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

blkdemonight
Posts: 80
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by blkdemonight » 11 months ago

Ym1r wrote:
11 months ago
idSurge wrote:
11 months ago
I want DIFFERENT cards, not strictly better.
Yeah I am sure you do. That is why you were open in trying out the companion mechanic, because you like to see experimentation.

Let's be honest, this thread has NOTHING to do with Modern any more. This thread is basically a message board for 1) bashing wizards that they love the market and hate the players "THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT US" 2) claiming that literally everyone and their mom in wizards is an incompetent designer who has no idea how to design any cards (completely disregarding that there are a lot of people working for countless hours to bring these sets out, with or without mistakes) 3) all eternal formats are ruined forever because wizards only cares about commander standard.

All are absurd claims, mostly delivered in 1-liner posts (or 2-3 sentences at best), ignoring any data driven attempt for discussion by Ktk.
Every time I come back here I regret it 101%. The entire concept of this forum, from MTGS to here was, for me at least, an excellent place and format to actually discuss issues, discuss decks, innovate, learn new things. With the exception of 1-2 excellent posters, confined in this thread, there is nothing new to learn about Magic here, not right now at least.

We GOT IT. You hate magic as it is, you made your point 1000 times already. Is there ANY way that we can start a normal discussion now?
How is complaining about Lurrus proof of hating magic? Are you confusing me for Desolatormagic?

Maybe point to some articles that you think might clean up this board.

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

Post by TheBoulderer » 11 months ago

Ok I just faced a Kaheera Companion Hatebear deck with 4 Lurrus mainboard.

This format is dead as %$#%.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 11 months ago

First, there are major problems right now, i think most people would agree with that, so everyone should be focused on that at this time. You can be upset or not, but the topic of discussion inevitably returns to those problems. There are always lots of repeat arguements because things change so slowly. WOTC is a company and therefore is primarily concerned about profit, any other issue must come in behind profit or the company may fail, get liquidated by its owner or simply lose investors and that causes lots of problems when the money dries up. That is the nature of a company, and people forget that sometimes. These are fair points of discussion imo.

It may look like bashing but I think it comes from a point of caring. We talk about these issues and philosophy, design, bans/unbans or whatever because we care and we want mtg to be everything that it can be. Alot like a strict parent dealing with a child they love actually.

WOTC has had problems recently and not talking about perceived problems simply buries them and then allows the problem to grow. Having hard conversations about your problem and facing an issue is how you try to work through it and make something better imo.

blkdemonight
Posts: 80
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by blkdemonight » 11 months ago

TheBoulderer wrote:
11 months ago
Ok I just faced a Kaheera Companion Hatebear deck with 4 Lurrus mainboard.

This format is dead as %$#%.
I didn't realize there were would be enough hate bears in those 5 tribes in Modern. This doesn't bodes well.

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

Post by idSurge » 11 months ago

Ym1r wrote:
11 months ago
Yeah I am sure you do. That is why you were open in trying out the companion mechanic, because you like to see experimentation.
I was open to it. I did try it. I have a Lurrus aggro deck that gets hilarious value (RB) and a Yorion (Bant) deck that is honestly exhausting to play, even on Arena.

EDIT: I'll tell you what, I'll cut out all the rest, and be the change I wish to see in the thread. :p

If you wish to discuss other things, feel free.

How are your games going Ym1r? I'm having a lot of fun with Yidaro, Wandering Monster and if paper was going on, it would be my UR Control win con for sure.
UR Control UR

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 11 months ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
11 months ago
TheBoulderer wrote:
11 months ago
I can get behind most of your arguments, but I honestly don't think there is a middle ground to be found when discussing Lurrus. There is no middle ground. Lurrus warps the format in an unprecedented, extreme way. Either you're ok with that, in which case you're ok with an extremely warped metagame. Or you're not, in which case you either want Lurrus banned, which is the extreme on the other end of the spectrum.
There are comparatively few arguments in Modern, Magic, and life generally that are completely either/or cases with no middle ground. I fully acknowledge the general trend of arguments, especially online and especially in Magic/Modern, is towards extreme hot takes with little room for nuance. Lurrus is not an exception to this. A Lurrus metagame can be both diverse in archetypes and have way too many decks using Lurrus.
I will be frank here: I've read your articles and they're extremely valuable, but I do think the whole "Lurrus is broken but makes for a healthy meta" is just bollocks. Lurrus makes some old and some new strategies viable, but it 100% also makes at least as many strategies that just cant run it completely unplayable. We only see the decks that work in metagame breakdowns, but the decks that become unplayable are invisible because, well, there by definition isnt any data.
I don't really say that Lurrus's companion influence alone makes for a healthy metagame. In fact, I'm pretty careful and precise in my articles to not say that at all. I emphasize the metagame and archetype breakdown is diverse, but Lurrus is itself an issue that confounds the picture. Here are a few quotes where I make this distinction very clear:
  • "Incidentally, Tier 1 also represents a healthy mix of archetypes (more on archetype balance shortly). This suggests the overall format is healthy, at least from a strategic diversity perspective. "
  • "We might be comfortable with this companion dominance if it means a healthy archetype breakdown like we're seeing above..."
These are clear distinctions between companions/Lurrus being a problem and the archetype breakdown showing strategic diversity. They are separate and overlapping issues, like a venn diagram that we need to assess.

