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

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

I believe that Mystic Sanctuary should be the number 1 concern if a banning occurs. I was gonna say that there were no lands on the banlist, but I forgot the artifact lands. So, perhaps it is possible that Mystic Sanctuary can warrant a ban?
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
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: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

Simto wrote:
1 year ago
That's a very valid concern, and Wizards have definitely showed that nothing is safe before... It's pretty brutal seeing a deck that's awesome become popular, strong and then get a ban because it's "too good". It's really %$#% lame, especially in a format where you can't exactly go out and buy a new deck very often.
As I said though, it's not just bans. It feels pretty silly owning multiple foil Vendilion Cliques when cards like Brazen Borrower exist.

The entire point of Modern, and its allure to me personally, was the ability to buy a deck and play it for a long time. Maybe make a small upgrade here and there. But this past year has seen so many bannings and so many pushed new cards that are all extremely expensive, that many Modern players have simply given up and moved on. It's both mentally and monitarily exhausting to effectively buy a brand new deck every few months because of bannings and new cards. This is not supposed to be Standard, and it's pretty obnoxious that the decks that seem to avoid or minimize this the most are egregious and frustrating decks like Tron, Dredge, and Titan.

The line that stabs into my side every time I look at Modern today is this: Modern Should... Not rotate, allowing you to keep a deck for a long period of time.

Between the bans and planned obsolescence, it's just simply not the case anymore. That's why I want another clear vision of what they expect for Modern, because that article from 4 years ago is a joke today.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

I don't think that WotC actively tried to make Modern change so much. I think they just wanted to make some really powerful cards to shake up all formats at once. They wanted to see if box sales would correspond to the power level of the cards that they put in the sets. They pushed the envelope way too much, and in doing so, they messed up a lot of formats. Some of this can be solved by bans, but bans carry their own negativity and rightfully so. People have paid money for the cards.

There have been bannings in Vintage, Legacy, Modern, Pioneer, Standard, Pauper, and probably more that I don't know about. I'm not talking about in the past 5 years - I'm talking within the last year.

I do believe that it's very hard for a team to develop a new set. We all hear the "oh, this set is terrible; I'm not buying any boxes this time." I am like that. I have yet to find a box worth me buying (other than MM boxes to resell, not open) since Exodus. I have not bought a box since Exodus. I have been close a few times though. The team needs to be able to have powerful cards, many of which are very visible to people (not necessarily hidden gems) in order to sell boxes. They need to keep cards legal to sell boxes. All I know is that WotC should be seriously looking at people who can contribute to set theory and produce a set that is just wonderful. They have done it numerous times before. I can name many, many sets that have been a success - Innistrad, Exodus, Tempest, Return to Ravnica (not the whole block though), Khans, etc. (had to stop because maybe I'm just naming MY favorite sets)
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

User avatar
Tzoulis
Posts: 279
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
The line that stabs into my side every time I look at Modern today is this: Modern Should... Not rotate, allowing you to keep a deck for a long period of time.
How long is "long" though? Because, in most of your posts you haven't implied "long", you've implied "forever" with words and phrases "planned obsolescence" etc. If "long" is the goal, it has succeeded.

1. Jund, UW, UR, Shadow decks- all playable.
2. Amulet, Tron, Valakut decks, very much relevant and playable
3. Burn, Infect, Humans, again, all playable.

Hell, even artifact combo decks are still relevant.
Also, new decks like 5C Niv and Breach are popping up. Mardu Shadow is having a comeback. Mardu Unearth is making some tentative steps into playability.

Only decks that have ceased to exist the past couple of years are Affinity, Scales and KCI. So, I can't see why you're saying there's a "rotation". There's an ebb and flow in the metagame, as it should be. They definitely are pushing more cards, especially with MH1, but saying that you can't "invest" is absurd..

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

Too bad we don't have meaningful data to support any of that. But I guess as long as you don't need to be competitively successful, you can play anything you want. Including trash decks like UR Control.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

I was wondering what UR deck he was referring to, but I'm assuming a Snow deck, splashing Red for Wrenn and Six and Bolt? Maybe UR Breach or UR Blue Moon? (I'm not completely sure why Breach isn't solid. My experience has been not drawing the right pieces, but I doubt that's everyone's experiences.)

