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

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 859
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
There's no point in banning Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis when Bridge from Below already took the ban for it. Everyone knew that Hogaak was the correct ban anyway, but Wizards essentially "told us that they are NOT going to ban Hogaak." So they may as well UNBAN Bridge from Below, a card that hardly ever did anything in Modern, outside of some Bridgevine lists during a Pro Tour when Stitcher's Supplier came out. That's all Bridge from Below ever did.

How do I know? I play a lot of Modern. I move from deck to deck quite frequently. I never used the card, Bridge from Below in Modern until Stitcher's Supplier gave us ... Bridge Vine. Then I got scummed out of a top 8 at a PPTQ and went 2-4 at another PPTQ with it. (did very well in local tournaments, but I'd happily switch that around for how I did at the PPTQs)
The decision to ban Hogaak will be, and should be, made independently from the Bridge ban. If the deck remains broken, they're not going to deliberately avoid Hogaak because they didn't ban enough cards. I can't think of any area in society where a management group will fail to fix a problem and just leave it broken because they already used up their one try. They're just going to ban something new. Could they unban Bridge in a concession to messing up? Maybe but probably not. Many of the arguments against Bridge in the article would still be true, in that it insulates against removal and has strong synergies with Feeder/Altar. Also, can you even imagine what would happen if they banned Hogaak, unbanned Bridge, and then an Altar/Feeder/Bridge Dredge deck got big, forcing them to RE-BAN BRIDGE?? Modern would just break. It seems extremely unlikely Wizards risks that scenario.
I'm just saying... Everyone knew that Hogaak was the correct ban. Sure, some people said Bridge from Below was the "correct ban" because they knew Wizards would not ban Hogaak or they just have something against the card because it is a "stupid" card to them. But people that play Modern actively and currently knew that Hogaak was the correct ban. I'm going to say that again - we knew that Hogaak was the correct ban, but were fine with Wizards banning whatever the %$#% they wanted to. (mostly because most Modern players could care less if something that does hardly anything is banned)

They made an appealing argument to ban Bridge from Below? I can make a better argument for at least 10 more Modern cards that is more appealing than that one - Faithless Looting, Ancient Stirrings, heck I can make a better argument for Thoughtseize. I know my opinion is not a popular one, but I will continue to believe that if a card does not "break" Modern on its own, it should NOT be banned for any other reason.

Without milling 8 cards in one shot, I doubt that they would have to re ban Bridge unless they are getting 2-3 Bridges in their yard super early and then finding the other 1-2 super quickly with gobs of mana for Bloodghast triggers and to cast and recast Gravecrawlers. It simply can't be done on 1 turn. It can't be done on turn 3.

Regarding a Preordain unbanning, it just won't happen. Wizards printed a 1U Preordain that flashes back for 4U. They are not going to do it, even if Modern devolves into a turn 1 format eventually. They won't. Likewise with the super underpowered card, Green Sun's Zenith. At this point GSZ would only see play in Elves and some odd Tier 3 or below decks.

After Preordain was banned, Modern players said that the gap between Preordain and Serum Visions was the difference between Black Lotus and Lotus Bloom. After many years, I believe that players are realizing that the gap is actually much smaller than they originally thought. I have played Blue cantrips all my life. I had used them in the past for Control. I had used them to flip Delver of Secrets. And finally as I evolved as a player to Combo, I have used them to set up Combo pieces or find removal for my opponent's hate. I will tell you unabashedly that Preordain is closer to Serum Visions than it is to Ponder. Ponder is actually a very good cantrip, as evidenced by every Blue Legacy deck currently running 4 Brainstorm and 4 Ponder. Preordain is really all that's left, so you see these to fill in gaps in Legacy, as a 2 or 3 of.
Last edited by FoodChainGoblins 2 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
The issue is Hogaak is potentially a problem independently of FL. There are always going to be cheap 1-2 mana GY fillers coming through Standard. We can't ban all the Suppliers and Wayfinders and Shriekhorns and other crap that can get Hogaak into the GY and out in the T2-T3 range. We may still need to explore FL in Modern, but Hogaak itself will be creating imbalances whether or not FL is around.
Ktkenshinx, that entire reply was excellent but I really wanted to focus on this point. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT RIGHT NOW! Anyone who feels faithless looting is too powerful or widespread or whatever have lots of valid points that are worth discussing. HOWEVER, a FL ban alone will not fix hogaak, period. Something else will power out hogaak. Headron crab, thought scoure, even something as weak as tome scour, or something else. For this reason the hogaak issue has to be separated from the FL issue.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

