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

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

Speaking of data, I know a few people are looking for the 6-4+ Modern-only round information in a concise format. I'm working on it now for an article and it's super easy to paste in, so here it is. HOGAAK SMASH.
image.png
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

iTaLenTZ wrote:
2 years ago
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.
This is giving off a 'Teferi is too good for Standard' vibe. If Aggro is Turn 1/2 as the critical turn, Midrange is 2/3 (Wrenn/Lily), and Control is 4/5 (Jace/Teferi)?

I mean, just spell snare it? Just Mana Leak? Snap's in Ambush Viper Mode and then bolt it? Goblin Guide into bolt?

I get it, its extremely pushed, but any deck that it absolutely crushes, was never Modern viable anyway.

EDIT: The Hogaak numbers are absurd.
UR Control UR

SaberTooth
Posts: 7
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by SaberTooth » 2 years ago

Non rotating formats are based on broken cards. I think that looting (and stirrings) are just fine. You cant ban stirrings, looting and mox opal to let the children play with monogreen beasts at their LGS, and to be honest, if wizards ban those cards, you know that we will have people complaining about UW/X BG/X dominating the meta with all those broken walkers and answers to everything

I think that the better option is to ban the more specific problematic card (in this case, hogaak) and move on. Dredge exists and it is manageable. Affinity exists and its manageable. Tron is borderline but well...

Is good to have good decks that attack form different angles. This is not standard

Mapccu
Posts: 89
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Mapccu » 2 years ago

I had a longer post written up but it seems I lost it.

I don't think w6 is banable and jund really wasn't very well positioned before the recent sets. I don't like kitchen sink designs and the card is really fine at any stage of the game unless you're literally way behind on board or your opp is about to combo kill you.

W6 lines up very well against elves, goblins, Fae, spirits, humans early turns, infect, vizier combo, and any playable mana dork. That's a lot for a card that is two mana passive card advantage otherwise.

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

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

Mapccu wrote:
2 years ago
W6 lines up very well against elves, goblins, Fae, spirits, humans early turns, infect, vizier combo, and any playable mana dork. That's a lot for a card that is two mana passive card advantage otherwise.
This is kind of what it takes to be good though. Thats exactly what Jund needed.

1. Consistently hit lands.
2. Interact with small creatures to not get swarmed by Aggro.
3. Pull ahead.

If Jund starts stomping all over Big Mana, and Control, call me concerned. If Jund actually can play its Midrange roll in stepping on Aggro/Combo? Great, working as intended.

EDIT: Something I was thinking about while laying awake in the heat last night.

Instead of us constantly going around the wheel on 'ban this, unban that' what if we as a thread, picked one of the 'winners meta' decks, and disected what makes it good, what its position and role in the meta is, and what weaknesses it has? We used to be able to do that on an individual basis at MTGS, but the deck section here has not taken off to the same degree obviously.

I would propose the following list.

Hogaak (Not worth it right now.)
Eldrazi Tron
Humans
Jund
Mono-Red Phoenix
Izzet Phoenix
Amulet Titan
Mono-Green Tron
Burn
Grixis Urza

Especially for newer decks like Urza, or decks that have swung back into favour like Jund/E-Tron, it could be worth discussing?
UR Control UR

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

Hot takes from this week's Goldfish podcast:
MTG Goldfish Podcast wrote:Richard - Modern is not an interactive format anyway, so the only decks that Hogaak affects are like the reluctant Jund and Control players, and they love getting beat up on anyway, so they'll take the challenge. For everyone else, it doesn't matter that there's a Hogaak or not, because they're just trying to goldfish them anyway. What Hogaak means is you need to win on turn 3 or turn 4 or you're dead. Previously it was maybe turn 4 or turn 5. But it's not like Izzet Phoenix is trying to block and kill a Hogaak or something; they're trying to fly over the top and burn the face down.
Seth - Are we at the point where that's just a feature of Modern? I prefer healthy interactive Magic, but I kind of wonder just-- if this is what Modern is and it's not fixable. And if you ban Hogaak, then Phoenix is too good and gets banned, then Tron is too good, etc. Is there any way to make it so Modern isn't this goldfishy, turn 3 format? Or is that just what Modern is?
Richard - I figured it out, Seth. In Limited, you interact in combat. In Standard, you interact on the Battlefield. In Legacy and Vintage, you interact on the Stack, and in Modern, you just don't interact. What are you gonna do? Leyline? Is Surgical even enough?

