While I agree that it is a diverse Top 8 in a currently diverse Modern meta, it is very noninteractive. None of those decks are trying to interact - Merfolk and Counters probably the most of the top 8.
I would say Death and Taxes are the most interactive. They are running Land destruction, hand attack, and removal.
While I agree that it is a diverse Top 8 in a currently diverse Modern meta, it is very noninteractive. None of those decks are trying to interact - Merfolk and Counters probably the most of the top 8.
I concur.
Its a lets see how fast I can put together my win-con top 8.
I also see 3 decks leaning heavily on Aether Vial as well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
While I agree that it is a diverse Top 8 in a currently diverse Modern meta, it is very noninteractive. None of those decks are trying to interact - Merfolk and Counters probably the most of the top 8.
I concur.
Its a lets see how fast I can put together my win-con top 8.
I also see 3 decks leaning heavily on Aether Vial as well.
Why is 3 Vial decks a negative thing?
Also, aggro decks hadn't seen much success lately besides affinity and it is ok to see that they can still do well, even if they come in new versions (humans).
While I agree that it is a diverse Top 8 in a currently diverse Modern meta, it is very noninteractive. None of those decks are trying to interact - Merfolk and Counters probably the most of the top 8.
I concur.
Its a lets see how fast I can put together my win-con top 8.
I also see 3 decks leaning heavily on Aether Vial as well.
Why is 3 Vial decks a negative thing?
Also, aggro decks hadn't seen much success lately besides affinity and it is ok to see that they can still do well, even if they come in new versions (humans).
It's not. I think he was just mentioning it as a side observation. I noticed it as well. Quite frequently, you notice market fluctuations after situations like this - for example Aether Vial going up by $5 or so or all foil Green new Merfolk sold out everywhere. It's just an interesting observation, which I nearly posted myself in the Prices thread.
*It's also interesting to see a lot of Aggro doing well. If this were to become a strong trend (which I don't think it would), then possibly people's view of unbanning Punishing Fire could be a real possibility. I doubt it will happen though. I predict that some interactive decks will rebound next week to prey on these decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
There's nothing insane about not unbanning anything given the only evidence that anything is actually safe is from a few people running a few games and them saying that it is safe. Wizards bans cards based on getting gameplay information via MTGO, the Pro Tour (most likely), and possibly other sources. It's not hard to say they probably have more information on what cards should be or shouldn't be banned than any small group or gameplay run.
Then this backfires upon itself because it means if they unban something, then they have the supposed information that it's okay. Therefore, no unbanning is insane by your logic. Also, this inherently can't apply to any card that wasn't Modern legal to begin with, as there's no data for it in the format, so you can't defend the banning on that rationale (what data did they have on Stoneforge Mystic in Modern?)
Also, on Birthing Pod, the reasons that were given when looking at the original article are mentioned in the January 19, 2015 article. (Posting it here for easy reference, though)
Over the past year, Birthing Pod decks have won significantly more Grand Prix than any other Modern decks and compose the largest percentage of the field. Each year, new powerful options are printed, most recently Siege Rhino. Over time, this creates a growing gap between the strength of the Pod deck and other creature decks. Pod won five of the twelve Grand Prix over the past year, including winning the last two. The high percentage of the field playing Pod suppresses decks, especially other creature decks, that have an unfavorable matchup. In the interest of supporting a diverse format, Birthing Pod is banned.
The part highlighted in bold is the part of interest.
And how about the part that immediately followed it:
"Pod won five of the twelve Grand Prix over the past year, including winning the last two. The high percentage of the field playing Pod suppresses decks, especially other creature decks, that have an unfavorable matchup. In the interest of supporting a diverse format, Birthing Pod is banned."
The non-bolded part is the actual reason it was banned. The bolded part was just the explanation of how it got to that point. They didn't ban it because of it "always getting better" but because of how good it actually was. Collected Company isn't anywhere close to that.
Really, the only reason I can think of why they haven't banned collected company is that Birthing Pod hits creatures at all CMC, while collected company is limited to 3 and below. The fact that the field isn't 30% Collected Company decks is sort of pointless misdirection because that is just a result, not a reason.
Except the result was the reason. It's not "pointless misdirection."
People, help me: Am I being trolled here? Colt47's arguments are so completely nonsensical I feel like I must be being trolled, particularly because I don't remember him making such weak arguments in the past. I was already suspecting it when he made the claim that Deathrite Shaman is the most likely unban after Bloodbraid Elf but the successive posts are just making me wonder more and more.
I'm not trolling you Seth, though given how you are quoting the posts so no one sees anything else I posted with the original I'm pretty sure people might actually think so. I think the disconnect is that you're looking at this like it's not a hypothetical scenario and that it is a very likely possibility, where as I'm looking at it as a hypothetical situation and thinking exercise.