cfusionpm wrote:
2 years ago
There are 2.5 important questions to answer:
1) Why would you play any other graveyard deck besides Hogaak, for as long as Hogaak remains legal?
2) What becomes the best graveyard deck once Hogaak leaves?
--> 2a) What happens if this best graveyard deck is also the best overall deck?
--> 2b) What series of data trends could we look at to make this prediction, given that all our current information is skewed by Hogaak?
1. Why would we even question this though? There is zero, literally zero, reason for a Pro to play Dredge instead of Hogaak, outside of 'I couldnt get the cards or reps in time'. Hogaak, is actually a working example of 'Suppression'. Phoenix and Dredge are not 'bad' decks. However especially in the case of Dredge, you are crazy if you play that instead of Hogaak.

2. You return to the decks that existed prior.
a: Dredge or Phoenix.
b: There is none, unless you look at side event's where Hogaak was in the Main.

Oddly, your question is being posed here already, his answer however appears to be 'ban nothing, just play Tron' and while for Pro's I can buy this angle, that is not what Modern is about. I should not have to play Tron, because the format is warped out of its mind.



EDIT: This is correct btw.
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
I will tell you unabashedly that Preordain is closer to Serum Visions than it is to Ponder. Ponder is actually a very good cantrip, as evidenced by every Blue Legacy deck currently running 4 Brainstorm and 4 Ponder. Preordain is really all that's left, so you see these to fill in gaps in Legacy, as a 2 or 3 of.
Having played Preordain now in Pauper, I couldnt care less if it comes off. Its lower in impact than SFM/Twin would be, and is nothing more than adding +1 to the critical mass of Cantrips being played. We dont have, even with FoN, enough free spells to both Dig, and Answer so just play Serum.
UR Control UR

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

cfusionpm wrote:
2 years ago
gkourou wrote:
2 years ago
3) Diversity is great beneath Hogaak. No clear best deck after this one. I really believe it's one problem and one problem alone; Hogaak. The other graveyard decks seem like some fine decks and nothing more. For example, normal Dredge is nowhere to be seen.
It's a shame Hogaak exists, because Modern looks tremendously diverse, outside of Hogaak!
There are 2.5 important questions to answer:
1) Why would you play any other graveyard deck besides Hogaak, for as long as Hogaak remains legal?
2) What becomes the best graveyard deck once Hogaak leaves?
--> 2a) What happens if this best graveyard deck is also the best overall deck?
--> 2b) What series of data trends could we look at to make this prediction, given that all our current information is skewed by Hogaak?
Not GK, but these are interesting and precise questions, so I'll take a shot:

1) You probably shouldn't, unless there is so much GY hate out there that you would switch to a more resilient GY deck. That is probably Izzet Phoenix, if the data is any indication. Bonus points for Phoenix having better Plan Bs and Plan Cs against GY hate. There's no good data-driven reason I know of to play any other GY-based strategy beyond those two, however.

2) Probably Izzet Phoenix if the MC4 and pre-MC4 data is any indication. Maybe Dredge but the old stats showed, if I remember, that Dredge was worse.

2a) If that best deck has no/too few bad matchups plus goes on to have dominant metagame share, it probably gets banned. History suggests this precedent from 2013 through 2016 in a cycle of Wizards banning the best deck, the next best deck, etc. If that best GY deck has enough bad matchups and a low enough metagame share to appropriately fit in the metagame, nothing will happen and Modern will go on.