You raise a separate issue about Lurrus decks supplanting non-Lurrus decks. This is a much more valid diversity concern, as we have seen this happen in the past with other dominant decks. Can you specifically cite any non-Lurrus decks that Lurrus decks have pushed out? For reference, here's the top-tier metagame both before IKO and after, even including Tier 3 representatives up to 86% of the format:

image.png

Pre-IKO Modern has lost Simic Reclamation, Naya Zoo, Rakdos Midrange, and Jeskai Whirza. Post-IKO Modern has gained Devoted Devastation, Hardened Scales, Grixis Delver, The Rock, Grixis Shadow, 4C Snow Control, Storm, Yorion Chord, Goblins, and Bogles. This is a visibly more diverse metagame both in number of distinct decks and in the different strategies those decks represent. The two decks Lurrus certainly pushed out (Naya Zoo and Rakdos Midrange) have been replaced by 5+ decks that saw virtually (or literally) zero play before Lurrus. Again, this is not to say that Lurrus is acceptable in Modern. The card is almost certainly bannable on prevalence, variance reduction, and repetitive play patterns. But it does not appear to be pushing decks out of the metagame. The metagame as a whole is strategically diverse.
Lear_the_cat wrote:
11 months ago
ktkenshinx
Was thinking about what you posted. I think I have analogue with Lurrus - it's like the diversirty inside of Eldrazi archetype during Eldrazi winter with few decks that were able to beat them.
See above. The diversity within Eldrazi decks was purely semantical. The diversity between Jund, Hardened Scales, Grixis Delver, Burn/Prowess, and Devoted Devastation is real. I don't even think this warrants an argument. If people are really going to argue this point, we can easily compare the overlap between Eldrazi decks (which was probably at least 50%-75% of cards) to the overlaps between Lurrus decks (maybe 25% at absolute worst, way lower for most decks). Again, it is okay to admit the metagame is currently diverse. You can both acknowledge this diversity and identify glaring problems with Lurrus. Lurrus doesn't have to be committing every bannable offense in Modern to be a problem. Just focus on the problems Lurrus is presenting (insane prevalence, repetitive play patterns, variance reduction) and don't invent problems or redefine terms to add additional charges.
About prison decks: Sun and Moon (Boros Prison), Martyr Proc, Wx Enduring Ideal, Skred Red and etc. Some of them sometime randomly did top8 of huge tournaments. But now thanks to powercreep like 2-3 mana planeswalkers, Uro, Arcum's Astrolabe and etc. They just don't have any tools to compete with "new" modern.
None of these decks were viable in any way that made them metagame forces that regulated anything. I'm not denying prison decks are bad. They are really bad right now and that's unfortunate for prison players. I'm simply saying prison decks are not a prerequisite for a healthy format. There were many healthy Moderns and other formats where prison decks were nonexistent or just plain bad. Late 2015 Modern was quite healthy and did have a viable prison deck that won a GP (Lantern Control), and yet drmark said this was an example of a Modern with no prison decks that was unhealthy because it didn't have prison. That's inaccurate.
cfusionpm wrote:
11 months ago
ktkenshinx

How does today's Lurrus meta "diversity" compare to 2014's Treasure Cruise meta?

IE: "Different" decks playing Lurrus vs "different" decks playing Cruise?

I mentioned this a few times with no bites the last day or so. Curious if we have hard numbers to compare.

I'm really trying to understand if they are different, and if so, why.