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

SaberTooth wrote:
2 years ago
Non rotating formats are based on broken cards. I think that looting (and stirrings) are just fine. You cant ban stirrings, looting and mox opal to let the children play with monogreen beasts at their LGS, and to be honest, if wizards ban those cards, you know that we will have people complaining about UW/X BG/X dominating the meta with all those broken walkers and answers to everything

I think that the better option is to ban the more specific problematic card (in this case, hogaak) and move on. Dredge exists and it is manageable. Affinity exists and its manageable. Tron is borderline but well...

Is good to have good decks that attack form different angles. This is not standard
Strongly agree. If you hit Looting and Stirrings and Opal and SSG and just keep racing to the bottom of UWx vs BGx metagames, you just get a highly iterated/refined Standard. And people aren't even thrilled with the current Standard either. Specific bans are always the best way to proceed and, thankfully, this is what Wizards tends to do in these situations (even if there's a vocal group who wants a nuclear option).
Mapccu wrote:
2 years ago
I had a longer post written up but it seems I lost it.

I don't think w6 is banable and jund really wasn't very well positioned before the recent sets. I don't like kitchen sink designs and the card is really fine at any stage of the game unless you're literally way behind on board or your opp is about to combo kill you.

W6 lines up very well against elves, goblins, Fae, spirits, humans early turns, infect, vizier combo, and any playable mana dork. That's a lot for a card that is two mana passive card advantage otherwise.
Incidentally, I don't have any issue with BGx Midrange having more game against these creature-based aggressive decks. As long as BGx remains weak against big mana decks (G Tron, E Tron, Titanshift, Amulet Titan, etc.) then there will always be plenty of natural predators for the strategy. BGx is allowed to have good matchups against lower-tiered creature decks, and I agree with your assessment of Jund here.
idSurge wrote:
2 years ago
nstead of us constantly going around the wheel on 'ban this, unban that' what if we as a thread, picked one of the 'winners meta' decks, and disected what makes it good, what its position and role in the meta is, and what weaknesses it has? We used to be able to do that on an individual basis at MTGS, but the deck section here has not taken off to the same degree obviously.
I fear there is no amount of deliberate conversation that will shift the focus away from unbans and bans. Wizards bought the sheets and pillows, the community made the bed, and now we're all just living in it. The best we can do is try to keep the ban and unban discussion reasonable and data-focused, pushing back when it's unwarranted and corralling it towards reasonable arguments.

That said, I do think it's worthwhile discussing Modern pillars. Future article topic: the zere/one-mana pillars of Modern - Hierarch/Vial, Looting, Stirrings, Opal, SV/Opt, TS/IoK. Maybe Bolt too? I'm pretty sure you can't be doing anything competitive if you aren't playing these pillars in your deck. And before someone leaps in with a ban axe waving around, this breakdown is totally fine because these pillars support a wide variety of deck types.
cfusionpm wrote:
2 years ago
Hot takes from this week's Goldfish podcast:
MTG Goldfish Podcast wrote:Richard - Modern is not an interactive format anyway, so the only decks that Hogaak affects are like the reluctant Jund and Control players, and they love getting beat up on anyway, so they'll take the challenge. For everyone else, it doesn't matter that there's a Hogaak or not, because they're just trying to goldfish them anyway. What Hogaak means is you need to win on turn 3 or turn 4 or you're dead. Previously it was maybe turn 4 or turn 5. But it's not like Izzet Phoenix is trying to block and kill a Hogaak or something; they're trying to fly over the top and burn the face down.
Seth - Are we at the point where that's just a feature of Modern? I prefer healthy interactive Magic, but I kind of wonder just-- if this is what Modern is and it's not fixable. And if you ban Hogaak, then Phoenix is too good and gets banned, then Tron is too good, etc. Is there any way to make it so Modern isn't this goldfishy, turn 3 format? Or is that just what Modern is?
Richard - I figured it out, Seth. In Limited, you interact in combat. In Standard, you interact on the Battlefield. In Legacy and Vintage, you interact on the Stack, and in Modern, you just don't interact. What are you gonna do? Leyline? Is Surgical even enough?
The sweeping statement Richard opens with makes it hard to take his argument seriously, and it goes downhill from there. It's like Hogaak came around and everyone just lost their Modern minds. There were plenty of interactive decks in Modern before Hogaak and are still plenty of interactive decks (ignoring the Hogaak problem, which is a separate issue). I know you always talk about Wizards crunching spreadsheets and not actually playing the format; it's not a good management method. This is also true of Richard's statement. There are dozens of interaction points in most Modern games, whether on the stack, in the hand, or on the battlefield. The format's premier aggro deck is full of interaction: Meddling Mage, Freebooter, Reflector Mage, and Image to copy those effects. Phoenix, UW Control, and Jund are all similarly interactive. It's really just Hogaak threatening to throw things off into this "do you have it or not?" battle. I know it's a popular, dramatic, and catchy case to reduce Modern to a non-interactive goldfish format, but that's simply not true. There were dozens of featured MC4 matchups that proved this.