2b) Look at pre-MC4 Izzet Phoenix MWP and metagame statistics. Compare those with MC4 statistics. Read through a series of Izzet Phoenix articles by established players and qualitatively determine if they agree GY hate is good/bad/neutral against their deck. A quantitative test would be better, but that would be really hard and time-consuming. If the consensus by Phoenix pilots is that GY hate is good against their deck and Phoenix still had strong MC4 numbers, that's worrisome. If the consensus by Phoenix pilots is that GY hate is neutral/bad against their deck, then MC4's numbers could suggest an overall decline in deck effectiveness for other factors.
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
I'm just saying... Everyone knew that Hogaak was the correct ban. Sure, some people said Bridge from Below was the "correct ban" because they knew Wizards would not ban Hogaak or they just have something against the card because it is a "stupid" card to them. But people that play Modern actively and currently knew that Hogaak was the correct ban. I'm going to say that again - we knew that Hogaak was the correct ban, but were fine with Wizards banning whatever the %$#% they wanted to. (mostly because most Modern players could care less if something that does hardly anything is banned)
Hindsight is 20/20, but at the time of the Bridge ban, there were many players and content creators who thought Bridge was a sufficient ban. CFB's Matt Sperling was okay with it ("I predict this strategy will not be better than traditional Dredge."), SCG's Ben Friedman agreed (" A simple, precise ban, Bridge from Below can leave the format to power down the egregious Bridgevine deck without upsetting the delicate balance in Modern that exists between a number of entrenched archetypes."). TCG's Seth Manfield also said Bridge was the right move ("Now without the card Bridge from Below that deck isn't going to be the same—or it could be completely dead. "). All of the SCG Fact or Fiction commentators in the ban follow-up also said Bridge was the right call, although Todd was a bit more measured than the rest and would ultimately prove to be in the right direction. I'm sure there are authors and players who immediately decried the ban was missing the mark, but the point is, there were many top players and vocal writers who thought it was fine. We can't just say "everyone knew that Hogaak was the correct ban" and leave it at that when the record clearly shows that's not the case.
They made an appealing argument to ban Bridge from Below? I can make a better argument for at least 10 more Modern cards that is more appealing than that one - Faithless Looting, Ancient Stirrings, heck I can make a better argument for Thoughtseize. I know my opinion is not a popular one, but I will continue to believe that if a card does not "break" Modern on its own, it should NOT be banned for any other reason.
I encourage you to read my article on how this ban was structured. The argument to ban Bridge is not a rhetorical case in a vacuum like you'd be making with Thoughtseize or Stirrings or even Looting. Bridge was selected as the card to ban after the deck playing it crossed the line and violated format rules. We don't construct rhetorical ban arguments without those violations, and Wizards doesn't either. Bans have triggering events (e.g. Hogaak as a deck posting absurd MTGO results) and then Wizards selects cards from the offending deck (e.g. picking Bridge after weighing pros/cons of other options). They don't simply skip the triggering event and jump to the ban justification.
Regarding a Preordain unbanning, it just won't happen. Wizards printed a 1U Preordain that flashes back for 4U. They are not going to do it, even if Modern devolves into a turn 1 format eventually. They won't. Likewise with the super underpowered card, Green Sun's Zenith. At this point GSZ would only see play in Elves and some odd Tier 3 or below decks. After Preordain was banned, Modern players said that the gap between Preordain and Serum Visions was the difference between Black Lotus and Lotus Bloom. After many years, I believe that players are realizing that the gap is actually much smaller than they originally thought. I have played Blue cantrips all my life. I had used them in the past for Control. I had used them to flip Delver of Secrets. And finally as I evolved as a player to Combo, I have used them to set up Combo pieces or find removal for my opponent's hate. I will tell you unabashedly that Preordain is closer to Serum Visions than it is to Ponder. Ponder is actually a very good cantrip, as evidenced by every Blue Legacy deck currently running 4 Brainstorm and 4 Ponder. Preordain is really all that's left, so you see these to fill in gaps in Legacy, as a 2 or 3 of.
I agree it is extremely unlikely Wizards unbans Preordain. This gets us to that gray area of us predicting what Wizards WILL DO vs. suggesting what Wizards SHOULD DO based on their decision making history vs. us speculating about or arguing for what we WANT Wizards to do based on our theories of the format. Those are three separate things entirely. This is the difference between narrow arguments like Soorani's for unbanning JTMS (a realistic suggestion in line with previous unbans) vs. Hoogland describing his ideal banlist in terms that are out of alignment with Wizards' policies and decisions. In that regard, Preordain is definitely something players want but unlikely to be something Wizards ever does. SFM, however, would be a little more realistic.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
cfusionpm
With that on the stack...
Posts: 1177
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Post by cfusionpm » 2 years ago

FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
Regarding a Preordain unbanning, it just won't happen. Wizards printed a 1U Preordain that flashes back for 4U. They are not going to do it, even if Modern devolves into a turn 1 format eventually. They won't.
I mean, their reasoning is idiotic, but I agree that it will never be unbanned. Still, I await the day when we get something like..
U: Instant, "Draw 2, put a card from your hand on top of your library."
Or..
U: Sorcery, "Look at the top 2 cards of your library. Put one in your hand. Put the other on the top or bottom of your library."
If they're not going to give us the decency of returning Preordain (which you have demonstrated is aggressively mediocre as it is), they could totally give us "fixed" Brainstorm and "improved" Sleight of Hand, instead of more unplayable 2 mana cantrips and trash like Opt.