In my opinion, the top Tier of Modern is something like this now.
1. Snow Deck
2. Snow Deck
3. Amulet
4. E Tron

That's it. But I do think that Tier 2 strategies can steal a tournament now and then. I don't think that part has changed much. Look at Jund with Choke and Boil in the SB. That's clearly aimed at Snow, with a play vs. Amulet after Dryad of Ilysian Grove also being pretty solid. ;)
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
I believe that Mystic Sanctuary should be the number 1 concern if a banning occurs. I was gonna say that there were no lands on the banlist, but I forgot the artifact lands. So, perhaps it is possible that Mystic Sanctuary can warrant a ban?
You watch your mouth.... :p

EDIT: And no, UR Control is 'playable'. Is it top tier competitive? No. But the Winners meta is not diverse, and never has been.

Its firmly a playable T2 deck though.
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

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
Too bad we don't have meaningful data to support any of that. But I guess as long as you don't need to be competitively successful, you can play anything you want. Including trash decks like UR Control.
Define "competitively successful." This gets back to an old topic we've discussed in the past, which is that many people here (and I believe you, judging from your posts) define competitive success as T8ing a GP. This is generally the most visible bar for deck/player success, and it is true that there are a few best decks you probably want to play if you want to do that. But if your definition of competitive success is 3-2 or better on MTGO leagues, i.e. going infinite, then I'm pretty sure you can play any deck you want within reason. I'm pretty sure few/none of us seriously pursue the GP T8 goal, whereas most of us are probably happy with infinite positive records on MTGO. You knock on Izzet Control all the time, but I regularly see those decks in Challenge T16s. Just look at the Prelim dump this week:



I don't think you or most of us are trying to T8 a GP. For most of our intents and purposes, just play what you want and as long as the deck has some power baseline, you'll have success.

Finally, I'm going to reemphasize that our MTGO data is a lot better than people think. I and others used almost exclusively publicly available MTGO data to predict the OUaT ban, which was by no means a unanimous, popular target at the time. With enough Challenges, Prelims, Premiers, and other MTGO events (just 1+ months is enough), you get a pretty good picture of what the metagame looks like.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

TheBoulderer
Posts: 88
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by TheBoulderer » 1 year ago

Ym1r wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
Maybe I build a Grixis snow list with Kroxas, and K Commands, and Cryptics, and Snaps, and Bolts, and Pushes, and Jaces, and Rals, and why not Blood Moon too?.... Hm...... :hmm: :party:
Wait a minute... Waaaaait a minute... Astrolabe fixes our grixis mana so we can play any weirdly priced spell we want? DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS?

There is always greater power
I tried that exact list day before yesterday. Grixis Snow, Blood Moon, the whole sheebang. And it's not good enough. The synergies in Grixis Control need their cantrips to actually do something other than make the mana perfect i.e. fuel your gy for Delve/Snap/Kommand or opps gy for Drown/Story. Grixis is missing a ridiculous payoff card like UG modern Baleful Strix (just even better) to make Snow worthwhile.

Adding to that, now is not the time to be on Grixis Control. I know. Because I am I try to be. A lot of matchups are good, but Veil of Summer is broken enough against us to lose us every game where it resolves. I mean, I have seen Veil of Summer out of HUMANS!!!!! Don't think I've ever been that baffled. Couldn't even be mad anymore. Had to give it to the Humans player for his... creative deck building.

User avatar
Tzoulis
Posts: 279
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
Too bad we don't have meaningful data to support any of that. But I guess as long as you don't need to be competitively successful, you can play anything you want. Including trash decks like UR Control.
You keep throwing that phrase around, but all your points lack the same data as mine. So, I don't see why your points hold any more merit than mine and are met with such dismissal.

You've been trashing on UR Control and other T2 decks plenty, and for many years, but you've been making generalized arguments to support this trashing, based on incomplete data and when you get called out on it you respond with phrases like that. You've never explained what's "successful" or "good" or what constitutes as "long" in your railing against the meta, Wizards and many others.

