoodChainGoblins wrote: Honestly it's not really safe to buy anything in Pioneer in my opinion.
Realistically speaking, when has it been "safe" to buy into Modern? Has it ever been? It certainly hasn't felt that way for the majority of time I have been in Modern. Time I spent buying into a format that continues to devalue my decks while continuing to spark fear in investing in "the good ones." Fear that the hundreds (or thousands) needed to buy/upgrade to these new decks could all be undone with a single B&R announcement, or made irrelevant by another slew of pushed Horizons cards. Why bother?

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote: Prices are also dropping each day on Modern.
This is the most terrifying thing because it means both a lack of demand and lack of faith in the format. Even less a reason to buy in, unless you think things will miraculously recover at some point.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
Realistically speaking, when has it been "safe" to buy into Modern? Has it ever been?
When your deck is Tier 2 pile, that doesnt count on a 'power' piece of the format.
UR Control UR

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

"X deck should be totally safe to invest in" is literally why people are still upset about Twin's ban 4+ years later. *(see spoiler tag for words written 1 month before Twin's ban)*

Watch someone buy into Amulet Titan, just to see Primeval Titan or Amulet of Vigor banned a few months, or whatever. Bonus points if they do it shortly after multiple reprints for the deck. Sorry, I have no faith in WOTC's ability to manage any format anymore. Nothing is safe. Without realizing it until now, I've effectively been boycotting all organized play for months until they can show they can get their act together. Too bad WOTC still gets some of my money through D&D products, but I suppose that (and Commander) are actually fun because they don't devolve into winning at all costs (including the cost of like... fun or engaging gameplay).
*
Show
From: https://www.modernnexus.com/twins-and-t ... ittsburgh/

"Modern breaks down in two scenarios. The first is where tournaments are too small for the metagame to arc towards Twin and BGx justice. Linear decks can dodge these policemen in smaller events, and then hope to get lucky in the single game where they get jammed up. This doesn't work at a Grand Prix ... That's not going to happen at a tournament where both Twin and Jund show up in force. [T]he second breakdown scenario is where one (or both) of the decks are absent. No Twin? Get ready for Affinity and Amulet to run over everything in sight. No BGx? Honesty, i can't think of a time when there was no BGx at all, but I know that an absence of Jund sees big increases in Infect and other small-critter-based aggro."

Doesn't that sound kind of exactly what has happened to Modern? No URx/BGx = nothing but big mana and linear aggro.

The cherry on top, and why I continually reference this article:
"At Pittsburgh, we saw both decks which is why the event was so healthy and such a return to old-school Modern. This is a critical observation because it shows us situations where the metagame can be broken (relatively speaking) and then self-correct just a month later. That's important if you are playing (prepare for the correction or jump on board a policing deck), speculating (don't play the long-game on spending on linear decks that might be here today and gone tomorrow), investing (Twin and BGx only go up because they are always here), or just trying to understand the format (we'll always come back to these two decks no matter where the format is at any given moment). Pittsburgh should have been a faith-restoring event for all Moern players, and I am optimistic that we can keep seeing these forces in more events to come."

Twin was banned a month later, and other than a few pockets of chaotic shake ups, we've been in a degenerate linear spiral ever since.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Turns is safe. :D
UR Control UR

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Welp... no more data for us...

Just when you think WoTC could not possibly commit anymore howlers after the %$#%-storm of 2019. Well, joke's on me.

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Welp... no more data for us...

Just when you think WoTC could not possibly commit anymore howlers after the %$#% of 2019. Well, joke's on me.
Must have taken a cue from today's politics. When in doubt, hide information at all costs.

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

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

True-Name Nemesis wrote:
1 year ago
Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Welp... no more data for us...

Just when you think WoTC could not possibly commit anymore howlers after the %$#% of 2019. Well, joke's on me.
They probably believe metagames are solved too fast and because of that bannings are needed more often and faster than before. The costs of bans is huge. Not only for them as a company but I am talking about players. I know several people who lost between 500-1000 euros last year due to bans. These people are currently taking a break from mtg and will take time for their wounds to heal so I don't expect them back any time soon.

Limiting the data means it will take longer for normal people to catch up on the best deck which would mean more format stability in the hope consumer trust returns. Also by limiting data and having unsolved metagames it creates the illusion everything is viable. That is what gets most Timmy's to attend FNM's.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
They probably believe metagames are solved too fast and because of that bannings are needed more often and faster than before. The costs of bans is huge. Not only for them as a company but I am talking about players. I know several people who lost between 500-1000 euros last year due to bans. These people are currently taking a break from mtg and will take time for their wounds to heal so I don't expect them back any time soon.