Case in point my prior section here...
The part highlighted in bold is the part of interest. Really, the only reason I can think of why they haven't banned collected company is that Birthing Pod hits creatures at all CMC, while collected company is limited to 3 and below. The fact that the field isn't 30% Collected Company decks is sort of pointless misdirection because that is just a result, not a reason. It does bring up the question of how they may handle a banning if, for example, they printed something powerful at 3 cmc that pushed Coco over the edge. Do they ban the 3 cmc creature in that case, or would they ban Collected Company itself? My guess is that it all depends on how the people at wizards feel about the two cards. Did the creature go above the acceptable limit like Deathrite Shaman, or is it that they printed a pushed creature and now Collected Company, being the known mistake it was, finally reached a point where it isn't safe to play in modern?
I'm really sorry if I did give the impression I was trolling you. Bans and unbans are a hot topic for some who really love the format so it can be hard to actually take the subject with levity.
Also, about this...
Then this backfires upon itself because it means if they unban something, then they have the supposed information that it's okay. Therefore, no unbanning is insane by your logic. Also, this inherently can't apply to any card that wasn't Modern legal to begin with, as there's no data for it in the format, so you can't defend the banning on that rationale (what data did they have on Stoneforge Mystic in Modern?)
I posted before this point something that is very relevant to what you are talking about and I think you missed it...
Unbanning anything seems like a bad idea unless they are saying they made an unpopular banning and think that undoing it will bring people back into playing the game again. I'm way more on board with Bloodbraid Elf making a potentially triumphant return to modern, though if the past proved anything it could just be yet another Golgari Gravetroll situation.
You could say the point of my post is to point out how ludicrous the idea of unbanning something probably is. They are basically adding new cards to the game every standard set, each one of those cards has the possibility of fitting a role that a banned card may have filled, and undoing a banning on an old card while introducing a new one can be a problem (for example, see Exhibit A: Golgari Grave-troll).
I don't think wizards is prepared at all with enough information to unban something informatively. I'd really like it if they had some kind of set up via MTGO where they have an unglued / unhinged modern where some cards they are pondering to unban get thrown into the field for people to run around with. Have a weekend or week where Bloodbraid Elf is legal, maybe have another weekend where Birthing Pod is legal. If they have the information from those weekly events then they can start to get a better picture on what is safe or not.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
So Top8 looks like:
2 Death and Taxes (1 normal, 1 Eldrazi Taxes)
1 Infect
1 Storm
1 Affinity
1 Merfolk
1 Humans
1 Counters Company
Well...
Thank god i was watching Legacy at the Eternal weekend most of the time.
I know that we can't assume one tournament on its own is indicative of anything, but this looks like the meta is shifting to Aggro and linear Combo. Recently, Big Mana seemed to be on the decline, which would make sense if linear decks are getting more popular.
Assuming this is an actual trend, Aggro looks to be pretty popular, so Midrange decks are going to be getting better. Especially if the linear decks are pressuring Ramp. If Midrange decks do start to do well, we might see more cyclical shifts.
This top 8 is definitely uninteractive, but if it's indicative of the meta, I think we are going to be seeing some interaction soon.
Events like these, although not as significant as a GP or PT show exactly why Wizards is unlikely to ban anything. They want diversity, they got diversity. We even had UW Control and Jeskai Control barely miss on breakers. I know all the "blue sucks" camp will accuse these T8 decks of being non-interactive, but a) that misrepresents at least 2 of those decks and b) Wizards doesn't seem to care. They just want lots of viable decks and that's what they have. Of course, I also think there are secretly 2-3 best decks that everyone should be playing, but we'll see if that is true come PT time.
Overall, this meta we see in events every weekend (one Wizards called "healthy") bodes poorly for anyone who wants big, swingy unbans. Twin ain't happening in this format if Wizards' number 1 goal remains diversity. Only SFM and JTMS seem plausible as unbans in this format; neither slots into existing Tier 1 decks and neither was ever a diversity offender in the past. BBE could cut it too, but it's less likely because BBE (although not as offensive as DRS) still contributed to a historically warped metagame.
Honestly, Collin was lucky that UG Merfolk played horribly multiple times. I'm going to chalk up the merfolk player just being absolutely exhausted, because he definitely snatched away defeat from the jaws of victory.
And had that happened, Storm most likely would have won this whole thing.
I think Storm is very much heading towards a ban in Feb.
If Storm makes it the semi finals in the pro-tour, I think you we can absolutely expect the deck to be banned.