So please, define them so we can understand what you're referring to, because there's no point conversing with you anymore if you're gonna dismiss what we;'re saying with one liners as if you know better than us.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

Tzoulis wrote:
1 year ago
cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
Too bad we don't have meaningful data to support any of that. But I guess as long as you don't need to be competitively successful, you can play anything you want. Including trash decks like UR Control.
You keep throwing that phrase around, but all your points lack the same data as mine. So, I don't see why your points hold any more merit than mine and are met with such dismissal.

You've been trashing on UR Control and other T2 decks plenty, and for many years, but you've been making generalized arguments to support this trashing, based on incomplete data and when you get called out on it you respond with phrases like that. You've never explained what's "successful" or "good" or what constitutes as "long" in your railing against the meta, Wizards and many others.

So please, define them so we can understand what you're referring to, because there's no point conversing with you anymore if you're gonna dismiss what we;'re saying with one liners as if you know better than us.
The way that we used to use data to determine what's doing well in Modern was this (and @ktkenshinx can correct me if I'm wrong) - Modern Leagues, SCG Regionals, SCG Opens, SCG Classics, Weekend Comp REL tournaments listed on mtgtop8, and to a much more weighed extent, Grand Prix Day 2 and top 16 conversion percentage, SCG Invitationals, and Pro Tours.

He's not wrong in saying that many of these can't be measured anymore. I remember when people used to argue TO THE BONE that an SCG Open doesn't "count; it's a glorified larger FNM." "Only Grand Prix can be used for Competitive information because anything can win any other tournament or the tournaments are inbred and too small (Pro Tour, Team Events, and SCG Invitationals) to use the information nicely. So, @cfusionpm is not wrong in saying that there is not the data that we used to use (and also dismiss anyone else that tried to say otherwise VERY harshly).

I guess then there's no "proof" technically that UR Control is NOT actually the best deck in Modern. But then as a player and theorist, you have to come to some conclusion that when you test the deck, it seems very underpowered. Yes, maybe you're taking all the lines in order for you to barely lose every single match, while your win percentage with other decks is still high, but then again, maybe it's the deck?

THIS is where someone can give their opinion. I don't think anyone here can say that anything is 100% correct without some fail rate. I'll give an example here - I told people long, long time ago that the Amulet Bloom deck was Tier 1 and I don't care what classifications are given here on mtgsalvation. People told me that I was wrong. It hadn't been played enough to prove it. It hadn't been played on the large screen by enough strong players to prove it. I ... did ... not ... care. The deck was the same deck that it was when it eventually got Summer Bloom banned. Nothing changed; just more people played it. And I honestly don't care if I'm wrong in saying that the Amulet Bloom deck was Tier 1 all along.

*Just like you're gonna be hard pressed for me to blindly believe something someone says about Bogles, Titanshift, Grishoalbrand, and Amulet, I trust someone like @cfusionpm when it comes to Blue/Red. He is invested, just like the countless hours and years that I have spent with those 4 decks that I mentioned. I'm not saying that he is the end all because occasionally players like that are so dialed in, they don't consider certain cards or changes in strategies, but for the most part, they have a better understanding on those types of decks than a big percentage of other players.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
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: 1109
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
*Just like you're gonna be hard pressed for me to blindly believe something someone says about Bogles, Titanshift, Grishoalbrand, and Amulet, I trust someone like @cfusionpm when it comes to Blue/Red. He is invested, just like the countless hours and years that I have spent with those 4 decks that I mentioned. I'm not saying that he is the end all because occasionally players like that are so dialed in, they don't consider certain cards or changes in strategies, but for the most part, they have a better understanding on those types of decks than a big percentage of other players.
The issue with UR Control is that its answers are frequently conditional, narrow, or temporary, its threats are fragile and do not recur, and it has a very, very difficult time clawing back from an unfavorable position. It needs great cards, it needs exactly what it wants on time, and any stumble is horribly punished. Is it possible to string together 5 match wins? Sure. But how often that actually happens tells us that this deck absolutely needs to be on the favorable side of variance, and it's nearly impossible to overcome good starts from any of the top decks. There's no "get out of jail free" card, or any kind of powerful, repeatable, resilient value card, and without it, the deck is super mediocre.

