Agreed. I don't play Legacy, but if SCG switched to Modern, Legacy would die. Modern is doing just fine. It is a good thing that they are supporting Legacy.
Um, no. It is just as diverse as Legacy and is much less expensive. Yes, there are 9-10 cards that I don't think should be on the banned list, but the format is functioning just fine other than that.
Less expensive, yes, but as diverse? Not even close. Legacy had a home-brew deck win a tournament 2 weeks ago, when by contrast, the modern GP on the weekend was 50% GBx in the top 8. I think people are prepared to accept modern as it is due to its lower entry cost, but let's not gloss over its problems. Really there are only a handful of tier 1 decks, and the top 16 almost always consists of the same 4 or 5 decks. That's not even mentioning the lack of good control and tempo options, the over-prevalence of midrange as an archetype, or -- as you mentioned -- the banned list.
I don't want to make this yet another legacy vs modern pissing contest, because we've had enough of those, but what you stated is demonstrably false. Legacy has its own problems, but diversity isn't one of them.
SCG didn't jump on the bandwagon because if they dump legacy dual land prices plummet/look at how much dual lands they have in stock. $50 underground sea's for NM copies again like it was prior to their support? Force of will back to $25 a pop? Yeah SCG wants that so badly with their large legacy inventory. They also said they like legacy more as a format, and I HAVE to agree. Legacy has a much better cardpool than modern and an infinitely better banlist.
I don't see how this is a factor, if they were moving to Modern they could easily sell their existing stock at the current prices while not picking up more cards. If they wanted to move fast they could just buylist to other stores.
It's simply just a lower priority than Legacy. This is really Wizards fault more than anything, they don't promote the format enough to get people interested. How many Modern articles are there from pros compared to Legacy and Standard?
Less expensive, yes, but as diverse? Not even close. Legacy had a home-brew deck win a tournament 2 weeks ago, when by contrast, the modern GP on the weekend was 50% GBx in the top 8. I think people are prepared to accept modern as it is due to its lower entry cost, but let's not gloss over its problems. Really there are only a handful of tier 1 decks, and the top 16 almost always consists of the same 4 or 5 decks. That's not even mentioning the lack of good control and tempo options, the over-prevalence of midrange as an archetype, or -- as you mentioned -- the banned list.
Only two GPs have had a significant showing of BGx and the top16 show other recent decks are gaining in popularity. Furthermore, I'd say Modern is fairly diverse for a format that is less than three years old, give it time to evolve.
I don't see how this is a factor, if they were moving to Modern they could easily sell their existing stock at the current prices while not picking up more cards. If they wanted to move fast they could just buylist to other stores.
It's simply just a lower priority than Legacy. This is really Wizards fault more than anything, they don't promote the format enough to get people interested. How many Modern articles are there from pros compared to Legacy and Standard?
I kinda agree with you on this, but allow me to play Devil's Advocate. We now have Modern as a sanctioned FNM format, Modern Grand Prix and Pro Tours, a Modern Masters (although its "success" can be debated), and coming soon a Modern Event Deck. I would say it is being promoted somewhat.
Btw, if you are interested in discussing more on this topic, check out my thread "Wizards Needs to Support Modern". Surprisingly, it already has reached 13 pages. http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=566864
SCG actually tried to kill modern by causing the zendikar fetch lands to go up 500% in price, maybe that was their plan all along?
Some people would say that is statement is pure speculation with no facts to support it. I say I would not be surprised if this actually turns out to be true lol.
I agree with the op. Would it really kill SCG to at least switch their sundays between Legacy one weekend and Modern the next? I think there is a ton of demand right now to see Modern play in a tournament setting.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard:
N/A
Modern:
Grishoalbrand / Grixis Death's Shadow / Jeskai Control / UW Control
Goodness gracious me does the legacy chauvs always have to go around telling people ho bad modern is. Modern is not any worst than legacy it is just different. Different does not equal bad.
There are a lot of players who have not been around forever so an extended standard with a bump in power serves a great purpose for them. Also there are a ton of really nice and flavourful cards that are played in modern and not in legacy.
You get to play with different cards you enjoy so all in all not a bad format.
Man the first time you start reanimating Mulldrifters with Unburial rites you will understand why people like it.
...
I think there is a ton of demand right now to see Modern play in a tournament setting.
There really just isnt.
WOTC is already desperately ramming it down everyone's throat to try to make it popular. If there's a demand to see Modern, they've fulfilled it in spades.
They tried it for about 6 months last year - viewing figures were down, attendance was down and while I can't confirm it 100%, I'd say that based on the fact that fewer people came, revenue was down compared to legacy because people can get modern fixes easier than legacy fixes. There's modern as FNM, modern readily available on MTGO, GP's, a PT each year and an entire PTQ season of it.