For context, after rotating out of Standard and before Pioneer existed, Cruise was banned or restricted in literally every Constructed competitive format Magic has, due to its strength and ubiquity.
This is an excellent question; sorry I missed it earlier. Thankfully, I have all my old MTGS data from late 2014! I need to go through it and figure out the best way to present it, but the data exists. Here's a snapshot for folks to play around with, representing the rough Tier 1-Tier 2 picture for an insane N=2,226 decks (man I miss the days where we had all this data) from 10/02/2014 - 01/11/2015.

1. UR Delver: (14.2%)
2. Melira Pod: (9.8%)
3. Burn: (8.8%)
4. Scapeshift: (7.5%)
5. Affinity: (6.4%)
6. Junk: (3.5%)
7. Merfolk: (3.4%)
8. Bogles: (3.3%)
9. Amulet of Vigor: (3.1%)
10. UR Twin: (2.5%)
11. RUG Delver: (2.4%)
12. UWR Control: (2.3%)
13. Martyr Proc: (1.8%)
14. UWR Ascendancy: (1.6%)
15. Junk Pod: (1.6%)
16. UWR Midrange: (1.4%)
17. Mono W Death and Taxes: (1.4%)
18. RG Tron: (1.3%)
19. UWR Delver: (1.3%)

Need to figure out where I put all the GP data in this spreadsheet and how to present it.
Unfortunately quoting this does not show the image of the Pre Ikoria Modern metagame vs. the Post Ikoria Modern metagame. It just shows up as "image.png." :\ This is from pg. 251.

The 4 most played decks at the time all played Lurrus of the Dream-Den and Mishra's Bauble. Is it okay that to play one of the most played decks in Modern (I won't even mention power level), you have to play 1 Lurrus and 4 Mishra's Bauble? If that's acceptable, then that's the arguing point for me. I don't think it is. Sure, you see a bunch of different decks in the meta. Outside of Burn and Prowess, the meta is more diverse than before in decks. But there is a Companion that is seen in most decks. Every time I watch a stream and the opponent is not on Lurrus, everyone flips out in the chat.

I personally don't have anything against Companions per se. I just think that a free card that can't be interacted with has space to be way too good. I don't think it's "out there" to think this. If I needed to mulligan once and I asked my opponent, "can I mull to the same number that I have right now, but keep my best card for you to not discard," none of my opponents would ever let me do this. I actually think that no other ones are ban worthy right now, with the possible exception of Yorion. But maybe it's not the 5 mana, draw 5 on a 4/5 flier that's the problem? It could just be that the deck is stuffed with draw card effects on 1-3 mana permanents. Personally I hope that I have a chance to play Yorion when it paper resumes. I just can't feel positive that it will happen.

I don't have a hard-on for any cards on the ban list. Some may say I do for Preordain because I bring it up the most - that and Green Sun's Zenith. I just think that the ban list should be somewhat consistent. I know if I went to a Modern tournament to win, I would feel much better with 1 Lurrus in my SB than with 4 Preordain in my deck. I can't fathom in what world 4 Preordain in my deck would be better than 1 Lurrus in my SB. Maybe I'm just dumb. Many Magic players can't quantify the power level of cards too well.

I haven't played with them at all. I only play paper. But I've watched them a bunch and Lurrus makes the games dumb; Yorion possibly to a lesser extent. The rest could be fine; they just give you a free card at a cost that many players don't want to admit is next to 0 cost. There's several issues that people have with Companions as well in that it is yet another change in the meta. And you don't know when Lurrus will get banned or not banned. If I know Lurrus will be around for a while, I'll buy the $20 card and get my play's worth out of it. But I don't know. Nobody knows. The other issue is like someone said here - Modern is a format where players are attracted to spells 3-5. It is not like Legacy, where everything is 0-2. When Lurrus becomes too prevalent, it shuts out a lot of cards like Liliana of the Veil and Bloodbraid Elf for 2 of them. It is not a good look for someone looking to potentially join Modern.
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 » 11 months ago

I believe if your an online grinder at all, and you have the rest of the pieces, there is minimal risk in picking up Lurrus/Yorion for Modern.
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 » 11 months ago

Greeksis wrote:
11 months ago
At last, someone said it. A lot of people already left this forum, because of this situation it's into. Two people making endless companion bashing, WOTC bashing, "free Twin" & "I am sorry, you are not smart if you don't understand Twin would be fine" discussions(there are even one-two people who think twin would be fine with veil and t3f and astrolabe). No new content at all.
I would love to see what a list looks like running 4 colors and the Twin combo. As I said on Twitter, that sounds like a clunky and unfocused mess. You might as well just play Kiki Chord at that point.