By comparison, playing Bant Snow has shown me how utterly stupid the game can be. I can fumble my way through staying alive, land an Uro at super low life to stabilize, and ride that ball of tempo swing all the way to victory. There's just nothing like that in UR. It's just "hold your breath and hope what you have is good enough." At least in my experience. Also seems silly to waste time with it, considering how easy it is to splash Astrolabes and Snow Forests for W6 and Uro. Which I would be doing if W6s weren't $115 each online.

Spsiegel1987
Posts: 38
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Spsiegel1987 » 1 year ago

Outside of fun or financial reasons, there is zero reason to be playing a fair deck that isn't Bant. If I were a spike I'd be playing Bant or a deck that beats up on Bant.

Uro decks feel head and shoulders above the midrange/control decks by a mile. I look silly playing Goyf while my opponent is up three cards by the time he casts Uro from the graveyard (1 for the draw, 2 for the 2nd draw, 3. for that spell you had to kill it).

I also get to flash in my death touch AND kill one of your main win cons, and be up a card? Oh, and you have to keep those awkward removals while I gain CA while you don't?

Yeah, ok, you have fun. If you're not on Bant you should absolutely be playing a combo deck or a deck that can go underneath it.

EDIT: Whoops, can't really go underneath it. So, basically, play ramp or combo, playing fair decks are absolutely foolish against this deck.

Spsiegel1987
Posts: 38
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Spsiegel1987 » 1 year ago

I personally greatly dislike that Astrolabe enables so much in one fair deck. I've tested a ton of Jund, Shadow of every flavor, BR Unearth...

I love that a fair deck is on top, I just don't love quite how invalidating it is to other flavors of fair decks. I think if GPs and Starcity games occurred we'd see how poor of an idea it is to play fair against Bant.

User avatar
Tzoulis
Posts: 279
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Tzoulis » 1 year ago

@FoodChainGoblins I didn't say "top performing/top tier", I said playable. His constant dismissal of T2 strategies or non-Twin UR -and many more other- strategies is getting to be beyond annoying. We're not GP or top ranked players, he definitely isn't. Most of us are playing on FNMs or larger local events, so playable is more than enough. The data we have so far suggest that all the decks I mentioned (and more that I missed) are playable and above.

So yeah, I'd like for him to pin down those terms and not dismiss or hand waive away arguments based on "a lack of data", because he doesn't have access to better quality of data.

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

If you don't mind being exponentially outclassed by the top decks, there are all sorts of things that could be considered "playable."

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

That's literally nothing new. For years on end.

Winners meta, or gtfo.

If your goal is to win more than you lose, there are PLENTY of options as ktk illustrated.

If your goal is to top 8 a GP you are limited.

Modern has been that way, forever.
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

idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
That's literally nothing new. For years on end.

Winners meta, or gtfo.

If your goal is to win more than you lose, there are PLENTY of options as ktk illustrated.

If your goal is to top 8 a GP you are limited.

Modern has been that way, forever.
Agreed. UR Control is perfectly capable of 3-2ing an FNM.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago
idSurge wrote:
1 year ago
That's literally nothing new. For years on end.

Winners meta, or gtfo.

If your goal is to win more than you lose, there are PLENTY of options as ktk illustrated.

If your goal is to top 8 a GP you are limited.

Modern has been that way, forever.
Agreed. UR Control is perfectly capable of 3-2ing an FNM.
Which isn't acceptable to many of us. I guess we should all be all right and overjoyed to 3-2 FNM? :thinking:
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
Which isn't acceptable to many of us. I guess we should all be all right and overjoyed to 3-2 FNM? :thinking:
I just don't understand what you, CFP, and anyone else in this camp actually want from a competitive deck. What are your competitive goals? Are you truly trying to T8 Modern GP events? Maybe you are, but my guess is that the vast majority of us Modern diehards are at most just trying to get consistent winning League records. Maybe 5-0s. Maybe an occasional Challenge/PTQ T16 or T8 too, or a T8 run at the equivalent of your local SCG Classic or equivalent event. There are literally dozens of decks that can accomplish this. With CFP, I'm confident the issue is largely that he wants to play Twin but can't. He enjoyed that gameplay experience immensely, Wizards has not replaced it in any competitive format (Modern included), and Wizards won't apologize for it or unban Twin despite the ban not having its intended effects and happening for ulterior motives. But I'm not sure what the specific issue is for you or others. What's so bad about going 3-2 or better in every League?