By comparison, there are no legacy PT, PTQs or FNMs, legacy events rarely fire on MTGO and when they do, its like 10 people, there are only 2 legacy GP's a year. So when it comes to the opens, the legacy players will travel a lot further than the modern players, because its basically the only legacy event that's both a decent size and held regularly.
There has never been a modern open, will the legacy fanbase please stop saying they've failed. Realistically modern would probably get more people per tournament, but the loss in inventory from SCG would be to high to make that feasible. But please let's not actually think legacy is played by more people than modern. It merely gets a lot more support from SCG and SCg supports it better than Wotc does with modern. There's a reason that on Magic Online where both formats are equally supported modern's player numbers are over 2x legacys.
Nope they refused to do them stating that modern has support from Wotc, and so they just won't do any. I understand the logic. It's funny right now on Magic online there's a modern daily event and a legacy daily even 1 hour from each other on a Saturday. Modern has 96 players in it and legacy has 29.
Less expensive, yes, but as diverse? Not even close. Legacy had a home-brew deck win a tournament 2 weeks ago, when by contrast, the modern GP on the weekend was 50% GBx in the top 8. I think people are prepared to accept modern as it is due to its lower entry cost, but let's not gloss over its problems. Really there are only a handful of tier 1 decks, and the top 16 almost always consists of the same 4 or 5 decks. That's not even mentioning the lack of good control and tempo options, the over-prevalence of midrange as an archetype, or -- as you mentioned -- the banned list.
I don't want to make this yet another legacy vs modern pissing contest, because we've had enough of those, but what you stated is demonstrably false. Legacy has its own problems, but diversity isn't one of them.
Legacy might have more deck diversity, but it has less archetype diversity. While both formats have a lot of combo and midrange, Legacy has less aggro, less ramp, and less control.
Legacy, with considerably less reprints, is a safer bet to continue purchasing and holding stock for sale of.
Starcity's primary goal during these opens is card sales. These sales generate a lot of profit.
They obviously would make more money when someone needs that last 'cheap' legacy staple than someone who needs that last 'cheap' modern staple.
Not to mention the considerably large amount of legacy stock that SCG has. While people will continue to purchase modern staples anywhere, at the many events SCG has booths at, online, etc people are more likely to purchase legacy staples at a legacy event.
Not to mention that you can walk into just about any store with a decent case and find a good amount of reasonably priced modern staples, but it's harder to find cheaply priced legacy staples, especially in areas with smaller legacy crowds. Sure, most stores have some, but I can only name 3-4 stores near me that I would be confident that would have any random card I wanted.
Why is doesn't SCG support Modern, at least on the Open Series level? Because they would lose money if they did. Legacy is making SCG more money than Modern does because SCG created the demand where previously no demand existed. The price of duals, Force of Wills' and other old cards can mostly be laid at SCG's feet. The created a tournament circuit that had such ridiculous prize payout, that predated the open series mind you, that people invested into the format, which in turn, drove the overall price of the cards up as the already small supply dwindled. This also allowed SCG to market a massive amount of inventory which was no longer useless. It now had a massive value, and people would buy it, at what appeared to be nearly any cost. While some of the increased cost can be attributed to age, most of it cannot.
Modern cards are still being actively printed and marketed by Wizards themselves. SCG did not need to create the demand, Wizards did that for them. Therefore it is more profitable for SCG to continue to market a format which makes an otherwise useless subset of Magic cards valuable.
If and when the demand of Modern outstrips Legacy to such a degree that SCG could bear the cost of no longer being able to sell Legacy cards efficiently, only then will Modern events be truly supported by SCG at the Open Series level. However this will never happen.
Legacy might have more deck diversity, but it has less archetype diversity. While both formats have a lot of combo and midrange, Legacy has less aggro, less ramp, and less control.
I disagree. Legacy does have less aggro (since Zoo died out), less control (although UW Miracles is probably the purest control deck in any format) and less ramp (12 post, I guess) but it features archetypes that have next to zero representation in Modern thanks to Modern design policies. Legacy has more tempo, more fast combo, more prison, and more "wacky non-Magic" like Dredge and Belcher. I don't disagree that Modern has archetype diversity (even if I'd argue that midrange is overrepresented), but Legacy just has more IMO.
And the status quo of Wizards supporting Modern and Starcitygames supporting Legacy is fine in my book. All parties benefit, a good number of events are held for both, and everyone's happy. While I do wish they had more Legacy GPs, I'm happy with the way things are.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Special thanks to Hakai Studios and SushiOtter for the sig!