Limiting the data means it will take longer for normal people to catch up on the best deck which would mean more format stability in the hope consumer trust returns. Also by limiting data and having unsolved metagames it creates the illusion everything is viable. That is what gets most Timmy's to attend FNM's.
Right, but the invested players, the ones that see and look at all this, are also semi-educated. All this really shows, is that Wizard's wont stand behind its own product with confidence, because they know their Development team screwed 2019 into the ground, and a few cards are probably gonna be an issue this year too.

Data is never the issue. Incompetence is.
UR Control UR

True-Name Nemesis
Posts: 156
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by True-Name Nemesis » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Data is never the issue. Incompetence is.
So much this.

Hiding matchup win-rate data is not going to reduce ban mania or induce stability. The decklists of top 8/16/32/54 whatever are still going to be released.

Now instead of having a granular view of all decklists (or as many as karsten can collect) + win-rates to gauge a deck's performance, we just have a number to look at.

1) X deck put this many copies in top 8/16/32/64 + has a win rate of Y% over the next 3 most played decks. It is approaching/at Tier 0 and something should be done to nerf it.

VS

2) X deck put this many copies in top 8/16/32/64. It must be broken. Ban!!!

(1) Is a data-based approach towards understanding the metrics behind a ban.
(2) Is a great way to get the player base to jump to conclusions and propagate ban-mania.

User avatar
AvalonAurora
Posts: 162
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by AvalonAurora » 1 year ago

On the earlier discussion of Modern needing land destruction, I'm wondering if something like From the Ashes would work, I'd rather that than Wasteland or Sinkhole (possibly with different color(s)), although the fact that it can't come online before Tron might be an issue, the fact that it gets rid of the entire Tron setup out so far might actually make it better than some of the other options if removal is good enough to deal with Tron's early plays. If something like that didn't work I'd then prefer Sinkhole (possibly with different color(s)) over Wasteland, but I'm not sure why that feels better to me.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Needs to be flat out destroy. Not replace. Basic replace type stuff we already have, its not good enough.
UR Control UR

User avatar
AvalonAurora
Posts: 162
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by AvalonAurora » 1 year ago

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
Needs to be flat out destroy. Not replace. Basic replace type stuff we already have, its not good enough.
Eh, but what we have currently is single target, I suspect a sweep would behave very differently. Since, say, if you swept Tron, it wouldn't just have to replace one of the three that you hit, but all 3 of them (taking three more land drop turns). I feel like a bigger question is if a 4 drop can do the job soon enough, rather than if replace type stuff is a viable method, since, at least against tron, a sweep is a very different effect.

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

Post by Yawgmoth » 1 year ago

A color-shifted "white" Sinkhole would be cool.

Ww Exile target non-basic land, sorcery speed.

I think Wasteland would be too strong for Modern (I say that as someone who loves playing Wasteland). On the other hand, I could see Rishadan Port being a fair addition to the meta.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

I'd absolutely LOVE for that card to exist.
UR Control UR

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

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

Waster Land

: Destroy target non-basic land

User avatar
Simto
Posts: 252
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Copenhagen

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

Yawgmoth wrote:
1 year ago
A color-shifted "white" Sinkhole would be cool.

Ww Exile target non-basic land, sorcery speed.

I think Wasteland would be too strong for Modern (I say that as someone who loves playing Wasteland). On the other hand, I could see Rishadan Port being a fair addition to the meta.
That would be cool and that's even coming from a Tron player hehe.
iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Waster Land

: Destroy target non-basic land
Way too brutal if serious hehe. Field of Ruin already exists and is good.

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

Post by iTaLenTZ » 1 year ago

Simto wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ wrote: ↑
2 hours ago
Waster Land

: Destroy target non-basic land

Way too brutal if serious hehe. Field of Ruin already exists and is good.
Field of Ruin on the draw is too slow. The 1 mana requirement means you equally trade tempo which would IMO balance the card.

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

Post by DarthDrac » 1 year ago

gkourou wrote:
1 year ago
On today's earnings call, Hasbro says that Magic's revenues grew 30% in 2019, with double digit growth in tabletop.
I guess Modern Horizons, Secret Lairs and the other sets released in 2019 alongside Arena did what they were meant to. It's also likely to mean there will be no drive for change, despite players stating wallet fatigue, the products still sold and sold well. The mentioned MH2 will be along next year (hopefully not this year) and who knows maybe they will print Counterspell in it...