Modern might have an interaction problem. I'm totally willing to concede this and explore it. But sweeping statements about Modern being categorically a goldfish format are just as ridiculous as someone saying "Modern has no problems!
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 582
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 2 years ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
Again, I'm going to encourage you and anyone else using this kind of strong language to avoid questions like "is this even a real question?" It's borderline trolling when I asked the question and phrased it as I did. It's also a much more open question than you are making it out to be, which is the other danger of these kinds of sweeping, sarcastic reductions of arguments. No one has any issue with many green decks running MD Scavenging Ooze...
It's just the way I speak / type. I honestly wasn't trolling. I think it is ridiculous to ask, who would WANT to put GY hate main deck? The question seems absurd on it's face. I think this whole notion of main decking hate is the type of thing that WOTC swoops in to stop from being necessary. They have protected us in the past from needing main deck hate, I really hope they stick to their guns and ban the problem card.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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

Post by ktkenshinx » 2 years ago

robertleva wrote:
2 years ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
Again, I'm going to encourage you and anyone else using this kind of strong language to avoid questions like "is this even a real question?" It's borderline trolling when I asked the question and phrased it as I did. It's also a much more open question than you are making it out to be, which is the other danger of these kinds of sweeping, sarcastic reductions of arguments. No one has any issue with many green decks running MD Scavenging Ooze...
It's just the way I speak / type I honestly wasn't trolling. I think it is ridiculous to ask, who would WANT to put GY hate main deck, the question seems absurd on it's face. I think this whole notion of main decking hate is the type of thing that WOTC swoops in to stop from being necessary. They have protected us in the past from needed main deck hate, I really hope they stick to their guns and ban the problem card.
Well, there are a few notable examples of acceptable maindeck graveyard hate. I think we can all agree it's fine for green decks to run some number of Scavenging Ooze, especially BGx Midrange. I also think we're okay with decks like E-Tron and Amulet Titan running their bullet Scavenging Grounds and Bojuka Bogs respectively. Similarly, I have no issue with toolbox artifact decks running 1-2 anti-GY bullets to get off Whir: Cage and Spellbomb being the most common. I'm a little torn on G Tron running Relic of Progenitus, but honestly, that's partially because GY decks are bad Tron matchups anyway, so they are hedging bets against a historically, not recently, bad matchup. Old-school Tron also used to run Relic all the time, so it's more a blast from the past than a new issue.

The biggest question mark is around UW Control and Izzet Phoenix. Are we okay with these decks running 2-3 MD Extractions? I'm torn. On the one hand, it's definitely a symptom of increased GY presence. On the other hand, these cards have real synergies with the rest of the deck (Snapcaster into Surgical is strong against tons of strategies; Extraction turns on Phoenix/Thing/Aria). On the other hand, these would probably be different cards in a different metagame. This gets us into a question of adaption vs. warping, which is a tough nut to crack.

This is in contrast to decks maindecking Leyline of the Void (which is probably just Hogaak decks optimizing for the inbred, inevitable mirror). That's just gross because it's so narrow and symptomatic of a warped metagame preparing for a warped mirror.
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

robertleva wrote:
2 years ago
ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
Again, I'm going to encourage you and anyone else using this kind of strong language to avoid questions like "is this even a real question?" It's borderline trolling when I asked the question and phrased it as I did. It's also a much more open question than you are making it out to be, which is the other danger of these kinds of sweeping, sarcastic reductions of arguments. No one has any issue with many green decks running MD Scavenging Ooze...
It's just the way I speak / type. I honestly wasn't trolling. I think it is ridiculous to ask, who would WANT to put GY hate main deck? The question seems absurd on it's face. I think this whole notion of main decking hate is the type of thing that WOTC swoops in to stop from being necessary. They have protected us in the past from needing main deck hate, I really hope they stick to their guns and ban the problem card.
I also think it is absolutely absurd that anyone in their right mind could in any way justify the obscene levels of warping that Graveyard decks have on the format. Especially given MANY users spending YEARS complaining about how "Twin warped the meta," even though it could be interacted with using basic, simple, regular, maindeck answers like discard, counters, and removal, in addition to a suite of cards that specifically hose the deck. The double-standard of saying something is totally warping and unacceptable and then openly embracing something that is categorically more warping, and on a totally different axis, it is almost as jarringly frustrating as trying to talk American politics at any point in the past 3 years.