Legacy:UR Sneak and Show IUBG Team America IX Metalworker MUD Modern:UBR Blue Jund IWBX Eldrazi Processors IX Affinity IWRG Nacatl Burn IGR Tron IUBR Grishoalbrand
I disagree. Legacy does have less aggro (since Zoo died out), less control (although UW Miracles is probably the purest control deck in any format) and less ramp (12 post, I guess) but it features archetypes that have next to zero representation in Modern thanks to Modern design policies. Legacy has more tempo, more fast combo, more prison, and more "wacky non-Magic" like Dredge and Belcher. I don't disagree that Modern has archetype diversity (even if I'd argue that midrange is overrepresented), but Legacy just has more IMO.
And the status quo of Wizards supporting Modern and Starcitygames supporting Legacy is fine in my book. All parties benefit, a good number of events are held for both, and everyone's happy. While I do wish they had more Legacy GPs, I'm happy with the way things are.
I am classifying Prison as Control (it is trying to control the game), Fast Combo as Combo (they are the same thing, it is just one is faster), and Dredge and Belcher as combo (they are built around comboing with a few certain cards). If one views Magic as having 6 archetypes (Control, Combo, Aggro, Tempo, Midrange, and Ramp), Modern has the same amount of Combo and Midrange as Legacy while having more Ramp, Control, and Aggro. The only thing that Legacy has that Modern doesn't in archetypes is Tempo.
There's probably more UW Miracles in Legacy than UWR control in Modern. Also, Stoneblade (not the tempo version) kind of counts as control.
If you add together WUR Control, Cruel Control, Mono-U Tron, Esper Zur, and 8-Rack in Modern, I'm pretty sure that that is more of the metagame than UW Miracles, Pox, Enchantress, MUD, and the Control version of Stoneblade. I could be wrong though.
Again, false. When I made my list, I only took multiple lists from an archetype if they were substantially different - ie LED vs LEDless dredge, the different Nic Fit splashes. If I cut the variant lists, I'm left with 65 archetypes. A lot of the problem actually comes from SCG's own coverage. They tend to favour their grinders, who generally favour a given deck, only show the top few tables and don't show the first few rounds. So the rounds where the interesting decks that go 5-2 will be paired against the grinders aren't shown, meaning that sometimes you can get a false impression of the meta, making it seem more stagnant than it is. For instance, Enchantress isn't that uncommon a deck to see, but it got 0 coverage in 2013 and only 2 or 3 in 2012. Its problem is that it'll rarely be in the top 16, but will often place well at 5-2 or 5-1-1.
By archetype diversity, I meant Aggro, Control, Combo, Tempo, Midrange, and Ramp. Modern has more ramp than Legacy (Legacy has only 12-Post while Modern has the much more successful RG Tron and Scapeshift). It also has more aggro (Modern has Affinity, Merfolk, Burn, Soul Sisters, Bogles, Gruul Zoo, 5C Domain, and possibly Hatebears, depending on your definition of aggro. Legacy has only Merfolk, Goblins, Affinity, and Burn, all of which are less successful than the aggro decks in Modern). I'd also say that Modern has slightly more control, though that depends on what you consider control. I'd say that having more different archetypes be common is more archetype diversity.
According to Mtgtop8 Stoneblade and Miracles are 11% and 5% of Legacy metagame, while Pox and BUG Control are both 2%. That's 20% total. In Modern UW control, mono black control and other control are 7% in total.
I wouldn't agree with MTG Top 8, as it doesn't count Tempo, Midrange, or Ramp as separate archetypes. I'm pretty sure that it is counting the less controlling versions of Stoneblade as control. And also, you are discounting 4C Gifts, Mono-U Tron, and UW Tron in Modern's section.
Well, on the last BBD vs CVM video there were a few people requesting that they play some Modern decks in the future in the comments. Someone deleted them all. Guess that means SCG has no interest in Modern.
And you discount Lands, Death and Taxes from Legacy control decks.
Also, you try to fit all decks in a few slots. Legacy decks are moch more difficult to fit into them.
Also, if you're talking about Ramp in Legacy, you should remember Nic Fit as it does not fit any other archetype of the ones you are accepting.
And that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are many more examples of diversity in Legacy.
Don't forget this: when we talk about combo in modern, we're talking about three variations of creature-based combo (Twin and two kinds of Pod) and some outliers (a bit of Griselcannon, some Living End, a tiny amount of Storm). When we talk about combo in Legacy... At least two Show and Tell combo decks that win differently, several different variations of Storm (from Belcher to DDFT), at least three completely different Dredge decks (regular, manaless and oops all spells), Painter Combo, Enchantress, Elves, Tin Fins, Reanimator... I think you should get what I'm trying to say here. And combo isn't the only one.