Humans really looked like a flash in the pan. Not a bad deck, but it's undefeated win-streak doesn't indicate the decks strengths. We certainly need to see decks with more removal.
Is it ironic that after the two Death and Taxes decks that I find Infect the third most interactive list on this top 8? Wow...
Feels like the most interactive decks get now is preventing another deck from playing its cards.
Another note, is the SCG Classic any different than the Modern? Noted the two events for Cincinnati in the modern decklist tab.
The modern open is a two day event with a lot of rounds. The classic is just a one day event that tends to have somewhat skewed results as a lot of the players in it are people who didn't make the day 2 cut in the open.
Honestly, Collin was lucky that UG Merfolk played horribly multiple times. I'm going to chalk up the merfolk player just being absolutely exhausted, because he definitely snatched away defeat from the jaws of victory.
And had that happened, Storm most likely would have won this whole thing.
I think Storm is very much heading towards a ban in Feb.
If Storm makes it the semi finals in the pro-tour, I think you we can absolutely expect the deck to be banned.
Humans really looked like a flash in the pan. Not a bad deck, but it's undefeated win-streak doesn't indicate the decks strengths. We certainly need to see decks with more removal.
As I hinted at in my last post, I think there are a few decks that are just better than other decks, even if our dearth of metagame stats doesn't reflect that reality. Storm is one such deck (ETron and GDS are the others). I think the pros will just figure out that Storm is the best linear deck, so if you want to go non-interactive at the PT, Storm will be the deck of choice. This may result in a T4 rule violation and a ban, but again, we have no data to actually know if Storm is CONSISTENTLY winning before T4.
K, I'm getting tired to writing it all out. But seriously?
I think the issue here is that people who make these claims have a self-centered approach to what "interaction" should mean. It is not the opponents' responsibility to build a deck so that we can interact how we feel we should be allowed to. We are only as entitled to as much interaction as we've built into our decks. If the opponent doesn't interact how we want them to, then such is life. They're still interacting.
On that note, I've said this multiple times, and it's disappointing that this basic concept hasn't already been understood as such, but every single competitive deck in existence is built to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way. Sometimes that means using "taxing" effects, or cards that punish linear gameplans (Ensnaring Bridge) or characteristics (Blood Moon/Chalice of the Void) that another deck might have, or just working so fast that the opp doesn't get a chance to interact in a meaningful way.
If we decide to play a linear deck, then we run the risk of losing to a card that punishes us. If we decide to play a deck that gets greedy with the manabase, or with tempo, then we run the risk of losing to cards that punish us. If we decide to play a deck that has no significant disruption or interaction on the first 3-4 turns, then we run the risk of losing to a faster deck.
But to go straight to hyperbole and say that "there is no interaction" is obstinate, at best.
I chalk up a lot of talk about non-interaction towards the sword fighting fallacy. If two people who are good at swordsmanship faced each other down, they aren't aiming for each others swords to have the clang of metal echo through the room: they are aiming at one another and trying to finish the sword match decisively. Directly blocking damages the sword blade so even though it is possible under extreme duress, it's an actively discouraged move in both western and eastern swordsmanship. Instead, deflection is typically used while trying to pull oneself into an advantageous position.
In MtG that kind of philosophy is showing in a lot of high level play. No one is trying to directly answer threats as much as being proactive and trying to deflect threats. If using Path to exile creates an opening, than they use it to create an opening. Thought-knot Seer advances the board and potentially disarms the opponent of a needed utility card or key creature.
The only format that I know of that has "direct blocking" kind of interactions is standard, as that is what sorcery speed removal basically is. Most sorcery speed cards in modern that get played are much more potent and game changing than a Walk the Plank.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
K, I'm getting tired to writing it all out. But seriously?
I think the issue here is that people who make these claims have a self-centered approach to what "interaction" should mean. It is not the opponents' responsibility to build a deck so that we can interact how we feel we should be allowed to. We are only as entitled to as much interaction as we've built into our decks. If the opponent doesn't interact how we want them to, then such is life. They're still interacting.
On that note, I've said this multiple times, and it's disappointing that this basic concept hasn't already been understood as such, but every single competitive deck in existence is built to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way. Sometimes that means using "taxing" effects, or cards that punish linear gameplans (Ensnaring Bridge) or characteristics (Blood Moon/Chalice of the Void) that another deck might have, or just working so fast that the opp doesn't get a chance to interact in a meaningful way.
If we decide to play a linear deck, then we run the risk of losing to a card that punishes us. If we decide to play a deck that gets greedy with the manabase, or with tempo, then we run the risk of losing to cards that punish us. If we decide to play a deck that has no significant disruption or interaction on the first 3-4 turns, then we run the risk of losing to a faster deck.