Any level of consistency for stances or opinions seems to have been lost long ago. At least for anyone who thinks Faithless Looting is remotely OK for this format.
Last edited by cfusionpm 2 years ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
robertleva
Posts: 582
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by robertleva » 2 years ago

The surgical / scavenging ooze examples are fine. No one is complaining about those types of plays, because they are design space choices that have real consequences.

The problem is Leyline of the Void being the most popular card and many decks just playing it main board to stand any chance at all in a meta with Phoenix and Hogaak.
Robert Leva
Creator of Modern's 8Rack Deck
Image

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
I also think it is absolutely absurd that anyone in their right mind could in any way justify the obscene levels of warping that Graveyard decks have on the format. Especially given MANY users spending YEARS complaining about how "Twin warped the meta," even though it could be interacted with using basic, simple, regular, maindeck answers like discard, counters, and removal, in addition to a suite of cards that specifically hose the deck. The double-standard of saying something is totally warping and unacceptable and then openly embracing something that is categorically more warping, and on a totally different axis, it is almost as jarringly frustrating as trying to talk American politics at any point in the past 3 years.

Any level of consistency for stances or opinions seems to have been lost long ago. At least for anyone who thinks Faithless Looting is remotely OK for this format.
I'm curious to what extent the problem is a) the number of GY hate in MDs/SBs vs. b) the importance of drawing those cards if you want to win the game. I think (a) is much less problematic than (b), because I think (a) just reflects small adaptions to perceived metagame trends. (B), however, would be a problem if true. Here's a hypothetical illustration of this. Let's say I'm normally only winning 40% of my unfavorable matchups, which jumps to 50%-60% if I draw my hate cards. That's probably business as usual. But what if I'm only winning 20% of my GY matchups, but that jumps to 70%+ if I draw my hate cards? That would be way too swingy. It would be even worse if I was 20% with no hate and then still just 40%-50% even with the hate. Obviously, those are made up numbers, but they just illustrate a potential problem with this deck. I suspect (b) is far more problematic than (a) if it could be proven.

As for inconsistencies between Twin and Looting, we know 1) Wizards views different Looting decks as different from Twin variants, i.e. supporting diversity more, 2) the "dies/loses to interaction" argument is categorically bad and has always been bad, and 3) Wizards %$#%$#% Twin ban reasons to shake up the PT in the first place. So the comparison isn't really relevant to Looting.
robertleva wrote:
2 years ago
The surgical / scavenging ooze examples are fine. No one is complaining about those types of plays, because they are design space choices that have real consequences.

The problem is Leyline of the Void being the most popular card and many decks just playing it main board to stand any chance at all in a meta with Phoenix and Hogaak.
The maindeck Leyline statistic is a great example of a number that needs context because no one, to my knowledge, has really looked into where those Leylines are showing up. I'm doing this for an article right now and I can tell you (spoilers for the article) that 86% of maindeck Leylines were in Hogaak decks at the MC4 (exceptions being 2 Jund, 1 G Tron, 1 E Tron). This doesn't really point to a bigger GY problem, but it absolutely points to an inbred, mirror optimization around a warping deck. But again, the problem there is Hogaak being ridiculous, not Looting or other GY strategies.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

Mapccu
Posts: 89
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Mapccu » 2 years ago

I think it's fine for an archetype to have a favorable match up against another (bgx beats aggro/combo and is weaker to big mana). I think what I'm trying to say is I don't want that dynamic folded up in one card because that one card becomes boarderline insurmountable in a number of games. I mean big mana almost has a blood moon + CA walker in WAR Karn vs Jund. It just feels bad to see someone plop down a card that you can't beat but isn't even necessarily there for you. You board in surgical against me game 2/3 when I'm on a GY deck - fine. I lose to mainboard goodstuff that invalidates a large portion of my deck? Less fine.