I forgot about Lands, thanks.
Nic Fit+12 Post is still less of the Legacy meta than RG Tron+Scapeshift+Amulet of Vigor+Monogreen Devotion.
You are right about there being more different kinds of combo decks (though Enchantress really doesn't count as a combo deck last time I checked). But that doesn't change the fact that there are almost no aggro decks or ramp decks in Legacy. If more archetypes are playable in Modern than in Legacy, Modern has more archetype diversity than Legacy.
They have to support standard, because more people play it than any other format, so any modern tournaments would take the place of their legacy opens.
They need to continue to support Legacy because without them supporting it there would not he nearly as many playing Legacy, and they make a lot of money from legacy cards. The money the make from modern would be the same anyways, because modern is supported by WotC, so SCG will always have the modern base to sell cards to. They want to make sure there is also a Legacy base to continue to sell legacy cards to.
By archetype diversity, I meant Aggro, Control, Combo, Tempo, Midrange, and Ramp. Modern has more ramp than Legacy (Legacy has only 12-Post while Modern has the much more successful RG Tron and Scapeshift). It also has more aggro (Modern has Affinity, Merfolk, Burn, Soul Sisters, Bogles, Gruul Zoo, 5C Domain, and possibly Hatebears, depending on your definition of aggro. Legacy has only Merfolk, Goblins, Affinity, and Burn, all of which are less successful than the aggro decks in Modern). I'd also say that Modern has slightly more control, though that depends on what you consider control. I'd say that having more different archetypes be common is more archetype diversity.
Why oh why do we have to keep doing this?
MUD is also a ramp deck, and stompy/painter have ramp elements. Zoo and Affinity are both good decks in legacy, and burn is always strong. Hatebears and Merfolk were originally ported from legacy to modern, and cut their teeth in legacy. Moreover, merfolk's brothers, goblins and elves -- an aggro-combo deck and an aggro-prison deck -- haven't been successfully ported across. You also have the gate, which -- while not top tier -- is probably about as strong relative to legacy's tier 1 as a number of the decks you listed are relative to modern's tier 1.
For control, you have miracles, some versions of esperblade, and BUG planeswalker (pernicious deed) control as the big ones. There's also pox and lands (including the recent jund list that won 2 weeks ago), though you're right, control has been suffering a lot compared to the other archetypes. Pushing to the far end of the control spectrum though, legacy has far more prison than modern, including decks like enchantress, scepter chant, stasis, and a number of decks that include prison elements like stompy. The big difference is that control in legacy actually has a shot at winning, whereas in modern, if you play control, you're relegated to tier 1.5 at best. I would be embarrassed to take gifts to a comp (and I played gifts, so I know how strong it is relative to the decks that matter), whereas BUG control is a niche deck that is capable of ripping apart top tier decks (and I say this as a delver player who's learned a healthy respect for capable control pilots).
That said, you're correct that control is hurting more than other archetypes in legacy, largely because the creatures are so strong nowadays. Not only is it difficult to keep a board clear and maintain your card advantage, but you can convert a control deck to a tempo deck pretty easily by replacing a few spells and changing your win condition, and your deck will probably be far more consistent for it. You get the best of both worlds in that you can still control the game, and you can generate the kind of pressure that even a few years ago would have been unheard of. This will only get more and more pronounced as creatures continue to get pushed, and tempo pulls ever further away from the pack. In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only tempo, though I'll take that over only midrange any day of the week.
Also, aside from affinity, none of the decks you listed are particularly good decks in modern. Merfolk gets one top 16, and suddenly its a good modern deck? Modern players have incredibly low standards for what they consider top tier (and I've seen numerous players in the last 3-4 months or so calling merfolk tier 1), because pre-emptively hyping the strength of non-tier 1 decks makes the format seem more diverse than it actually is. And again, you can't refute the results of the latest tournament. 4 GBx decks in the top 8 is a joke for any format, and is most certainly not the hallmark of a healthy and diverse metagame. I suppose it's just variance, just like the last time it happened.
As for what modern could be, I really, really want it to be a format that I enjoy. Honestly, I do. But until they start printing good counterspells and non-creature cards again, I'll play the format that most feels like magic to me, and currently, that's legacy. I'm tired of coming to the realisation that every new brew I make in modern is better as a midrange deck, or having to deal with cards that could enable strategies I enjoy being on the banlist, while DRS happily warps the format. Playing modern to me is like playing a strategy game where the best strategy has already been chosen for you, by virtue of a banlist that selects against specific archetypes, rather than broken cards. Yeah, real diverse.