User avatar
Necrofish
Posts: 65
Joined: 2 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Necrofish » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
I.. really don't know what to say about that quote. I don't think those other decks are kept in place by stronger decks, and the whole discussion revolves around banning cards. We're banning when something is way too strong for the meta too handle with the resources given.
If Phoenix and Tron would be able to do that, they should be targets for bans regardless if Hogaak is part of it or not. There is no "this deck is broken but it's ok because there is one deck alive that's even worse".
This chain of "what deck will be better if this one is banned" is also not helpful in any way. It's not about keeping all decks at the same level and removing everything that stands out too much. You will never have a perfectly balanced metagame. Just shaving off the top will not make the game any more fun.

With that said, I'd much prefer adding more answers to the card pool that can be played in the maindeck,
Scavenging Ooze and Kaya's Guile come to mind.
Wydwen is much too cool for you.

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

Necrofish wrote:
2 years ago
I.. really don't know what to say about that quote. I don't think those other decks are kept in place by stronger decks, and the whole discussion revolves around banning cards. We're banning when something is way too strong for the meta too handle with the resources given.
If Phoenix and Tron would be able to do that, they should be targets for bans regardless if Hogaak is part of it or not. There is no "this deck is broken but it's ok because there is one deck alive that's even worse".
This chain of "what deck will be better if this one is banned" is also not helpful in any way. It's not about keeping all decks at the same level and removing everything that stands out too much. You will never have a perfectly balanced metagame. Just shaving off the top will not make the game any more fun.

With that said, I'd much prefer adding more answers to the card pool that can be played in the maindeck,
Scavenging Ooze and Kaya's Guile come to mind.
I also prefer printing answers, and I too dislike the suggestion about an eternal race to the bottom in Modern power level. We can always ban key cards in best decks to theoretically open up the format until the banlist is three times as long and we're all just playing Standard with a bigger card pool. And I know how some Standard mages have felt about recent and current Standard cards like Nexus, Reclamation, T3feri, Chainwhirler, and others, so that race to the bottom mentality would lead to even more bans. It's not sustainable and is terrible for player confidence, both in their investments and in their excitement about the format.

That said, I am very worried about Wizards' ability to print reasonable answers. I was less worried about this before MH1, where they had an opportunity to print appropriately-powered callbacks to Daze, Swords to Plowshares, Wasteland, and other options. Instead, we get FoN, which is a better card than many give it credit for but also definitely represents the upper limit of Wizards' tolerance for strong answers. Kaya's Guile is also sweet, but a) it's often a turn too late against GY-abusing decks, and b) it embarrassingly was not part of a cycle of similarly costed-powered enemy colored answers. We can't even get the U two-card Brainstorm effect many have speculated about to help reactive decks dig for their answers in increasingly diverse, proactive metagames.

All of this gives me little confidence in Wizards' ability to print these cards. If they don't want to do that and instead want to keep pushing the proactive envelope, that's a design decision they will have to live with. But if that's the case. they can at least start to consider fairer proactive cards (SFM at one end of the spectrum, Twin further up) as a way to force interaction by decks that deliberately forego interaction.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

Necrofish wrote:
2 years ago
I don't think those other decks are kept in place by stronger decks,
Normally, I would agree, however there is every reason to believe that Hogaak has altered the landscape and cannibalized Phoenix/Dredge numbers. There is just little reason to play them when a Tier 0 option exists.
ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
All of this gives me little confidence in Wizards' ability to print these cards. If they don't want to do that and instead want to keep pushing the proactive envelope, that's a design decision they will have to live with. But if that's the case. they can at least start to consider fairer proactive cards (SFM at one end of the spectrum, Twin further up) as a way to force interaction by decks that deliberately forego interaction.
I really really really wish people would start thinking about this openly, and honestly. Enough of the grossly unfounded fear about SFM, its a sad joke, and enough about 'Twin pushed out Blue' which is probably the most intellectually dishonest and shallow comment I believe could be uttered about the deck at this point.