As it stands though, Veil of Summer is an atrocity of design failure in of itself, and should not be a linchpin in deciding whether or not a deck is "too good." Alternatively, you know what's really good against flash creatures and counterspells? Teferi, Time Raveler. Just things to think about. It's not nearly as black and white as people make it out to be. The same kinds of people who said Jace and SFM were too good for Modern.

BeneTleilax
Posts: 601
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by BeneTleilax » 11 months ago

modern is a rotating formatt they just call the rotaton a banlilst

User avatar
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 11 months ago

@ktkenshinx
I am kind of still waiting for your response to this, I think you might have missed it. Or I have missed yours.
Either way I think you got your years mixed up or have not looked at the data.

My point was that 2015 had a lot less lantern than 2016. Way less. Your statement about 2015 was factually inaccurate in that you said it had a viable prison deck- it had a viable prison deck (I accept) but it was not a widely played prison deck (and I mean wide by Prison deck standards), and it had much more in 2016, which was the actual year of Lantern- over ten times more in 2016 vs 2015. The screenshots are in the original post, you can check them out if you want. I said 2015 had very little prison. It had just seven (yes seven!) entries for Lantern on MTG top 8, albeit with one breakout GP win. You can't claim 7 entries on MTG Top 8 as having a Prison deck.
2016 was the year of Lantern, not 2015, the numbers are in the post below and on the original screenshots. There was way more Lantern prison in 2016- it was a small presence but much bigger than 2015, and there were more prisons in 2017 too.



Here is my original post- you can check it a few pages back if you want to see the screenshots of the MTG top 8 listings for Lantern. I am aware of the fact it is not the best place for accurate data, but nonetheless, to get more than ten times in the next year makes a pretty unarguable case that 2016 was a better Lantern Prison year than 2015. Whether you or I think a meta is unhealthy/healthy is subjective, but Prison decks were more prevalent in 2016 and 17, that is not really debatable unless you have different data. For my money that is probably why I preferred those years.


Original post:
I actually did play Lantern, I was fully aware of it. I thought you might mention it- it was discussed here before a while ago talking about 2015.
This is the 2015 MTG top 8 list for control using 2015 as a filter.

Control
18 %
UrzaTron 171 6 %
UWx Midrange 93 3 %
Scapeshift 77 3 %
Grixis Control 62 2 %
UW Control 49 2 %
Gift Control 13 0 %
Eldrazi Control 12 0 %
Tooth and Nail 9 0 %
UR Control 8 0 %
Urza 7 0 %
Mono Red Control 6 0 %
Faeries 6 0 %
BUG Control 5 0 %
Esper Control 5 0 %
Mono Black Control 4 0 %
Mardu Midrange 1 0 %
Nahiri Control 1 0 %
Smallpox 1 0 %
Other - Control 5 0 %

Now Lantern on MTG Top 8 has always been retroactively listed under Urza decks, because, well MTG top 8 is odd.
Some search fu gives us just 7 entries under the Lantern Control heading for 2015 (compared with almost 10 times that in 2016).
Here are the seven

image.png

and 2016

image.png

We know MTG top 8 has never been excessively exhaustive, though it is better now than it ever was back then, but the seven entries are remarkably low to be called a real presence in 2015. The GP win lead to a lot of interest (my sales of the pieces were high), I kept the deck myself and played it in paper. The problem with Lantern is that it is a bit like the prison equivalent of KCI decks, it was a good deck, but required hours of practice, and was not very friendly to online play with the click rate being high, so it did not get the numbers after Zak E's breakthrough. Crucially, good opponents made the deck better by playing more predictable lists, knowing when to scoop and not calling the judge over at comp REL every five mins. The deck was viable, (enjoyable in some ways too if both players were experienced) but the uptake was tiny early on. So I will happily concede the point that there was a prison deck in 2015, and a very good one, but sadly by a quirk of luck for most people it did not happen, at least until 2016 when it made the breakthrough into the mainstream.