As for what makes T1 more successful I think recursion (or ability to execute a game win on consecutive turns - thinking decks like storm/phoenix), plan b/C (like aria of flame), and card throughput are what set the top tier decks ahead of the rest of the meta. Hogaak/Phoenix/uw controls cantrips/FL/AS/WAR karn/many of GBx's 3-4 ofs are CA/etc. allow players to see a scary volume of cards even if they don't put you up on cards. It just leads to more consistent games and that accounts for a lot over the course of a larger tournament. Card quality and deck churn seems just as great as card advantage in many games. I don't want to draw a card, I want to draw the card I need.

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

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
The maindeck Leyline statistic is a great example of a number that needs context because no one, to my knowledge, has really looked into where those Leylines are showing up. I'm doing this for an article right now and I can tell you (spoilers for the article) that 86% of maindeck Leylines were in Hogaak decks at the MC4 (exceptions being 2 Jund, 1 G Tron, 1 E Tron). This doesn't really point to a bigger GY problem, but it absolutely points to an inbred, mirror optimization around a warping deck. But again, the problem there is Hogaak being ridiculous, not Looting or other GY strategies.
While Surgical main deck has been a thing for a while (and alarming in of itself), I think the main deck Leylines are overblown due to the nature of the MC. Open decklists and predictably Hogaak-filled meta meant that was absolutely the right choice. But for any other scenario? Maybe not. I would still be packing 4-8 free GY hate cards in the 75 indefinitely though. Whether they're Leyline, Surgical, or Trap depends on the deck, but because of the warping GY-abuse decks are causing, this need for hate is not going anywhere any time soon.

I fully agree with the rest of your post, it just the actions of Wizards and players alike still sting me to the core this day, given the %$#%$#% I personally had to put up with (including multiple forum bannings) defending a position which is now widely accepted as correct.

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
ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
The maindeck Leyline statistic is a great example of a number that needs context because no one, to my knowledge, has really looked into where those Leylines are showing up. I'm doing this for an article right now and I can tell you (spoilers for the article) that 86% of maindeck Leylines were in Hogaak decks at the MC4 (exceptions being 2 Jund, 1 G Tron, 1 E Tron). This doesn't really point to a bigger GY problem, but it absolutely points to an inbred, mirror optimization around a warping deck. But again, the problem there is Hogaak being ridiculous, not Looting or other GY strategies.
While Surgical main deck has been a thing for a while (and alarming in of itself), I think the main deck Leylines are overblown due to the nature of the MC. Open decklists and predictably Hogaak-filled meta meant that was absolutely the right choice. But for any other scenario? Maybe not. I would still be packing 4-8 free GY hate cards in the 75 indefinitely though. Whether they're Leyline, Surgical, or Trap depends on the deck, but because of the warping GY-abuse decks are causing, this need for hate is not going anywhere any time soon.
Open question to everyone: What do you and others believe is an acceptable average number of GY hate cards in a sideboard? Is it the same as hate for artifacts, lands, and other axes of gameplay? I have the MC4 numbers but I'm curious what people think is acceptable.
Over-Extended/Modern Since 2010

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

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
Open question to everyone: What do you and others believe is an acceptable average number of GY hate cards in a sideboard? Is it the same as hate for artifacts, lands, and other axes of gameplay? I have the MC4 numbers but I'm curious what people think is acceptable.
2 Modal (or Surgical/SCooze) in the main, and Modal in the side is acceptable to me. Pure dedicated hate for the yard (Traps, Voids) should not be 'normal'.

For the forseeable future, I'll be on 2 Surgical/3 Trap, simply because they are free.
UR Control UR

User avatar
LeoTzu
Posts: 30
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by LeoTzu » 2 years ago

idSurge wrote:
2 years ago

2 Modal (or Surgical/SCooze) in the main, and Modal in the side is acceptable to me. Pure dedicated hate for the yard (Traps, Voids) should not be 'normal'.

For the forseeable future, I'll be on 2 Surgical/3 Trap, simply because they are free.
The concerning thing about grave hate is that it has become 0 mana or bust. The only pieces of hate that really seem to be able to work are pieces that effectively cost 0 (Surgical Extraction, Ravenous Trap, Leyline of the Void).

Rest in Peace, Scavenging Ooze, Rakdos Charm, and even Relic of Progenitus and Nihil Spellbomb are too slow. The graveyard itself isn't necessarily a problem zone… the problem is that the window to interact with decks abusing the grave is so small.