Modern needs a deck that does the following.

1. Slow down the progress of the opponent.
2. Present a conditional boardstate that demands interaction ON A BASIC AXIS OF PLAY, or loss happens.

If KCI was a normal deck like say, oh I dont know one that depended on Creature, that could be interacted with at Instant (and not Split Second) speed, I actually believe it would have been fine for the format. If we had a deck like this or even MULTIPLE, you would not have to ban out decks all the time, because they would not be able to refine themselves to the point of linear perfection, and would have to respect the other side of the table.

As it is, there is no competitive deck that plays the type of game needed to police the format, not even UW.
UR Control UR

metalmusic_4
Posts: 260
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

So I'm going to take this bait. Do you mean UR twin? I have not tested an original twin list against hogaak at all, but in theory that could be a decent match up for twin. Bolts and remands early, then creatures that tap hogaak, followed up with cryptic command before you combo them out since they have very little removal with Anger of the gods in the side. Wow, I think casting remand on a hogaak may read "cast time walk, draw a card and remove your opponents graveyard from the game." IDK, it's a fun thought experiment anyway.

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 859
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
If KCI was a normal deck like say, oh I dont know one that depended on Creature, that could be interacted with at Instant (and not Split Second) speed, I actually believe it would have been fine for the format. If we had a deck like this or even MULTIPLE, you would not have to ban out decks all the time, because they would not be able to refine themselves to the point of linear perfection, and would have to respect the other side of the table.

As it is, there is no competitive deck that plays the type of game needed to police the format, not even UW.
There is a "creature" deck version of KCI. It is called Devoted Druid/Vizier. It can combo out on turns 3/4 very consistently without disruption and actually has a lot of resiliency, depending on the build. There are even Turbo Vizier builds that can combo as early as turn 2 (SSG or Gemstone Caverns).

I actually saw 1 guy in the CFB comments section saying that Devoted Druid should be banned, to which I just had to make a comment to.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
Legacy - No more cards, will rebuy Sneak Show when I can
Limited - Will start when paper starts
Commander - Nope

Zorakkiller
Posts: 57
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Zorakkiller » 2 years ago

what I would do to fix modern

ban: hogaak and faithless looting

unban: stoneforge mystic, green suns zenith and splinter twin.

User avatar
idSurge
Posts: 1121
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

metalmusic_4 wrote:
2 years ago
So I'm going to take this bait. Do you mean UR twin? I have not tested an original twin list against hogaak at all, but in theory that could be a decent match up for twin. Bolts and remands early, then creatures that tap hogaak, followed up with cryptic command before you combo them out since they have very little removal with Anger of the gods in the side. Wow, I think casting remand on a hogaak may read "cast time walk, draw a card and remove your opponents graveyard from the game." IDK, it's a fun thought experiment anyway.
Or something like it, yes.

I dont care if its UG, UW, UB, or U, but something that can slow via Counters (because Discard is defeated by Top Decks) into a presented state of 'this wins me the game unless you Bolt/Volley/Dismember/Counter/Claim/Decay (you get the point) either This or That piece of the combo, right now.'

UW does not do this, it only does it in half measure, and because of how UW plays right now for 1, and the rest of the format for 2, there is no other meaningful counter presence in the format and despite any protests against it that is a problem, and we have seen it time and again. Daniel Wong's UR Turns is an example of this, but I believe it has too much space devoted to elements of the 'combo' to survive as a Tier 1 option.

I've also taken turn's hundreds of times so I know how it plays out, and it can certainly work, but just not quite there with the current speed of the format.

Ultimately though, I'm not looking for a deck that dunks on other decks. I'm looking for a deck that dunks on decks that choose to refine themselves to the point of absurdity, where the only meaningful solutions cost 0 instead of the decks that choose to hedge their bets a bit, and play main deck answers to the most basic 'problem' in Magic.