If you want to compare to other Prison-y decks in Modern, I would point to what became christened as Sun and Moon, (Boros Control) in 2017 [which has many more entries than Top Control in 2015], Skred Red/Pyro Prison (both decks being the same deck in many ways from different angles), and Death and Taxes/Hatebears, which was once a very common deck back in the early days of the format, as well as 8 rack, Marytr Proc, and that excludes the incorrectly named Ponza and a fair few rogue landkilling lists in the naya colours (RW/RGW etc) and the Whir lists based on Bridge you rightly mention as a corner case- because it was very to hugely popular for a short period. There have been a fair few bubbling away in similar numbers to Top control, and when they are about Modern is better for them. I agree that Modern has not been prison central, all it has had is a minor presence, but I will stand by 2016 and 2017 as much, much better than 2015.
To answer your last point, I would say that Modern generally has had issues with certain decks when a prison deck would have helped- and overall the format's lack of robustness has often been partially down to weak answers and a lack of a top tier deck like DnT in Legacy (which was originally called white prison in Europe back around 2006/7). Anecdotally I can recall a couple Tron players telling me that they often lost to hatebears at a PTQ when I was on a hatebear deck, but those decks got outclassed circa 2014 or so, and Tron marched on. So there is the argument that Modern being a format with a tiny amount of prison has lead to a lot of issues that would have been solved by decks like Lands or DnT in Legacy, let alone Pox, Stax etc. and I do subscribe to that to a great extent.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 11 months ago

drmarkb wrote:
11 months ago
ktkenshinx
I am kind of still waiting for your response to this, I think you might have missed it. Or I have missed yours.
Either way I think you got your years mixed up or have not looked at the data.

My point was that 2015 had a lot less lantern than 2016. Way less. Your statement about 2015 was factually inaccurate in that you said it had a viable prison deck- it had a viable prison deck (I accept) but it was not a widely played prison deck (and I mean wide by Prison deck standards), and it had much more in 2016, which was the actual year of Lantern- over ten times more in 2016 vs 2015. The screenshots are in the original post, you can check them out if you want. I said 2015 had very little prison. It had just seven (yes seven!) entries for Lantern on MTG top 8, albeit with one breakout GP win. You can't claim 7 entries on MTG Top 8 as having a Prison deck.
2016 was the year of Lantern, not 2015, the numbers are in the post below and on the original screenshots. There was way more Lantern prison in 2016- it was a small presence but much bigger than 2015, and there were more prisons in 2017 too.
I think in theory, Lantern was underplayed. It was a very good deck for those who practiced it a lot and knew the Modern meta like the back of their hand.

The issue comes with the 50 min. clock, at least in paper it does. Opponents could take too long and if Lantern lost Game 1, they most certainly were not winning SBed games because of this. Then the Lantern player also needs to play incredibly quickly and at a high level. Lantern was one of the toughest decks, even historically, in Modern history. To be a truly amazing Lantern player, you need to be able to use the clock like a Pro Player, in addition to playing the deck super well, quickly, and efficiently. Also, as is true quite often, if someone brings hate for your deck, it is very easy for Lantern to fall to that (the issue is that Modern is so diverse, players can't honestly do that and expect to win, but some will do it anyway, sacrificing other matchups). And I don't think that's necessarily wrong - I always hedge a little bit extra against Burn when I build my SB (or rather copy and make a few changes).
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 » 11 months ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
11 months ago
The issue comes with the 50 min. clock, at least in paper it does. Opponents could take too long and if Lantern lost Game 1, they most certainly were not winning SBed games because of this. Then the Lantern player also needs to play incredibly quickly and at a high level. Lantern was one of the toughest decks, even historically, in Modern history. To be a truly amazing Lantern player, you need to be able to use the clock like a Pro Player, in addition to playing the deck super well, quickly, and efficiently. Also, as is true quite often, if someone brings hate for your deck, it is very easy for Lantern to fall to that (the issue is that Modern is so diverse, players can't honestly do that and expect to win, but some will do it anyway, sacrificing other matchups). And I don't think that's necessarily wrong - I always hedge a little bit extra against Burn when I build my SB (or rather copy and make a few changes).
Good God, did I hate playing against Lantern. Like the deck itself was awful enough, but the number of players that played it at a snail's pace was infuriating. Like; I have no game actions. I pass the turn to you immediately. You don't need to tank for 5 minutes about whether to mill me or not. Either think ahead, know what to prioritize, or play a different deck. I am so incredibly thankful this deck is no longer a thing.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 11 months ago