MUD is also a ramp deck, and stompy/painter have ramp elements.
Stompy and Painter are aggro and combo respectively. They don't play as much ramp as an actual ramp deck. And even if you count them as combo, I'd say that Amulet of Vigor, Monogreen Devotion, UW Tron, Mono-U Tron, RG Tron, and Scapeshift put together are doing better than Nic Fit, 12-Post, Mud, Stompy, and Painterstone put together.
Zoo and Affinity are both good decks in legacy, and burn is always strong. Hatebears and Merfolk were originally ported from legacy to modern, and cut their teeth in legacy. Moreover, merfolk's brothers, goblins and elves -- an aggro-combo deck and an aggro-prison deck -- haven't been successfully ported across. You also have the gate, which -- while not top tier -- is probably about as strong relative to legacy's tier 1 as a number of the decks you listed are relative to modern's tier 1.
Last I checked, Zoo was dead. Also, elves is primarily combo, not aggro. And none of the decks that you listed are Tier 1. Affinity is Tier 1 in Modern. Merfolk is Tier 1.5. Burn and Soul Sisters are both Tier 2. Modern has better placing aggro decks than Legacy and has more aggro decks overall.
For control, you have miracles, some versions of esperblade, and BUG planeswalker (pernicious deed) control as the big ones. There's also pox and lands (including the recent jund list that won 2 weeks ago), though you're right, control has been suffering a lot compared to the other archetypes. Pushing to the far end of the control spectrum though, legacy has far more prison than modern, including decks like enchantress, scepter chant, stasis, and a number of decks that include prison elements like stompy. The big difference is that control in legacy actually has a shot at winning, whereas in modern, if you play control, you're relegated to tier 1.5 at best. I would be embarrassed to take gifts to a comp (and I played gifts, so I know how strong it is relative to the decks that matter), whereas BUG control is a niche deck that is capable of ripping apart top tier decks (and I say this as a delver player who's learned a healthy respect for capable control pilots).
And how many of those prison decks are Tier 1? Last time I checked, the answer is 0. Also, WUR Control is Tier 1 in Modern. But I will concede the point on control.
That said, you're correct that control is hurting more than other archetypes in legacy, largely because the creatures are so strong nowadays. Not only is it difficult to keep a board clear and maintain your card advantage, but you can convert a control deck to a tempo deck pretty easily by replacing a few spells and changing your win condition, and your deck will probably be far more consistent for it. You get the best of both worlds in that you can still control the game, and you can generate the kind of pressure that even a few years ago would have been unheard of. This will only get more and more pronounced as creatures continue to get pushed, and tempo pulls ever further away from the pack. In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only tempo, though I'll take that over only midrange any day of the week.
Modern isn't only Midrange. It has a lot of Combo as well as ramp and aggro. And while Legacy control decks don't get better easily, Modern has a low enough power-level that it can use control cards printed in newer sets (see Sphinx's Revelation).
Also, aside from affinity, none of the decks you listed are particularly good decks in modern. Merfolk gets one top 16, and suddenly its a good modern deck? Modern players have incredibly low standards for what they consider top tier (and I've seen numerous players in the last 3-4 months or so calling merfolk tier 1), because pre-emptively hyping the strength of non-tier 1 decks makes the format seem more diverse than it actually is. And again, you can't refute the results of the latest tournament. 4 GBx decks in the top 8 is a joke for any format, and is most certainly not the hallmark of a healthy and diverse metagame. I suppose it's just variance, just like the last time it happened.
Actually, I'm going off of the MTGO meta. Legacy has so many more paper events than Modern, that the two really can't be compared. But if one compares the Modern MTGO meta with the Legacy paper meta, you get a more complete picture. Merfolk is Tier 1 on MTGO. Burn and Soul Sisters are both strong there. And yes, 4 BGx decks is uncommon. It is ne of the strongest decks in Modern, but it doesn't usually happem
As for what modern could be, I really, really want it to be a format that I enjoy. Honestly, I do. But until they start printing good counterspells and non-creature cards again, I'll play the format that most feels like magic to me, and currently, that's legacy. I'm tired of coming to the realisation that every new brew I make in modern is better as a midrange deck, or having to deal with cards that could enable strategies I enjoy being on the banlist, while DRS happily warps the format. Playing modern to me is like playing a strategy game where the best strategy has already been chosen for you, by virtue of a banlist that selects against specific archetypes, rather than broken cards. Yeah, real diverse.