Creatures.
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
There is a "creature" deck version of KCI. It is called Devoted Druid/Vizier. It can combo out on turns 3/4 very consistently without disruption and actually has a lot of resiliency, depending on the build. There are even Turbo Vizier builds that can combo as early as turn 2 (SSG or Gemstone Caverns).
Not really, because this is just another linear deck, and has absolutely no interaction or even intention to slow down the format itself. It just is one of many 'I present my race deck, you present yours, who gets there?' Its the same as when I'm on Knightfall. My ideal? Some fool taps out on their Turn 2, so I can Turn 3 Retreat and swing for 20+ while tapping down any blockers.

We need cards like Spell Snare, like Remand, like Mana Leak even, to be meaningful within the upper tier of the format, the 'winners meta' because we are not going to get anything better than FoN, Archmage's Charm (which I like btw in my only deck remaining, Blue Moon) and Cryptic.
UR Control UR

User avatar
FoodChainGoblins
Level 47
Posts: 859
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Riverside

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
FoodChainGoblins wrote:
2 years ago
There is a "creature" deck version of KCI. It is called Devoted Druid/Vizier. It can combo out on turns 3/4 very consistently without disruption and actually has a lot of resiliency, depending on the build. There are even Turbo Vizier builds that can combo as early as turn 2 (SSG or Gemstone Caverns).
Not really, because this is just another linear deck, and has absolutely no interaction or even intention to slow down the format itself. It just is one of many 'I present my race deck, you present yours, who gets there?' Its the same as when I'm on Knightfall. My ideal? Some fool taps out on their Turn 2, so I can Turn 3 Retreat and swing for 20+ while tapping down any blockers.

We need cards like Spell Snare, like Remand, like Mana Leak even, to be meaningful within the upper tier of the format, the 'winners meta' because we are not going to get anything better than FoN, Archmage's Charm (which I like btw in my only deck remaining, Blue Moon) and Cryptic.
Maybe I misunderstood you then. I thought you were looking for a less resilient version of KCI, thus being the reason KCI should stay banned? KCI didn't want to interact with you either. They just needed Engineered Explosives when something was stopping them from sending 7-10 Pyrite Spellbombs your way.
Standard - Will pick up what's good when paper starts
Pre Modern - Do not own anymore
Pioneer - DEAD
Modern - Amulet Titan, Elementals, Trollementals, BR Asmo/Goryo's, Yawmoth Chord
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: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

No, and I have no issue with GW Counters as part of the meta, but its not at the TOP of the meta, and so polices nobody. I would however much rather have GW Counters at the top, than 3 or 4 GY decks (funny, even GW Counters had a GY phase with Postmortem Lunge)

EDIT: I mean honestly, the reason GW Counters isnt any good really, is because unlike the decks that just shrug at your removal, its whole deck dies to removal that anyone and every can bring.
UR Control UR

Zorakkiller
Posts: 57
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Zorakkiller » 2 years ago

if the format needs more police decks then we need incentivise people to play them. you do this by unbaning twin and gsz.

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 224
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 2 years ago

gkourou wrote:
2 years ago
I am very worried about the recent banning and the next one that will inevitably come, Hogaak. What I am worried about?
The absolutely endless banmania. Faithless Looting banned as a result of Hogaak, Arisen Necropolis, Ancient Stirrings banned as a result of FL, Wrenn and Six as a result of this. That's the chain several people refer to.
Again, if bans are not the solution what else? I already said in a post that you can either ban cards or go deeper into the powercreep funnel trying to reprint undercost generic answers. The degenerate decks are so fast people are recurring to turn 0 cards like Leyline and Surgical and they still win through the hate. So do you want more turn 0 answers? Do we need more phyrexian mana hate cards?

Also Wrenn is the posterboy of powercreep. Its really not an acceptable Modern card and is only outshined/underestimated because Loothing decks are so strong right now. The problem with Wrenn is that he sucks vs the top decks but is oppressive vs decks that Jund already had a good matchup against, mostly every tier 2 deck and some tier 1, making it now impossible to beat Jund thus these decks will never be remotely playable again unless they print a cheap removal vs planewalkers that also gives you some sort of CA. Is that the path we really want to follow? More powercreep?

User avatar
motleyslayer
Posts: 922
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Contact:

Post by motleyslayer » 2 years ago

Zorakkiller wrote:
2 years ago
what I would do to fix modern

ban: hogaak and faithless looting

unban: stoneforge mystic, green suns zenith and splinter twin.
I've been waiting for those cards to be unbanned all year, each and every set that gets printed, the more I think those cards being on the ban list is absurd.