cfusionpm wrote:
11 months ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
11 months ago
The issue comes with the 50 min. clock, at least in paper it does. Opponents could take too long and if Lantern lost Game 1, they most certainly were not winning SBed games because of this. Then the Lantern player also needs to play incredibly quickly and at a high level. Lantern was one of the toughest decks, even historically, in Modern history. To be a truly amazing Lantern player, you need to be able to use the clock like a Pro Player, in addition to playing the deck super well, quickly, and efficiently. Also, as is true quite often, if someone brings hate for your deck, it is very easy for Lantern to fall to that (the issue is that Modern is so diverse, players can't honestly do that and expect to win, but some will do it anyway, sacrificing other matchups). And I don't think that's necessarily wrong - I always hedge a little bit extra against Burn when I build my SB (or rather copy and make a few changes).
Good God, did I hate playing against Lantern. Like the deck itself was awful enough, but the number of players that played it at a snail's pace was infuriating. Like; I have no game actions. I pass the turn to you immediately. You don't need to tank for 5 minutes about whether to mill me or not. Either think ahead, know what to prioritize, or play a different deck. I am so incredibly thankful this deck is no longer a thing.
I certainly did too, but that was more because of some of the players I played against. It all started for me when my Lantern opponent first looked at Scapeshift like it was an alien in the middle of our first match against each other. If you don't know cards in Modern or the current meta, maybe Lantern is not for you. :unamused:
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 » 11 months ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
11 months ago
cfusionpm wrote:
11 months ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
11 months ago
The issue comes with the 50 min. clock, at least in paper it does. Opponents could take too long and if Lantern lost Game 1, they most certainly were not winning SBed games because of this. Then the Lantern player also needs to play incredibly quickly and at a high level. Lantern was one of the toughest decks, even historically, in Modern history. To be a truly amazing Lantern player, you need to be able to use the clock like a Pro Player, in addition to playing the deck super well, quickly, and efficiently. Also, as is true quite often, if someone brings hate for your deck, it is very easy for Lantern to fall to that (the issue is that Modern is so diverse, players can't honestly do that and expect to win, but some will do it anyway, sacrificing other matchups). And I don't think that's necessarily wrong - I always hedge a little bit extra against Burn when I build my SB (or rather copy and make a few changes).
Good God, did I hate playing against Lantern. Like the deck itself was awful enough, but the number of players that played it at a snail's pace was infuriating. Like; I have no game actions. I pass the turn to you immediately. You don't need to tank for 5 minutes about whether to mill me or not. Either think ahead, know what to prioritize, or play a different deck. I am so incredibly thankful this deck is no longer a thing.
I certainly did too, but that was more because of some of the players I played against. It all started for me when my Lantern opponent first looked at Scapeshift like it was an alien in the middle of our first match against each other. If you don't know cards in Modern or the current meta, maybe Lantern is not for you. :unamused:
If you have to read the text on any of the top 100 played cards in the format, Lantern ain't for you! :hmm:

Lord Seth
Posts: 18
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Lord Seth » 11 months ago

I loved playing against Lantern, but that probably mostly comes from the fact I played Tron and I'm pretty sure I never lost a match to it even once.

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

Post by idSurge » 11 months ago

I actually enjoyed Lantern as an entity. Kept folks honest.
UR Control UR

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 815
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 11 months ago

Lord Seth wrote:
11 months ago
I loved playing against Lantern, but that probably mostly comes from the fact I played Tron and I'm pretty sure I never lost a match to it even once.
My Tron buddy said the same thing.

The matchup is hilariously in Tron's favor, although I will say that the first time I ran Lantern at a 6 rounder, I beat a Tron player, then lost only to me milling my opponent to the last 2 unknowns in the library, one of which contained the last Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger and he blew up 2 Bridges and swung me the next turn (1-2 match loss). I was 3-0 at the time, but that loss took the wind out of my sails and I ended 3-3 in the end. :?
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
drmarkb
Posts: 553
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by drmarkb » 11 months ago

I have discussed at length Lantern in these very threads. I agree there were many issues that prevented it being uptaken in numbers and have discussed them at length before I only bought it up because @ktkenshinx said I was factually incorrect in talking about 2015 not having a prison deck, when in fact I am correct and have provided the data that it was 2016 that had Lantern in numbers, not 2015 as he said, with its seven MTG top 8 listings, even though its breakthrough was 2015 it was not widely played even by its own standards then. 2016 was Lantern's year. It is fun to look back on past decks, but I was mainly trying to correct an incorrect statement to the correct year. Pedantry, perhaps, but since I said I preferred 2016/17 to 15 it also fits in with what I proclaimed.