But to go straight to hyperbole and say that "there is no interaction" is obstinate, at best.
Take out the SB cards and redo the list. I'm sure it will be pretty enlightening. Decks are basically trying to goldfish their opponents in game 1. After SB, it gets more complicated than that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
K, I'm getting tired to writing it all out. But seriously?
I think the issue here is that people who make these claims have a self-centered approach to what "interaction" should mean. It is not the opponents' responsibility to build a deck so that we can interact how we feel we should be allowed to. We are only as entitled to as much interaction as we've built into our decks. If the opponent doesn't interact how we want them to, then such is life. They're still interacting.
On that note, I've said this multiple times, and it's disappointing that this basic concept hasn't already been understood as such, but every single competitive deck in existence is built to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way. Sometimes that means using "taxing" effects, or cards that punish linear gameplans (Ensnaring Bridge) or characteristics (Blood Moon/Chalice of the Void) that another deck might have, or just working so fast that the opp doesn't get a chance to interact in a meaningful way.
If we decide to play a linear deck, then we run the risk of losing to a card that punishes us. If we decide to play a deck that gets greedy with the manabase, or with tempo, then we run the risk of losing to cards that punish us. If we decide to play a deck that has no significant disruption or interaction on the first 3-4 turns, then we run the risk of losing to a faster deck.
But to go straight to hyperbole and say that "there is no interaction" is obstinate, at best.
Take out the SB cards and redo the list. I'm sure it will be pretty enlightening. Decks are basically trying to goldfish their opponents in game 1. After SB, it gets more complicated than that.
Well, when a format has no good "defense", than the best defense is to just worry about making the best move you can to win the game. I'm sure interactive decks would make for a more entertaining modern event for viewers, but from the standpoint of an actual game it doesn't really matter quite as much.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
K, I'm getting tired to writing it all out. But seriously?
You forgot Griselbrand!
Blood Moon - interacts with opposing manabase
Bontu's Last Reckoning - What could be more interactive than good old Wrath of God
Chalice of the Void - Punishes greedy low casting cost decks, great piece of interaction
Collective Brutality - all them together
Engineered Explosives - dealing with problematic permanents; creatures, artifacts and such
Lightning Axe - Straight removal
Pact of Negation - a counterspell, God bless this control shell deck
Pyroclasm - punishes small creature strategies, great interaction
Shattering Spree - you should think twice before going all-in for artifacts
Should we analyze Kiln Fiend and Iron Works next? I am pretty sure that together we will finally find out how stupid and linear all these black green midranges and blue white decks are after all!
K, I'm getting tired to writing it all out. But seriously?
You forgot Griselbrand!
Blood Moon - interacts with opposing manabase
Bontu's Last Reckoning - What could be more interactive than good old Wrath of God
Chalice of the Void - Punishes greedy low casting cost decks, great piece of interaction
Collective Brutality - all them together
Engineered Explosives - dealing with problematic permanents; creatures, artifacts and such
Lightning Axe - Straight removal
Pact of Negation - a counterspell, God bless this control shell deck
Pyroclasm - punishes small creature strategies, great interaction
Shattering Spree - you should think twice before going all-in for artifacts
Should we analyze Kiln Fiend and Iron Works next? I am pretty sure that together we will finally find out how stupid and linear all these black green midranges and blue white decks are after all!
Thank you. Yes, my favorite deck in all formats is the pinnacle of interactive.
@Colt - I know. That's what I used to tell people when I played Griselbrand. My best defense vs. decks like Infect and Affinity was honestly just winning on turn 2 or 3. That's mostly how I beat them, at least before board. Some Affinity games after board actually became pretty long and interactive. I hard cast Griselbrand the most often vs. Affinity, at 3 times.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Well, when a format has no good "defense", than the best defense is to just worry about making the best move you can to win the game. I'm sure interactive decks would make for a more entertaining modern event for viewers, but from the standpoint of an actual game it doesn't really matter quite as much.
Being somewhat facetious, I made the argument to my friend (who loves thoughtseize and doesnt understand playing linear decks) that discard spell into threat into removal spell was no more interactive than your average combo deck. I'm sure I'll be crucified here for that statement but at the end of the day what the hell difference is there in taking someone's card before they cast it, playing a creature that kills in 3 turns and pushing their blocker or remanding your spell, casting baral then drawing to lethal.
These linear decks just play a gameplan that makes some of your cards dead. Thoughtseize decks do the same thing by making you discard your best cards for 1 mana. It's not exactly the deepest form of interaction. It isn't as if we have well timed counter stacks and complicated creature combat. Even these so called fair decks try to play short games with cheap spells and 1 for 1 into top decks. The best interactive magic this format had was twin, jeskai, bgx and grixis and that was on the back of a twin deck that people wanted gone.