I haven''t played any competitive modern events since Magic Fest Toronto but a lot of even the most seasoned modern grinders I know won't play events above FNM due to how broken it is

I just feel that faithless looting is getting the treatment that brainstorm gets in legacy and just not getting banned due to its role in the formats. so I can't see it going anywhere

Zorakkiller
Posts: 57
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Zorakkiller » 2 years ago

I hate that faithless looting is becoming moderns brainstorm. a big reason I got into modern was wizards originally wasn't going to give the format the same passes they do legacy. at least brainstorm doesn't homogenize a bunch of deck into graveyard aggro. faithless looting does not promote nearly as much diversity as brainstorm does in legacy

iTaLenTZ
Posts: 224
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by iTaLenTZ » 2 years ago

gkourou wrote:
2 years ago
Can you explain to me why/how Wr6 is so oppressive vs most Tier 2/3 and some Tier 1 decks? (Real question, no irony of course).
Turn 2 Planewalker that basically enters with 4 counters and ensures you never miss a land drop. Turn 2 it already has 2-4 counters, you can't attack it on your turn because any creature you played on your first turn would have been killed. Your second turn you might play a creature, it gets killed by a removal spell and Wrenn goes to 5 counters and ensures another land drop. What do you do now as a midrange deck? You are already down 2-3 cards and the game will just drag on for several more turns putting your more and more behind. Even his ultimate is a real threat basically closing the game.

Wrenn is oppressive because:
- Enters the battlefield too soon. Its a 2 mana walker ffs
- It provides immediate CA the moment it enters play
- Enters with either 2-4 counters without meaningful ways to interact with it early on with creatures
- Self defense ability and kills dorks
- PW's are already difficult to remove for many decks, especially early on without losing a card
- Every loyalty counter represents a lifepoint that has to be dealt with. So on turn 2 you gain 4 life and return a land card and at zero cost you can improve the investment rate every turn. Its the best 2 mana ever spent.

Try to play vs Wrenn with any deck that isn't Loothing or Tron and you will see how oppressive it is.

User avatar
pizzap
Posts: 9
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by pizzap » 2 years ago

Interesting win rate analysis from the Mythic Championship IV.
- Hogaak the best deck. Hogaak with maindeck Leyline of the Void was best Hogaak.
- UW control is despite being popular pretty bad.

The Grumpiest
Posts: 6
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by The Grumpiest » 2 years ago

pizzap wrote:
2 years ago
Interesting win rate analysis from the Mythic Championship IV.
- Hogaak the best deck. Hogaak with maindeck Leyline of the Void was best Hogaak.
- UW control is despite being popular pretty bad.
Thanks for the Data!

However, it's pretty clear that Crab Hogaak had the highest winrate against the field from your data set, not Leyline Hogaak. Honestly, the more I look at the data, the more I think we need to reconsider how we approach hating out Hogaakvine. Leyline of the Void isn't working, in a similar manner to how people were finding equally little success against UR Phoenix builds with the card. Frankly, Leyline has been too easy to remove, too inconsistent to get in the opening hand, and too hard to recur. I'm on Whir Prison, which has a reasonably favorable match up into Hogaak now, and I see the most success against Hogaakvine with an Esnaring Bridge and a Grafdigger's cage out. Also, Chalice on 1 can completely shut them down since all of their enablers except Altar are 1cmc. It's also exceptionally fragile to Ghost Quarters, since it usually only runs ~2 basic lands.