User avatar
Simto
Posts: 252
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Copenhagen

Post by Simto » 1 year ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Simto wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ wrote: ↑
2 hours ago
Waster Land

: Destroy target non-basic land

Way too brutal if serious hehe. Field of Ruin already exists and is good.
Field of Ruin on the draw is too slow. The 1 mana requirement means you equally trade tempo which would IMO balance the card.
1 mana for a repeatable land destruction card is insanely overpowered though. And even if you have to sac it, it's still too strong.
Field of Ruin is still dope

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

Post by Yawgmoth » 1 year ago

Simto wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
Simto wrote:
1 year ago
iTaLenTZ wrote: ↑
2 hours ago
Waster Land

: Destroy target non-basic land

Way too brutal if serious hehe. Field of Ruin already exists and is good.
Field of Ruin on the draw is too slow. The 1 mana requirement means you equally trade tempo which would IMO balance the card.
1 mana for a repeatable land destruction card is insanely overpowered though. And even if you have to sac it, it's still too strong.
Field of Ruin is still dope
You would need to sac or otherwise it would be insanely good. Rishadan Port only taps, not destroys, other lands and that card is widely played in Legacy where it is a very strong control piece.

Alternatively, you could require saccing any of your lands as the activation cost. That way you could trade your basic for their non-basic lands. That's a more balanced tempo piece.

Mapccu
Posts: 87
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Mapccu » 1 year ago

In regards to them hiding stats, we still have other data collection points like SCG. Yeah it's not the same prize purse, it's not international, and it's smaller pools but it's something. The circuit usually doesn't trend THAT far off the accepted norm.

It's not ideal, especially for those looking to invest. I understand where they're coming from but I don't agree with it. This allows them to push boundaries more often and doesn't allow us to fact check ban stats nearly as easily, which is unfortunate.

My biggest concern is that as they continue to hide these data dumps, the vocal minority in each format that rallies for justified bans are going to lose ammo in making cases and getting a voice of reason to be heard. The end result could be slower ban cycles and longer periods of bad standard, pioneer, modern, etc health. It could also lead to people being blindsided if they start hiding significant chunks of what little data we have down the road because you won't know something you're investing in is a problem per se, just that it looks fun and is competitive.

I don't see this road leading to a good place in consumer confidence for the enfranchised grinders. It is irrelevant for most kitchen tables.

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

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
Welp... no more data for us...
Extremely disappointing, especially in the context of trying to suggest that Modern can be revitalized by making it a format of information.

Can't say I'm surprised though. Wizards seems terrified of players having any information at all, because it leads to players solving a meta more quickly, if that can be done. Instead, to borrow a term, they're relying on meta security through obscurity. Which tends to sound really good to people without any background on information theory, and terrifying to anyone with even the most minor background on it.

This will only make Modern (and other formats) worse over time, and more susceptible to decks/cards that are too good. Of course, a couple months back I predicted the new ban update schedule was done because they know more bans are coming. Measures like this can prevent an issue from appearing on peoples radar as quickly, so perhaps it's more of the same strategy to avoid another Oko or Hogaak situation where a card takes over in a matter of days, and instead delay it to months while having secretly broken decks existing.

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

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
1 year ago
They probably believe metagames are solved too fast and because of that bannings are needed more often and faster than before. The costs of bans is huge. Not only for them as a company but I am talking about players. I know several people who lost between 500-1000 euros last year due to bans. These people are currently taking a break from mtg and will take time for their wounds to heal so I don't expect them back any time soon.
Limiting data only leads to more bans in the long run. The less information players have when metagaming, and especially when building a sideboard, the greater the chance that there are very potent decks out there that players are unaware of, or able to properly counter.

Imagine if something like Dredge was unknown. Can you imagine how much of the meta it would run over if no one knew to pack enough GY hate, or could read the metagame to know when to bring that GY hate? That is what you ultimately get when you hide information.

Also, you mentioned the cost of those bans. Now imagine those people come back, and find a good fringe deck, but don't know how overpowered it is. Eventually, people will figure it out and that ban will happen. This means people are purchasing their cards with less information available, meaning they have a higher chance of accidentally buying a deck that has a ban coming in it's future.

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

Aazadan wrote:
1 year ago
Imagine if something like Dredge was unknown. Can you imagine how much of the meta it would run over if no one knew to pack enough GY hate, or could read the metagame to know when to bring that GY hate? That is what you ultimately get when you hide information.
Exactly true. First they tried to hide the true meta with forced '5-0' diversity, a step like this would mask things completely.
UR Control UR

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”