It's just interesting that meddling mage and thalia are not "interactive" but thoughtseize is? Like that deck has duress and path stapled to creatures. We will never get fair decks playing long, grindy games without something like force to police the unfair decks so right now the best defence is take your spell, kill you turn four but I'd hardly call that interactive.
From a viewer standpoint though, I'd far rather watch the top 8 we had than a top 8 with Deathshadow in it.
Well, when a format has no good "defense", than the best defense is to just worry about making the best move you can to win the game. I'm sure interactive decks would make for a more entertaining modern event for viewers, but from the standpoint of an actual game it doesn't really matter quite as much.
Being somewhat facetious, I made the argument to my friend (who loves thoughtseize and doesnt understand playing linear decks) that discard spell into threat into removal spell was no more interactive than your average combo deck. I'm sure I'll be crucified here for that statement but at the end of the day what the hell difference is there in taking someone's card before they cast it, playing a creature that kills in 3 turns and pushing their blocker or remanding your spell, casting baral then drawing to lethal.
ok, so:
Thoughtseize - you are using a card from your hand (-1 card), to interact with your opponent's game-plan and disrupt it somehow. 100% interactive, has no other real purpose (besides intentional life loss) and isn't a threat by itself.
let's compare it to lightning bolt, same deal, with the added dimension that bolt can also attack the life total.
let's compare it to Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, ah right so this is where it gets a little tricker. Thalia is played firstly as a threat, with the secondary passive effect of potentially slowing an opponent down. The results of this are variable depending on the matchup, but I wouldn't say Thalia is classed as pure 'interaction' although nobody will refute that she's clearly more interactive than, say, wild nacatl.
meddling mage - this card is much more interactive than thalia. names a specific target, shuts down certain cards/hands/strategies and can be used more surgically. you're looking at a specific aspect and interacting with it directly. However, this is another 'hate-bear' style card which has the capacity to not be interaction at all and instead just beat face, putting it in a different sort of category to Thoughtseize, which is pure interaction.
qasali pridemage - can be a beater, but can also use the card (-1 card) to interact and disrupt an opponent's strategy somehow. This is logically more interactive than both thalia and meddling mage, somewhere near the top rung of how interactive it's possible for a creature to be.
so i suppose the sensible thing is to accept that there's a sliding scale of interactivity, with (for example) Duress at the top 100% pure interaction, and (again just for example) grizzly bears at the absolute bottom 0% zero interactivity.
most cards with any sort of rules text on them will fall somewhere in the middle.
I'd give grim lavamancer a 75% rating, for example, and dark confidant a 5% rating (more than zero because passively it's an enabler of interactivity, while itself not providing it directly). Likewise i'd give tarmogoyf a 2-3% rating because while in most situations it's a vanilla creature, there are the odd instances where the graveyard thing comes into play in a strategically interactive way.
i'd rate shriekmaw at about 80%, more than lavamancer, because about 80% of the time you're just using it for its evoke cost and it is a de facto removal spell rather than a creature.
that make sense? I don't think it's helpful for anyone to just go black/white "this is interactive and that isn't". It's a logical fallacy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
Yes, my favorite deck in all formats is the pinnacle of interactive.
Yes! We are on the same train, I don't know what people are complaining - if Lightning Bolt effects are too hard to deal with then "maybe this is not your format"
The problem with Modern is that the decision-trees are pretty small for a lot of decks which means the skill ceiling is lower and it isn't as interesting to watch as say Legacy or even Standard right now. Watching Jund vs Twin or UWR vs Pod was a lot more entertaining and generally the better player tended to win. That's not really the case in today's modern. Also, there are too many MU's that are disproportionate which also makes for less fun and less entertaining to watch. When a lot of MU's in the format tend to be 70/30 variety, it really diminishes the format. A lot of that has to do with an imbalanced meta where important archetypes like Control are pretty non-existent (as evidenced by meta share, and SB space that other decks in the format use for control which is extremely minimal). It's just not interesting. The Modern PT is going to suck so bad. Keep on parroting "diversity" uber alles though instead of quality of matches and significance of skill in-game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I would say Death and Taxes are the most interactive. They are running Land destruction, hand attack, and removal.
I concur.
Its a lets see how fast I can put together my win-con top 8.
I also see 3 decks leaning heavily on Aether Vial as well.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Also, aggro decks hadn't seen much success lately besides affinity and it is ok to see that they can still do well, even if they come in new versions (humans).
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
It's not. I think he was just mentioning it as a side observation. I noticed it as well. Quite frequently, you notice market fluctuations after situations like this - for example Aether Vial going up by $5 or so or all foil Green new Merfolk sold out everywhere. It's just an interesting observation, which I nearly posted myself in the Prices thread.