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

Post by idSurge » 2 years ago

Yes, and thats because it can be 'filled' on Turn 1, and exploited, on Turn 2. If you are on the draw in that scenario, you may have 1 untapped land at that point.
UR Control UR

User avatar
Arkmer
Opinionated and Wrong
Posts: 325
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Minnesota

Post by Arkmer » 2 years ago

In answer to the second question, [mention]ktkenshinx[/mention]. I don't generally view yard hate as the same as hate for things that are in play, on the stack, or discard.

Simply put, many cards are rendered useless until you establish yard hate.

A bit more to that is that destroy, sacrifice, discard, counter, mill, and probably some others that I'm missing for some reason are all just tempo plays until you establish reasonable yard hate. Even a Tormod's Crypt is a hard stop where you can destroy a bunch of things then get one exile off to wipe the slate clean for a bit.

Given how fast things can come out of the yard, those effects are basically worthless until you get either a very critical 1 time exile or a static effect that outlaws the yard. This makes yard hate less a "removal" the way we generally define removal and more an "anti-prison" piece in that returning from the grave invalidates many of my cards the same way Ensnaring Bridge invalidates many of my creatures.

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

Post by metalmusic_4 » 2 years ago

I usually run 4 peices of whatever hate I think I need. If i run only one or two I know I just won't see my hate cards often enough. In this environment I think it would be a good idea to rum 6-8 graveyard hate cards between your MB and SB. Surgical extraction is the best MB hate card probably, maybe relic, then leyline or rest in peace or something else in the side.

Edit: or just put all your leylines main board and then maybe bring in more. These are the troubled times we live in.

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

To echo what LeoTzu and idSurge said, grave hate that's not 0 is often too slow. Ravenous Trap and Surgical Extraction can often not be enough. This is why every deck in Modern runs 4 Leyline of the Void in their SB.

It is why Wizards will always have a tough time making "better grave hate." Tormod's Crypt cost 0, Leyline of the Void only affects the opponent and cost 0 if in the opener. Otherwise, it's mostly trash right now. (I mean I can see some corner cases where someone makes their opponent discard important cards in time to cast a Leyline of the Void, slowing Modular, Thopter/Sword, Phoenixes, or something else before they recover from the discard.)
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

I don't have a problem with 4 leyline in the side, its for packing hate cards for your bad match ups. Main board dedicated hate is a very different story but a few relics, scavenging ooze or something else like that main is a fine hedge and I would call that just good deck building even during normal circumstances. I've run main board anger of the gods in a few decks in the past.

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

Post by Zorakkiller » 2 years ago

you can ban cards like looting and stirring and not have a format dominated by midrange and control. it's not one or the other, it's not a race to the bottom. has the bar really been lowered so far that we have Stockholm syndrome and should just be happy to have a broken format

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

Post by FoodChainGoblins » 2 years ago

When Bloodbraid Elf was banned instead of Deathrite Shaman, how long did it take before Bloodbraid Elf was unbanned? Is that long I have to wait to see Bridge from Below back in Modern? Or good riddance because it was really good with a banned (what we presume will happen) card? (Hogaak)
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
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

ktkenshinx wrote:
2 years ago
Open question to everyone: What do you and others believe is an acceptable average number of GY hate cards in a sideboard? Is it the same as hate for artifacts, lands, and other axes of gameplay? I have the MC4 numbers but I'm curious what people think is acceptable.
Personally, any dedicated GY hate above 0 main deck copies is too much and warping. It's similar to the fact that people don't (and shouldn't have to) run Ancient Grudge main deck, but it's totally acceptable to run modal spells like Kolaghan's Command or more recently, Abrade (though Abrade is only really main decked in bad UR control decks). For Graveyards, cards like Scavenging Ooze aren't dedicated GY hate, but incidental GY hate (with the upside of growing the creature and being an all-around good value 2 drop). These sorts of things offer additional separate value outside of possible targeted hate, and are never dead. And while Surgical Extraction is never technically a dead card, it's still pretty mind numbing to call any meta in which multiple main deck copies is a good decision "healthy." Never mind the ludicrous idea that Leyline of the Void main deck could be a thing; especially with London Mulligan to find them, and Faithless Looting to throw them away.

Dedicated hate cards belong in the sideboard. The minute they start being correct to main board, you have a warped and unhealthy format. I don't really know much about Legacy, but I imagine main deck Pyroblast has a similar feel.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Modern”