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
2 years ago
Again, if bans are not the solution what else? I already said in a post that you can either ban cards or go deeper into the powercreep funnel trying to reprint undercost generic answers. The degenerate decks are so fast people are recurring to turn 0 cards like Leyline and Surgical and they still win through the hate. So do you want more turn 0 answers? Do we need more phyrexian mana hate cards?
You don't ban your way out of power creep. It just happens to all nonrotating formats and no number of reasonable bans will address it. As for 0 cost Turn 0 answers, yes, that is exactly what we need. That's why Legacy is actually slower than Modern with more interactive decks at the top, despite having significantly faster and stronger glass cannon decks. Daze, FoW, Wasteland, etc. and the cantrips to find such effects mean decks like Reanimator or ANT, which would be completely unstoppable and miserable in Modern, are just acceptable tiered strategies in Legacy. The only ways to address this barring a nuclear ban option which Wizards is never going to do, nor should they do due to its effect on format confidence, are (1), print/reprint/unban generic answers like FoN, and/or (2), print/reprint/unban proactive threats that trump decks which refuse to interact and fall to decks packing interaction.
Also Wrenn is the posterboy of powercreep. Its really not an acceptable Modern card and is only outshined/underestimated because Loothing decks are so strong right now. The problem with Wrenn is that he sucks vs the top decks but is oppressive vs decks that Jund already had a good matchup against, mostly every tier 2 deck and some tier 1, making it now impossible to beat Jund thus these decks will never be remotely playable again unless they print a cheap removal vs planewalkers that also gives you some sort of CA. Is that the path we really want to follow? More powercreep?
This is classic race to the bottom ban mania in action. So now not only are Hogaak and Looting decks a problem, but Jund secretly too behind them? What about UW and Tron after that? Humans? Do we just ban cards from all top tier decks until we're just playing Standard? This is the kind of indirect, speculative, next-next-next leveling Wizards never does with bans and rarely turns out to be accurate even in live formats. Bans are based around current, present violations of format rules, not speculation around possible futures.

Answer this very specific question: what are the specific decks (name then) which Jund is allegedly oppressing out of the metagame?
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
Depian
Posts: 26
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Spain

Post by Depian » 2 years ago

The Grumpiest wrote:
2 years ago
pizzap wrote:
2 years ago
Interesting win rate analysis from the Mythic Championship IV.
- Hogaak the best deck. Hogaak with maindeck Leyline of the Void was best Hogaak.
- UW control is despite being popular pretty bad.
Thanks for the Data!

However, it's pretty clear that Crab Hogaak had the highest winrate against the field from your data set, not Leyline Hogaak. Honestly, the more I look at the data, the more I think we need to reconsider how we approach hating out Hogaakvine. Leyline of the Void isn't working, in a similar manner to how people were finding equally little success against UR Phoenix builds with the card. Frankly, Leyline has been too easy to remove, too inconsistent to get in the opening hand, and too hard to recur. I'm on Whir Prison, which has a reasonably favorable match up into Hogaak now, and I see the most success against Hogaakvine with an Esnaring Bridge and a Grafdigger's cage out. Also, Chalice on 1 can completely shut them down since all of their enablers except Altar are 1cmc. It's also exceptionally fragile to Ghost Quarters, since it usually only runs ~2 basic lands.
They have almost the same overall win% but main Leyline has a much higher winrate than Crab when facing other Hogaak decks (79.4% vs 45.2%). If anything, this shows that Leyline can stop the deck in game 1 with open decklists (you can mull to Leyline game 1 when opp doesn't have answers)

I think PT data is too skewed, I'd rather wait for Tobi Henke to publish matchup analysis for GP Barcelona, a purely Modern event that doesn't have open decklists should give us much cleaner information

User avatar
ktkenshinx
Posts: 571
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: West Coast
Contact:

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

Depian wrote:
2 years ago
I think PT data is too skewed, I'd rather wait for Tobi Henke to publish matchup analysis for GP Barcelona, a purely Modern event that doesn't have open decklists should give us much cleaner information
On the one hand, I too am excited for anything Henke puts out, whether about MC4 or GP Barcelona. GP are significantly better indicators of format health than MCs/PTs, and we need to pay attention to their results. On the other hand, I am too compelled by GP Barcelona as a representative event; many players likely went into this event with no understanding of how good Hogaak was. This won't be an issue with future GP in August, but it's a big limitation of a GP held the same weekend as MC4.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
Depian
Posts: 26
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Spain

Post by Depian » 2 years ago

Yeah, of course only GP Barcelona data will not be perfect because there was less awareness about how powerful Hogaak is but it's a good starting point, many players knew about it and a lot of the pros that didn't day2 the MC were playing the GP and most of them were actually playing Hogaak, Leyline of the Void was probably not the most played card as in the MC but most people were playing a decent amount of GY hate.

In theory, GP Barcelona should show a higher than "normal" Hogaak winrate (less expected hate) although it should also show a smaller meta share (people who didn't know about the deck being good decided to play something else)

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”