*It's also interesting to see a lot of Aggro doing well. If this were to become a strong trend (which I don't think it would), then possibly people's view of unbanning Punishing Fire could be a real possibility. I doubt it will happen though. I predict that some interactive decks will rebound next week to prey on these decks.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)And how about the part that immediately followed it:
"Pod won five of the twelve Grand Prix over the past year, including winning the last two. The high percentage of the field playing Pod suppresses decks, especially other creature decks, that have an unfavorable matchup. In the interest of supporting a diverse format, Birthing Pod is banned."
The non-bolded part is the actual reason it was banned. The bolded part was just the explanation of how it got to that point. They didn't ban it because of it "always getting better" but because of how good it actually was. Collected Company isn't anywhere close to that.
Except the result was the reason. It's not "pointless misdirection."
People, help me: Am I being trolled here? Colt47's arguments are so completely nonsensical I feel like I must be being trolled, particularly because I don't remember him making such weak arguments in the past. I was already suspecting it when he made the claim that Deathrite Shaman is the most likely unban after Bloodbraid Elf but the successive posts are just making me wonder more and more.
That, or some sort of miracles-like deck was viable
Case in point my prior section here...
I'm really sorry if I did give the impression I was trolling you. Bans and unbans are a hot topic for some who really love the format so it can be hard to actually take the subject with levity.
Also, about this...
I posted before this point something that is very relevant to what you are talking about and I think you missed it...
I don't think wizards is prepared at all with enough information to unban something informatively. I'd really like it if they had some kind of set up via MTGO where they have an unglued / unhinged modern where some cards they are pondering to unban get thrown into the field for people to run around with. Have a weekend or week where Bloodbraid Elf is legal, maybe have another weekend where Birthing Pod is legal. If they have the information from those weekly events then they can start to get a better picture on what is safe or not.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I know that we can't assume one tournament on its own is indicative of anything, but this looks like the meta is shifting to Aggro and linear Combo. Recently, Big Mana seemed to be on the decline, which would make sense if linear decks are getting more popular.
Assuming this is an actual trend, Aggro looks to be pretty popular, so Midrange decks are going to be getting better. Especially if the linear decks are pressuring Ramp. If Midrange decks do start to do well, we might see more cyclical shifts.
This top 8 is definitely uninteractive, but if it's indicative of the meta, I think we are going to be seeing some interaction soon.
Interested in RUG (Temur) Delver in Modern? Find gameplay with live commentary at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8UcKe8jVh1e2N4CHbd3fhg
Overall, this meta we see in events every weekend (one Wizards called "healthy") bodes poorly for anyone who wants big, swingy unbans. Twin ain't happening in this format if Wizards' number 1 goal remains diversity. Only SFM and JTMS seem plausible as unbans in this format; neither slots into existing Tier 1 decks and neither was ever a diversity offender in the past. BBE could cut it too, but it's less likely because BBE (although not as offensive as DRS) still contributed to a historically warped metagame.
And had that happened, Storm most likely would have won this whole thing.
I think Storm is very much heading towards a ban in Feb.
If Storm makes it the semi finals in the pro-tour, I think you we can absolutely expect the deck to be banned.
Humans really looked like a flash in the pan. Not a bad deck, but it's undefeated win-streak doesn't indicate the decks strengths. We certainly need to see decks with more removal.
The top 8 is a diverse lists, but none of those decks interact. They're all linear decks with a little disruption.
Feels like the most interactive decks get now is preventing another deck from playing its cards.
Another note, is the SCG Classic any different than the Modern? Noted the two events for Cincinnati in the modern decklist tab.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sigpic.
Spider-Man Mafia 3 (Off-Site: NGA)
Metroid Mafia (Off-Site: Mafia Universe)
The modern open is a two day event with a lot of rounds. The classic is just a one day event that tends to have somewhat skewed results as a lot of the players in it are people who didn't make the day 2 cut in the open.
As I hinted at in my last post, I think there are a few decks that are just better than other decks, even if our dearth of metagame stats doesn't reflect that reality. Storm is one such deck (ETron and GDS are the others). I think the pros will just figure out that Storm is the best linear deck, so if you want to go non-interactive at the PT, Storm will be the deck of choice. This may result in a T4 rule violation and a ban, but again, we have no data to actually know if Storm is CONSISTENTLY winning before T4.
I still think Etron is a top 3 deck despite some poor showings lately. This if the first time I can remember that no Shadow deck made it.
I believe Storm is a very, very good deck now.
The meta will definitely shift when the top players in the world set their sights on what they truly feel is the best.