EDIT: I managed to beat tron once or twice- always lost the first- of course- won the next 2, think it was extraction on the land that did it I had to have a bit of an unusual board as Tron was everywhere here at the time, I think I changed the discard suite from the board. Long time ago, wish I could remember what it was that I did. The standard list just could not beat Tron. Ever. I seem to remember scooping if they played a tron land on the play or I thoughtseized them on th edraw saw a tron land so they did not know what I was on. Tron players locally knew me as prone to playing landkill and hatebear decks, so I had to give them something back in the form of a near bye.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 11 months ago

Thinking about companions:
Obviously after Monday we will know alot more about the future of the companion cards and mechanic in all formats. The bans look likely to only be in legacy vintage this time but will likely spread to other formats in the very near future. What is the consciences about the companion mechanic over the next few months? (whenever wotc feels like it, including Monday) Meaning do we expect just lurrus to get banned in virtually all formats, or lurrus plus 1 or 2 others in some various formats, or something fairly radical like a full out ban of the whole mechanic in various formats?

I'm betting on the lurrus plus 1 or two others in various formats. Lurrus will get banned almost everywhere first, but some of the others may get banned in older formats as they come up to fill the gap after lurrus leaves. Standard may be handled differently though. I also do not expect them to print any new companion cards.

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 11 months ago

I do not have the capacity right now to reply to every response that was directed my way, so if I missed something, feel free to @ me and I will hopefully be able to reply.
drmarkb wrote:
11 months ago
I have discussed at length Lantern in these very threads. I agree there were many issues that prevented it being uptaken in numbers and have discussed them at length before I only bought it up because ktkenshinx said I was factually incorrect in talking about 2015 not having a prison deck, when in fact I am correct and have provided the data that it was 2016 that had Lantern in numbers, not 2015 as he said, with its seven MTG top 8 listings, even though its breakthrough was 2015 it was not widely played even by its own standards then. 2016 was Lantern's year. It is fun to look back on past decks, but I was mainly trying to correct an incorrect statement to the correct year. Pedantry, perhaps, but since I said I preferred 2016/17 to 15 it also fits in with what I proclaimed.
I reviewed my old MTGS metagame stats from 2015 and 2016 and stand corrected. You are right that 2016 had more viable prison decks than 2015, even if 2015 was their breakout year. Based on my spreadsheet, by the end of 2016, Lantern Control was about 2.5% of the MTGO metagame and Sun and Moon was about 3%. Lantern was only around 1.5% in late 2015 with no other prison presences. Based on this, I am happy to concede that prison was better and more viable in 2016 than 2015.

I will still say that an original point I made stands: prison is NOT a prerequisite to a healthy Modern, nor does its presence guarantee Modern is healthy. 2016 had about 5.5% of the format on prison decks at the end of the year right before two bannings due to significant health issues. Similarly, 2015 ended the year with prison at only 1.5% (and not even white prison, at that); late 2015 was still regarded by many as an extremely healthy period of Modern. I am totally comfortable with you as a prison player preferring 2016 to 2015 as prison was better at that time. But your initial argument about "Wx Prison is not requirement for a healthy meta. Prison is a requirement" does not hold water. A metagame with a ton of prison was extremely unhealthy (late 2016) and a metagame with much less prison was much healthier (2015).
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

blkdemonight
Posts: 80
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by blkdemonight » 11 months ago

cfusionpm wrote:
11 months ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
11 months ago
cfusionpm wrote:
11 months ago

Good God, did I hate playing against Lantern. Like the deck itself was awful enough, but the number of players that played it at a snail's pace was infuriating. Like; I have no game actions. I pass the turn to you immediately. You don't need to tank for 5 minutes about whether to mill me or not. Either think ahead, know what to prioritize, or play a different deck. I am so incredibly thankful this deck is no longer a thing.
I certainly did too, but that was more because of some of the players I played against. It all started for me when my Lantern opponent first looked at Scapeshift like it was an alien in the middle of our first match against each other. If you don't know cards in Modern or the current meta, maybe Lantern is not for you. :unamused:
If you have to read the text on any of the top 100 played cards in the format, Lantern ain't for you! :hmm:
This reminds me of how people playing slow with Sensei's divining top contributed tonm its ban in Legacy

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

Post by Aazadan » 11 months ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
11 months ago
Thinking about companions:
Obviously after Monday we will know alot more about the future of the companion cards and mechanic in all formats. The bans look likely to only be in legacy vintage this time but will likely spread to other formats in the very near future. What is the consciences about the companion mechanic over the next few months? (whenever wotc feels like it, including Monday) Meaning do we expect just lurrus to get banned in virtually all formats, or lurrus plus 1 or 2 others in some various formats, or something fairly radical like a full out ban of the whole mechanic in various formats?