I understand your point here. I would prefer it if Modern was less creature focused. But I prefer it to Legacy, the format with free counterspells, free land destruction, easy fast mana, creatures with protection from target player, decks that can consistently win before turn 4, perfect library manipulation (Ponder would be fine in Modern, but Brainstorm is too powerful for me), and other broken things like that.
Modern is the official eternal format and thus its supported by WoTC directly. Its not directly stated but WoTC isn't in the business of supporting formats that they can't make money off of directly. SCG supports Legacy because its one of secondary formats that wouldn't get much support otherwise and there was a demand for it.
I'm a proud member of the Online Campaign for Real English. If you believe in capital letters, correct spelling, and good sentence structure, then copy this into your signature.
If that's your "casual," what on earth is required for "formal," a butler in livery shuffling the decks whilst a pianist plays Brahms in front of a tapestry?
Eternal means that you can use any card aside from banned ones (as opposed to non-rotating).
I personally do not have a dog in this debate, but for the sake of discussion, CrazyCatPerson123 is right. I think the difference is whether you are able to use cards from ancillary products like Commander and Planeschase.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Less expensive, yes, but as diverse? Not even close. Legacy had a home-brew deck win a tournament 2 weeks ago, when by contrast, the modern GP on the weekend was 50% GBx in the top 8. I think people are prepared to accept modern as it is due to its lower entry cost, but let's not gloss over its problems. Really there are only a handful of tier 1 decks, and the top 16 almost always consists of the same 4 or 5 decks. That's not even mentioning the lack of good control and tempo options, the over-prevalence of midrange as an archetype, or -- as you mentioned -- the banned list.
I don't want to make this yet another legacy vs modern pissing contest, because we've had enough of those, but what you stated is demonstrably false. Legacy has its own problems, but diversity isn't one of them.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
I don't see how this is a factor, if they were moving to Modern they could easily sell their existing stock at the current prices while not picking up more cards. If they wanted to move fast they could just buylist to other stores.
It's simply just a lower priority than Legacy. This is really Wizards fault more than anything, they don't promote the format enough to get people interested. How many Modern articles are there from pros compared to Legacy and Standard?
Only two GPs have had a significant showing of BGx and the top16 show other recent decks are gaining in popularity. Furthermore, I'd say Modern is fairly diverse for a format that is less than three years old, give it time to evolve.
I kinda agree with you on this, but allow me to play Devil's Advocate. We now have Modern as a sanctioned FNM format, Modern Grand Prix and Pro Tours, a Modern Masters (although its "success" can be debated), and coming soon a Modern Event Deck. I would say it is being promoted somewhat.
Btw, if you are interested in discussing more on this topic, check out my thread "Wizards Needs to Support Modern". Surprisingly, it already has reached 13 pages.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=566864
Some people would say that is statement is pure speculation with no facts to support it. I say I would not be surprised if this actually turns out to be true lol.
N/A
Modern:
Grishoalbrand / Grixis Death's Shadow / Jeskai Control / UW Control
There are a lot of players who have not been around forever so an extended standard with a bump in power serves a great purpose for them. Also there are a ton of really nice and flavourful cards that are played in modern and not in legacy.
You get to play with different cards you enjoy so all in all not a bad format.
Man the first time you start reanimating Mulldrifters with Unburial rites you will understand why people like it.
There really just isnt.
WOTC is already desperately ramming it down everyone's throat to try to make it popular. If there's a demand to see Modern, they've fulfilled it in spades.
There has never been a modern open, will the legacy fanbase please stop saying they've failed. Realistically modern would probably get more people per tournament, but the loss in inventory from SCG would be to high to make that feasible. But please let's not actually think legacy is played by more people than modern. It merely gets a lot more support from SCG and SCg supports it better than Wotc does with modern. There's a reason that on Magic Online where both formats are equally supported modern's player numbers are over 2x legacys.
Legacy might have more deck diversity, but it has less archetype diversity. While both formats have a lot of combo and midrange, Legacy has less aggro, less ramp, and less control.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Starcity's primary goal during these opens is card sales. These sales generate a lot of profit.
They obviously would make more money when someone needs that last 'cheap' legacy staple than someone who needs that last 'cheap' modern staple.
Not to mention the considerably large amount of legacy stock that SCG has. While people will continue to purchase modern staples anywhere, at the many events SCG has booths at, online, etc people are more likely to purchase legacy staples at a legacy event.
Not to mention that you can walk into just about any store with a decent case and find a good amount of reasonably priced modern staples, but it's harder to find cheaply priced legacy staples, especially in areas with smaller legacy crowds. Sure, most stores have some, but I can only name 3-4 stores near me that I would be confident that would have any random card I wanted.