In Humans:
Kitesail Freebooter (interacts with cards in opponent's hand),
Meddling Mage (interacting with the opponent in the sense that it "Surgicals" all copies of that card unless the opponent can interact)
Reflector Mage (interacts with the opponent's creatures)
Thalia, Heretic Cathar (interacts with the opponent's ability to keep tempo)
Thalia, Guardian of Thraben (same as above)
Ethersworn Canonist (interacts with opp's tempo, limiting the opp's interaction)
Fiend Hunter (interacts with the opp's creatures)
Izzet Staticaster (see above)
Vithian Renegades (interacts with the opp's artifacts)
Anafenze, the Foremost (interacts with the opp's ability to utilize the graveyard)
In Merfolk:
Harbinger of the Tides (interacts with the opp's creatures)
Merrow Reejerey (can tap down opp's permanents)
Kira, Great Glass-Spinner (pre-emptive counter to targeted removal)
Kopala, Warden of Waves (see above)
Spreading Seas (interacts by disrupting opp's manabase, neutralizes blockers)
Dismember (targeted removal probably counts as interaction)
Grafdigger's Cage (pre-emptive counter to Company)
Ceremonious Rejection/Dispel/Spell Pierce (are counters no longer interaction?)
In Counters Company:
Scavenging Ooze (graveyard interaction)
Tidehollow Sculler (hand interaction)
Aven Mindcensor (disrupts the opp's ability to fetch)
Qasali Pridemage (artifact/enchantment interaction)
Selfless Spirit (removal-counter with legs)
Path to Exile (again, is removal no longer interaction?)
Pharika, God of Affliction (more graveyard interaction)
In Infect:
Vines of Vastwood (counters removal)
Twisted Image (removal/creature interaction)
Dismember (this card again)
Blossoming Defense (another card that counters removal)
Apostle's Blessing (see above)
Grafdigger's Cage (pre-emptive answer to cards in an opp's library)
Nature's Claim (artifact/enchantment removal)
Hurkyll's Recall (artifact tempo interaction)
Spell Pierce (this card again)
In Affinity:
Galvanic Blast (interacts with creatures and life totals)
Ghirapur AEther Grid (see above)
Ancient Grudge (artifact removal)
Dispatch (creature removal)
Spell Pierce (again)
Thoughtseize (hand interaction)
In BW Eldrazi Taxes:
Tidehollow Sculler (hand interaction)
Eldrazi Displacer (creature interaction, can also be used on the opp's creatures, or their own for more interaction)
Flickerwisp (definitely interacts with the battlefield)
Thought-Knot Seer (hand interaction)
Wasteland Strangler (removal)
Both Thalias again....
Blessed Alliance (removal)
Path to Exile (removal)
K, I'm getting tired to writing it all out. But seriously?
I think the issue here is that people who make these claims have a self-centered approach to what "interaction" should mean. It is not the opponents' responsibility to build a deck so that we can interact how we feel we should be allowed to. We are only as entitled to as much interaction as we've built into our decks. If the opponent doesn't interact how we want them to, then such is life. They're still interacting.
On that note, I've said this multiple times, and it's disappointing that this basic concept hasn't already been understood as such, but every single competitive deck in existence is built to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way. Sometimes that means using "taxing" effects, or cards that punish linear gameplans (Ensnaring Bridge) or characteristics (Blood Moon/Chalice of the Void) that another deck might have, or just working so fast that the opp doesn't get a chance to interact in a meaningful way.
If we decide to play a linear deck, then we run the risk of losing to a card that punishes us. If we decide to play a deck that gets greedy with the manabase, or with tempo, then we run the risk of losing to cards that punish us. If we decide to play a deck that has no significant disruption or interaction on the first 3-4 turns, then we run the risk of losing to a faster deck.
But to go straight to hyperbole and say that "there is no interaction" is obstinate, at best.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
In MtG that kind of philosophy is showing in a lot of high level play. No one is trying to directly answer threats as much as being proactive and trying to deflect threats. If using Path to exile creates an opening, than they use it to create an opening. Thought-knot Seer advances the board and potentially disarms the opponent of a needed utility card or key creature.
The only format that I know of that has "direct blocking" kind of interactions is standard, as that is what sorcery speed removal basically is. Most sorcery speed cards in modern that get played are much more potent and game changing than a Walk the Plank.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Take out the SB cards and redo the list. I'm sure it will be pretty enlightening. Decks are basically trying to goldfish their opponents in game 1. After SB, it gets more complicated than that.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Well, when a format has no good "defense", than the best defense is to just worry about making the best move you can to win the game. I'm sure interactive decks would make for a more entertaining modern event for viewers, but from the standpoint of an actual game it doesn't really matter quite as much.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
You forgot Griselbrand!