I think this gets back to an issue we discussed a while back, which is the myth of high win rates. Players on forums and Reddit consistently report very high win rates in certain samples, and/or have high target win rates. They want to win something like 90% of their games or more and will always look for external factors to explain losses (bad luck, hot topdecks for the opponent, off days, shuffler, etc.). It's rampant on the Arena subreddit and I still see it here as we saw it back on MTGS. Players in MTG are just as unrealistic with their win-rates as LoL and DotA players are with their ELO and matchmaking rankings. People believe they are better than they are, and people don't understand how all Magic games have such a huge luck-based component. That's why the best Magic players on earth across the game's history typically don't push beyond a 65% win-rate across multiple events. I suspect now, as I have in the past, this is due to Magic attracting a certain type of spikey player that likes solving puzzles and optimizing their approach, maybe someone with a chip on their shoulder who wants to prove they are smart/competent to themselves and others. For many Magic players, losing isn't just unfun, it's a personal invalidation of everything from your intelligence to your economic investment in a deck. This is naturally going to lead to inflated expectations and crushing personal indictments when you lose or fall short.

If people adjusted their win-rate expectations in Magic as a whole, let alone Modern and our conversation about Modern top decks specifically, players would enjoy the game a lot more. They would definitely enjoy their options within different formats more too.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by idSurge » 1 year ago

cfusionpm wrote:
1 year ago

Agreed. UR Control is perfectly capable of 3-2ing an FNM.
You and I both know that's not remotely fair. You can pull in 5-0's or 4-1's, or you can scrub out and go 0-3 on MTGO with UR Control.

This is the same as literally dozens of decks.

Unless your goal is to be on the best deck, UR is an option, and yes, it is viable.

If your goal is to be on the best deck, you will ALWAYS be limited to around 3 options, and its not particularly relevant to most of us, because the meta is irrelevant unless you need to.

1. Win a GP.
2. Grind SCG.

NEITHER of which is going to matter for some time anyway.

I know you see the posts of that dude who grinds UR. You can play it, or not. :p
UR Control UR

TheBoulderer
Posts: 88
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by TheBoulderer » 1 year ago

it is worth remembering though that there are times when the "olymp" of top decks is closer to the masses in terms of power level, and there are times when it's further away.

Right now, it's pretty friggin' far away.

In any aggregate data set I can find, Bant/4c Snow control makes up 10-15%, and I don't see why it wouldnt rise even further, which is just utterly ridiculous. Another about 8-12% go to Urza (simic/ub/temur/sultai/4c). Those 2 archetypes (with the somewhat limited data available) are firmly establishing a Tier 0. Tier 1 is Dredge, GTron, Etron, Amulet Titan, Jund. RDW, but there's already a small world between those 2 groups.

It's getting to a point where the number of mirror matches is probably starting to deflate win% by giving Bant Snow a base line of 15% 50/50 matches.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 816
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 1 year ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
1 year ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
Which isn't acceptable to many of us. I guess we should all be all right and overjoyed to 3-2 FNM? :thinking:
I just don't understand what you, CFP, and anyone else in this camp actually want from a competitive deck. What are your competitive goals? Are you truly trying to T8 Modern GP events? Maybe you are, but my guess is that the vast majority of us Modern diehards are at most just trying to get consistent winning League records. Maybe 5-0s. Maybe an occasional Challenge/PTQ T16 or T8 too, or a T8 run at the equivalent of your local SCG Classic or equivalent event. There are literally dozens of decks that can accomplish this. With CFP, I'm confident the issue is largely that he wants to play Twin but can't. He enjoyed that gameplay experience immensely, Wizards has not replaced it in any competitive format (Modern included), and Wizards won't apologize for it or unban Twin despite the ban not having its intended effects and happening for ulterior motives. But I'm not sure what the specific issue is for you or others. What's so bad about going 3-2 or better in every League?