Modern cards are still being actively printed and marketed by Wizards themselves. SCG did not need to create the demand, Wizards did that for them. Therefore it is more profitable for SCG to continue to market a format which makes an otherwise useless subset of Magic cards valuable.
If and when the demand of Modern outstrips Legacy to such a degree that SCG could bear the cost of no longer being able to sell Legacy cards efficiently, only then will Modern events be truly supported by SCG at the Open Series level. However this will never happen.
I disagree. Legacy does have less aggro (since Zoo died out), less control (although UW Miracles is probably the purest control deck in any format) and less ramp (12 post, I guess) but it features archetypes that have next to zero representation in Modern thanks to Modern design policies. Legacy has more tempo, more fast combo, more prison, and more "wacky non-Magic" like Dredge and Belcher. I don't disagree that Modern has archetype diversity (even if I'd argue that midrange is overrepresented), but Legacy just has more IMO.
And the status quo of Wizards supporting Modern and Starcitygames supporting Legacy is fine in my book. All parties benefit, a good number of events are held for both, and everyone's happy. While I do wish they had more Legacy GPs, I'm happy with the way things are.
Special thanks to Hakai Studios and SushiOtter for the sig!
Legacy: UR Sneak and Show I UBG Team America I X Metalworker MUD
Modern: UBR Blue Jund I WBX Eldrazi Processors I X Affinity I WRG Nacatl Burn I GR Tron I UBR Grishoalbrand
I am classifying Prison as Control (it is trying to control the game), Fast Combo as Combo (they are the same thing, it is just one is faster), and Dredge and Belcher as combo (they are built around comboing with a few certain cards). If one views Magic as having 6 archetypes (Control, Combo, Aggro, Tempo, Midrange, and Ramp), Modern has the same amount of Combo and Midrange as Legacy while having more Ramp, Control, and Aggro. The only thing that Legacy has that Modern doesn't in archetypes is Tempo.
If you add together WUR Control, Cruel Control, Mono-U Tron, Esper Zur, and 8-Rack in Modern, I'm pretty sure that that is more of the metagame than UW Miracles, Pox, Enchantress, MUD, and the Control version of Stoneblade. I could be wrong though.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
By archetype diversity, I meant Aggro, Control, Combo, Tempo, Midrange, and Ramp. Modern has more ramp than Legacy (Legacy has only 12-Post while Modern has the much more successful RG Tron and Scapeshift). It also has more aggro (Modern has Affinity, Merfolk, Burn, Soul Sisters, Bogles, Gruul Zoo, 5C Domain, and possibly Hatebears, depending on your definition of aggro. Legacy has only Merfolk, Goblins, Affinity, and Burn, all of which are less successful than the aggro decks in Modern). I'd also say that Modern has slightly more control, though that depends on what you consider control. I'd say that having more different archetypes be common is more archetype diversity.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I wouldn't agree with MTG Top 8, as it doesn't count Tempo, Midrange, or Ramp as separate archetypes. I'm pretty sure that it is counting the less controlling versions of Stoneblade as control. And also, you are discounting 4C Gifts, Mono-U Tron, and UW Tron in Modern's section.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I forgot about Lands, thanks.
Nic Fit+12 Post is still less of the Legacy meta than RG Tron+Scapeshift+Amulet of Vigor+Monogreen Devotion.
You are right about there being more different kinds of combo decks (though Enchantress really doesn't count as a combo deck last time I checked). But that doesn't change the fact that there are almost no aggro decks or ramp decks in Legacy. If more archetypes are playable in Modern than in Legacy, Modern has more archetype diversity than Legacy.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
They need to continue to support Legacy because without them supporting it there would not he nearly as many playing Legacy, and they make a lot of money from legacy cards. The money the make from modern would be the same anyways, because modern is supported by WotC, so SCG will always have the modern base to sell cards to. They want to make sure there is also a Legacy base to continue to sell legacy cards to.
Why oh why do we have to keep doing this?
MUD is also a ramp deck, and stompy/painter have ramp elements. Zoo and Affinity are both good decks in legacy, and burn is always strong. Hatebears and Merfolk were originally ported from legacy to modern, and cut their teeth in legacy. Moreover, merfolk's brothers, goblins and elves -- an aggro-combo deck and an aggro-prison deck -- haven't been successfully ported across. You also have the gate, which -- while not top tier -- is probably about as strong relative to legacy's tier 1 as a number of the decks you listed are relative to modern's tier 1.