Blood Moon - interacts with opposing manabase
Bontu's Last Reckoning - What could be more interactive than good old Wrath of God
Chalice of the Void - Punishes greedy low casting cost decks, great piece of interaction
Collective Brutality - all them together
Engineered Explosives - dealing with problematic permanents; creatures, artifacts and such
Lightning Axe - Straight removal
Pact of Negation - a counterspell, God bless this control shell deck
Pyroclasm - punishes small creature strategies, great interaction
Shattering Spree - you should think twice before going all-in for artifacts
Should we analyze Kiln Fiend and Iron Works next? I am pretty sure that together we will finally find out how stupid and linear all these black green midranges and blue white decks are after all!
Modern
WUBRG
Thank you. Yes, my favorite deck in all formats is the pinnacle of interactive.
@Colt - I know. That's what I used to tell people when I played Griselbrand. My best defense vs. decks like Infect and Affinity was honestly just winning on turn 2 or 3. That's mostly how I beat them, at least before board. Some Affinity games after board actually became pretty long and interactive. I hard cast Griselbrand the most often vs. Affinity, at 3 times.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Being somewhat facetious, I made the argument to my friend (who loves thoughtseize and doesnt understand playing linear decks) that discard spell into threat into removal spell was no more interactive than your average combo deck. I'm sure I'll be crucified here for that statement but at the end of the day what the hell difference is there in taking someone's card before they cast it, playing a creature that kills in 3 turns and pushing their blocker or remanding your spell, casting baral then drawing to lethal.
These linear decks just play a gameplan that makes some of your cards dead. Thoughtseize decks do the same thing by making you discard your best cards for 1 mana. It's not exactly the deepest form of interaction. It isn't as if we have well timed counter stacks and complicated creature combat. Even these so called fair decks try to play short games with cheap spells and 1 for 1 into top decks. The best interactive magic this format had was twin, jeskai, bgx and grixis and that was on the back of a twin deck that people wanted gone.
It's just interesting that meddling mage and thalia are not "interactive" but thoughtseize is? Like that deck has duress and path stapled to creatures. We will never get fair decks playing long, grindy games without something like force to police the unfair decks so right now the best defence is take your spell, kill you turn four but I'd hardly call that interactive.
From a viewer standpoint though, I'd far rather watch the top 8 we had than a top 8 with Deathshadow in it.
ok, so:
Thoughtseize - you are using a card from your hand (-1 card), to interact with your opponent's game-plan and disrupt it somehow. 100% interactive, has no other real purpose (besides intentional life loss) and isn't a threat by itself.
let's compare it to lightning bolt, same deal, with the added dimension that bolt can also attack the life total.
let's compare it to Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, ah right so this is where it gets a little tricker. Thalia is played firstly as a threat, with the secondary passive effect of potentially slowing an opponent down. The results of this are variable depending on the matchup, but I wouldn't say Thalia is classed as pure 'interaction' although nobody will refute that she's clearly more interactive than, say, wild nacatl.
meddling mage - this card is much more interactive than thalia. names a specific target, shuts down certain cards/hands/strategies and can be used more surgically. you're looking at a specific aspect and interacting with it directly. However, this is another 'hate-bear' style card which has the capacity to not be interaction at all and instead just beat face, putting it in a different sort of category to Thoughtseize, which is pure interaction.
qasali pridemage - can be a beater, but can also use the card (-1 card) to interact and disrupt an opponent's strategy somehow. This is logically more interactive than both thalia and meddling mage, somewhere near the top rung of how interactive it's possible for a creature to be.
so i suppose the sensible thing is to accept that there's a sliding scale of interactivity, with (for example) Duress at the top 100% pure interaction, and (again just for example) grizzly bears at the absolute bottom 0% zero interactivity.
most cards with any sort of rules text on them will fall somewhere in the middle.
I'd give grim lavamancer a 75% rating, for example, and dark confidant a 5% rating (more than zero because passively it's an enabler of interactivity, while itself not providing it directly). Likewise i'd give tarmogoyf a 2-3% rating because while in most situations it's a vanilla creature, there are the odd instances where the graveyard thing comes into play in a strategically interactive way.
i'd rate shriekmaw at about 80%, more than lavamancer, because about 80% of the time you're just using it for its evoke cost and it is a de facto removal spell rather than a creature.
that make sense? I don't think it's helpful for anyone to just go black/white "this is interactive and that isn't". It's a logical fallacy.
Yes! We are on the same train, I don't know what people are complaining - if Lightning Bolt effects are too hard to deal with then "maybe this is not your format"
Modern
WUBRG