I'm betting on the lurrus plus 1 or two others in various formats. Lurrus will get banned almost everywhere first, but some of the others may get banned in older formats as they come up to fill the gap after lurrus leaves. Standard may be handled differently though. I also do not expect them to print any new companion cards.
I don't think they'll need to ban them in Standard. Lurrus needs to be eliminated from any non rotating format due to design space issues. In Vintage I see them possibly restricting, and then banning the mechanic companion (cards can be legal, but not as a companion). I don't think anything else needs adjusted at this point. It's certainly possible that other decks with a companion are too good but the meta would need to prove it first.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 11 months ago

I can see that. Ban the mechanic but not the cards. Idk if they will do that as it has never been done before, that would be different from conspiracy, but it is a work around for the restricted list issue in vintage.

User avatar
Bearscape
Posts: 213
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Bearscape » 11 months ago

I feel that if the ban is just going to be Lurrus, we'll just be playing musical chairs for the next Companion; once Lurrus is banned Yorion will take over, and after that some other one; Obosh in Legacy lets you play Delver, Ponder, Brainstorm, Force of Negation and Force of Will just fine.

Eventually, something more definitive will have to be done to Companion as a mechanic for Eternal formats. The larger the card pool, the less punishing the trade-off of deckbuilding restrictions versus a free card in your opener is.

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

Post by TheBoulderer » 11 months ago

Quick observation on Lurrus, nothing new, just another perspective: I've been on Grixis Control for years, it's the only deck I've ever seriously played, apart from UR Thing in the Ice. And when Lurrus arrived, I stopped playing Grixis Control because I thought Lurrus doesn't slot into that well enough, and switched to Grixis Thing in the Ice with Lurrus. Had some ups and downs with it.

But recently I've incorporated Lurrus into an Into the Story Grixis Control list running Young Pyromancer instead of Tasigur, and just ditching Gearhulk altogether. SB had to be adjusted, but there's even the option of not doing that and not revealing Lurrus as your companion.

Quick sidebar: I think thats one of the dumber things with companions, that you can choose not to reveal them and sideboard whatever you want. It should be mandatory.

Anyway, Grixis Control with Lurrus is insane. The restriction from my original list was literally 1 card (Gearhulk, and I was already on YP) and several sideboard slots (2 Kalitas, 2 Fulminator, 2 Ashiok), but Lurrus is just so much better than all that, and Nihil Spellbomb/Tormod's Crypt plus Lurrus gives so much consistent play against GY strategies, its just incredible.

And the best part is that Lurrus is a genuinely good card vs Burn/Prowess. Having a 3/2 lifelinker isnt that impressive, but having it every game is a huge deal and in the 30-something matches I've had against RDW, it steals about every 5th or 6th game vs Burn, no kidding.

So for my fringe deck specifically, Lurrus is just a great way to make the strategy 1) generally viable, 2) keep up with all the other Lurrus or non-Lurrus Companion decks and 3) shore up the single matchup that has historically made Grixis control struggle in any metagame with RDW.

I'm not necessarily defending Lurrus from being a ubiquitous card in our format, but there are some huge positives that come from having it in the format.

1) I really like the fact that Grixis Delver is a thing.
2) that Lurrus gives the meta a leg up vs Big Mana because they can't run it themselves.
3) that while Lurrus is good in Burn, in my experience it's even better against Burn.
4) that Lurrus + Crypt/Spellbomb is incredibly strong against Graveyard decks (Crabvine, Dredge, Living End, Rakdos Pyromancer lists etc).

If one has no problem accepting "reveal companion" as part of the game like "draw starting 7" or "roll for play", maybe it's ok to have these cards.

Lets look at 3 alternatives to leaving all Companions legal:

1) Ban just Lurrus: as others have said, the metagame would just tilt towards the other companions, which would make for another 2-3 months of bad modern an end with another ban, then another ban, and another until all of em are gone.

2) Ban all companions: modern had some massive problems before Companions, and we would just revert to those. I won't go into them again because there are a good 50-60 forum pages on the topic just a few pages back.

3) Adjust the rules: would be a very good option too imo, probably the best for everybody overall because people get to play their cards without having an unfair advantage.

I've been for banning Lurrus since it came out, but I admit I didn't try running it. I have now, and at least for my personal fringe deck, Grixis Control, having Lurrus stick around would probably be a net positive as opposed to pre-Lurrus.

EDIT: It's also not so bad for accessability to the format. Yes, Lurrus is a 15$ card, but you'll only ever need 1 copy if you're running it as companion and just having Lurrus (or other companions) will make a lot of budget-builds much more playable against all the non-companion tier decks.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”