For control, you have miracles, some versions of esperblade, and BUG planeswalker (pernicious deed) control as the big ones. There's also pox and lands (including the recent jund list that won 2 weeks ago), though you're right, control has been suffering a lot compared to the other archetypes. Pushing to the far end of the control spectrum though, legacy has far more prison than modern, including decks like enchantress, scepter chant, stasis, and a number of decks that include prison elements like stompy. The big difference is that control in legacy actually has a shot at winning, whereas in modern, if you play control, you're relegated to tier 1.5 at best. I would be embarrassed to take gifts to a comp (and I played gifts, so I know how strong it is relative to the decks that matter), whereas BUG control is a niche deck that is capable of ripping apart top tier decks (and I say this as a delver player who's learned a healthy respect for capable control pilots).
That said, you're correct that control is hurting more than other archetypes in legacy, largely because the creatures are so strong nowadays. Not only is it difficult to keep a board clear and maintain your card advantage, but you can convert a control deck to a tempo deck pretty easily by replacing a few spells and changing your win condition, and your deck will probably be far more consistent for it. You get the best of both worlds in that you can still control the game, and you can generate the kind of pressure that even a few years ago would have been unheard of. This will only get more and more pronounced as creatures continue to get pushed, and tempo pulls ever further away from the pack. In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only tempo, though I'll take that over only midrange any day of the week.
Also, aside from affinity, none of the decks you listed are particularly good decks in modern. Merfolk gets one top 16, and suddenly its a good modern deck? Modern players have incredibly low standards for what they consider top tier (and I've seen numerous players in the last 3-4 months or so calling merfolk tier 1), because pre-emptively hyping the strength of non-tier 1 decks makes the format seem more diverse than it actually is. And again, you can't refute the results of the latest tournament. 4 GBx decks in the top 8 is a joke for any format, and is most certainly not the hallmark of a healthy and diverse metagame. I suppose it's just variance, just like the last time it happened.
As for what modern could be, I really, really want it to be a format that I enjoy. Honestly, I do. But until they start printing good counterspells and non-creature cards again, I'll play the format that most feels like magic to me, and currently, that's legacy. I'm tired of coming to the realisation that every new brew I make in modern is better as a midrange deck, or having to deal with cards that could enable strategies I enjoy being on the banlist, while DRS happily warps the format. Playing modern to me is like playing a strategy game where the best strategy has already been chosen for you, by virtue of a banlist that selects against specific archetypes, rather than broken cards. Yeah, real diverse.
Because I think that I am right?
Stompy and Painter are aggro and combo respectively. They don't play as much ramp as an actual ramp deck. And even if you count them as combo, I'd say that Amulet of Vigor, Monogreen Devotion, UW Tron, Mono-U Tron, RG Tron, and Scapeshift put together are doing better than Nic Fit, 12-Post, Mud, Stompy, and Painterstone put together.
Last I checked, Zoo was dead. Also, elves is primarily combo, not aggro. And none of the decks that you listed are Tier 1. Affinity is Tier 1 in Modern. Merfolk is Tier 1.5. Burn and Soul Sisters are both Tier 2. Modern has better placing aggro decks than Legacy and has more aggro decks overall.
And how many of those prison decks are Tier 1? Last time I checked, the answer is 0. Also, WUR Control is Tier 1 in Modern. But I will concede the point on control.
Modern isn't only Midrange. It has a lot of Combo as well as ramp and aggro. And while Legacy control decks don't get better easily, Modern has a low enough power-level that it can use control cards printed in newer sets (see Sphinx's Revelation).
Actually, I'm going off of the MTGO meta. Legacy has so many more paper events than Modern, that the two really can't be compared. But if one compares the Modern MTGO meta with the Legacy paper meta, you get a more complete picture. Merfolk is Tier 1 on MTGO. Burn and Soul Sisters are both strong there. And yes, 4 BGx decks is uncommon. It is ne of the strongest decks in Modern, but it doesn't usually happem
I understand your point here. I would prefer it if Modern was less creature focused. But I prefer it to Legacy, the format with free counterspells, free land destruction, easy fast mana, creatures with protection from target player, decks that can consistently win before turn 4, perfect library manipulation (Ponder would be fine in Modern, but Brainstorm is too powerful for me), and other broken things like that.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
(Emphasis mine)
Modern is not an eternal format. http://www.wizards.com/Magic/tcg/resources.aspx?x=judge/resources/banned
Eternal means that you can use any card aside from banned ones (as opposed to non-rotating).
signature by rivenor at http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=329663
I'm a proud member of the Online Campaign for Real English. If you believe in capital letters, correct spelling, and good sentence structure, then copy this into your signature.
I hate the reserved list.
Mythic rares are fine.
I personally do not have a dog in this debate, but for the sake of discussion, CrazyCatPerson123 is right. I think the difference is whether you are able to use cards from ancillary products like Commander and Planeschase.