I think this gets back to an issue we discussed a while back, which is the myth of high win rates. Players on forums and Reddit consistently report very high win rates in certain samples, and/or have high target win rates. They want to win something like 90% of their games or more and will always look for external factors to explain losses (bad luck, hot topdecks for the opponent, off days, shuffler, etc.). It's rampant on the Arena subreddit and I still see it here as we saw it back on MTGS. Players in MTG are just as unrealistic with their win-rates as LoL and DotA players are with their ELO and matchmaking rankings. People believe they are better than they are, and people don't understand how all Magic games have such a huge luck-based component. That's why the best Magic players on earth across the game's history typically don't push beyond a 65% win-rate across multiple events. I suspect now, as I have in the past, this is due to Magic attracting a certain type of spikey player that likes solving puzzles and optimizing their approach, maybe someone with a chip on their shoulder who wants to prove they are smart/competent to themselves and others. For many Magic players, losing isn't just unfun, it's a personal invalidation of everything from your intelligence to your economic investment in a deck. This is naturally going to lead to inflated expectations and crushing personal indictments when you lose or fall short.

If people adjusted their win-rate expectations in Magic as a whole, let alone Modern and our conversation about Modern top decks specifically, players would enjoy the game a lot more. They would definitely enjoy their options within different formats more too.
I know we've gotten into this conversation before. My goal IS actually to top 8 or win a Grand Prix. Yes, it is an irrational goal since I don't grind enough, I don't play MTGO, and I don't travel to that many GPs (I attend 4-5 per year). But still, I know what I am capable of because of certain runs in GPs and SCG Opens, along with qualifying for the Pro Tour many years ago twice without really even trying (on ELO rating).

My personal goal was to win 66.7% of my Modern matches. Right now, mtgstats.net has my Modern win percentage at 64.7%, over 1% less than my Standard win percentage (a format that I've played sparingly for the past 4 years). You'll notice that this percentage is lower than the last time we had this conversation and I'm not proud of that. But I can be honest with myself. If I had played close to perfectly, I'm pretty sure I would have been an over 70% win percentage. But that's my shortcomings, and I think I can improve on that mentally. I've already started to slow down a bit when playing, whereas I used to play at a blistering pace, somewhat similar to how Shota Yasooka plays. I've tried to think things out a bit more.

When I come back from a GP where I was 12-3 with some Modern deck (and most of the 3 losses seem out of my control), yes, I do expect to slaughter my local FNM. Sorry, I just played with some of the best players on the planet and come back to a more casual setting. Nothing against anyone. We are a tight knit group at FNM; most of us. Still, I expect to perform better than the average FNM players. When that doesn't happen, I look for answers. Did I misplay? Did I choose the wrong deck (usually the wrong doing, lol)? Did someone get lucky? What else could I have done?

*Yes, some of my play group (not the FNM players I play with, but my actual "team") do derive our self worth from mtg. It is not right and 1 of my friends actually has quit the competitive scene after not seeing results in the past 2 years of GPing (they both go more often than myself, traveling to Seattle and as far as the midwest). I know this is something I can work on, but the only way I know how to see how good I am at Magic is to see the stats. I am a very statistic oriented person.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - MBA, UB Inverter
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Yawmoth Chord, Uroza
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

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

Post by Ed06288 » 1 year ago

Just put together a deck you find fun playing and go to fnm's with it. Grinding grand prix's and the like get too much in the way of more important things. Ideally you live in a city like Seattle where you won't have to travel too much to play high level magic.

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

Post by Aazadan » 1 year ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
1 year ago
That's it. But I do think that Tier 2 strategies can steal a tournament now and then. I don't think that part has changed much. Look at Jund with Choke and Boil in the SB. That's clearly aimed at Snow, with a play vs. Amulet after Dryad of Ilysian Grove also being pretty solid.
Jund took A LOT of help to even get to the point where it's competitive on a good day. This goes back to what was being written about the other day about 2019 cards.

Barren Moor
Nurturing Peatland
Kroxa, Titan of Death's Hunger
Wrenn and Six
Ashiok, Dream Render
Klothys, God of Destiny
Plague Engineer
Seasoned Pyromancer
Collector Ouphe
Weather the Storm

10 new cards for it in the past year, with about 14 combined copies of those mainboard and another 6 sideboard, or 20 card slots changed in total and that has only gotten it to being fringe competitive.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”