[Idea]
Modern Banned List Testing
Poll: Which cards do you think can safely come off the Banned List
Log in with your Curse username to vote in this poll.
Which cards do you think can safely come off the Banned List - Multiple Choice
- Ancestral Vision 56.7% of Users - 166 votes
- Ancient Den 5.8% of Users - 17 votes
- Bitterblossom 32.8% of Users - 96 votes
- Blazing Shoal 3.1% of Users - 9 votes
- Chrome Mox 18.4% of Users - 54 votes
- Cloudpost 3.8% of Users - 11 votes
- Dark Depths 6.1% of Users - 18 votes
- Dread Return 13% of Users - 38 votes
- Glimpse of Nature 4.4% of Users - 13 votes
- Golgari Grave-Troll 34.8% of Users - 102 votes
- Great Furnace 5.5% of Users - 16 votes
- Green Sun's Zenith 25.6% of Users - 75 votes
- Hypergenesis 3.4% of Users - 10 votes
- Jace, the Mind Sculptor 23.2% of Users - 68 votes
- Mental Misstep 13% of Users - 38 votes
- Ponder 17.1% of Users - 50 votes
- Preordain 25.3% of Users - 74 votes
- Punishing Fire 5.1% of Users - 15 votes
- Rite of Flame 9.6% of Users - 28 votes
- Seat of the Synod 4.8% of Users - 14 votes
- Sensei's Divining Top 14% of Users - 41 votes
- Stoneforge Mystic 15% of Users - 44 votes
- Skullclamp 2.7% of Users - 8 votes
- Sword of the Meek 13% of Users - 38 votes
- Tree of Tales 6.8% of Users - 20 votes
- Umezawa's Jitte 11.9% of Users - 35 votes
- Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle 24.6% of Users - 72 votes
- Vault of Wisphers 5.8% of Users - 17 votes
- Wild Nacatl 29.4% of Users - 86 votes
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes
I guess not having seen a Skullclamp in action, you might not see how absurd it is.
BUT DEAR LORD SKULLCLAMP IS TOP FIVE MOST BONKERS CARDS EVER. The only card I think is absolutely, undoubtedly more broken than it is Yawgmoths Bargain.
Bitterblossom isn't banned simply because it makes tokens efficiently. It's banned because of what it does to Spellstutter Sprite and Mistbind Clique.
Bident Layers
B Devotion
RG Devotion
UW Control
Modern:
Jund
UW Control
Combo Pod
Legacy:
DeathBlade
RUG Delver
BUG Control
now imagine a deck with skullclamp and bitter blossom
yum
Niv-Mizzet Ramp 'n' Wheel
Godo: Strap him up and turn him sideways!
don't forget thopter/sword too! not only can u gain "infinite" life, but u get to draw 2 cards everytime too!
Bident Layers
B Devotion
RG Devotion
UW Control
Modern:
Jund
UW Control
Combo Pod
Legacy:
DeathBlade
RUG Delver
BUG Control
When Modern came out I was playing BB + Fae against Jund, UW Elspeth, Bant-Hammer and a variance of other aggro/tempo decks, I won about a third of the matches... That was without Ancestral Visions though.
Bitterblossom isn't banned for power reasons at all, they've stated that. Several cards on that list are banned because Wizards fears that players might still have a bad taste in their mouths from decks like fae and cawblade.
If Wizards want to unban Valakut, they'll have to be prepared for one king of combo to overtake another. Sowing Salt may be able to handle Wargate, but not Scapeshift Combo.
That's literally what I was saying about Bitterblossom. People almost always assume a card is banned because it's "broken" or "too good" when in fact that isn't the case a lot of the time. Wild Nacatl, Green Sun's Zenith, and Punishing Fire are all prime examples of this, Nacatl and Fire for being super oppressive, making 2 toughness creatures and non-zoo aggro decks unplayable (of which there are several viable atm) and Zenith for being "too efficient" and limiting the playable aggro decks to prettymuch JUST zoo as well.
Bident Layers
B Devotion
RG Devotion
UW Control
Modern:
Jund
UW Control
Combo Pod
Legacy:
DeathBlade
RUG Delver
BUG Control
Is it wrong the creator of the game wants some diversity in the format? Getting rid of those cards created a more diverse meta. Bringing them all back will make it a format of a handful of decks.
The only problem I see with that is there will always be the question of where it stops. There are definitely more cards they could ban that would lead to more diversity.
Don't get me wrong, I personally think that they should follow all the way through and ban to maximum diversity. But that means hitting a lot of what people consider to be marquee cards of the format. How do we decide to ban some marquee cards (Bitterblossom, etc) and not others?
I am ready to accept a good explanation on it, but I think it is time an explanation is given.
I ran a thought experiment on my blog
Modern in a Nuclear Wasteland
of an extreme case of banning 20 more cards to make sure they get everything, then scaling back where appropriate. WotC seems to be on a slowly build up approach. Both ways probably reach similar end points.
The post Gatecrash metagame is proving to be closer to the endpoint than I estimated, so its very possible that few (if any) more cards need to be banned.
You must remember this is not the first format they have created. They seem to be learning from their past mistakes. Modern is well ahead of where Legacy was one year in. I believe Wotc understands what a format in its infancy needs to grow and become popular. I dont think they have to explain anything as long as they have the attendance numbers to back what they are doing is correct.
By the way, I believe some cards could just come off the list, I believe there are cards that could go on the list, I also would like to see some cards on the list replaced by other cards to see how the format plays out. But the format now is fine. Its diverse and a brewers playground right now.
BB: in a t4 format, this token maker by itself isn't all that dangerous. A player, yes, but not broken. Would change the meta, yes, but not break it. In faeries, it's a whole different story, because it makes another whole archetype live, while changing the meta a lot, making it slower.
Mox: Kinda weird to choose this in such a fast format, but past experiences have taught me in extended this was only good in types of decks that are not tier1 right now. Its unban might change the meta a bit.
Vision: Could be problematic in delver decks. Why make them better.
I actually just built and started playing UWr Delver on mtgo, and I can assure you, I wouldn't play Vision if it were available.
This may be what makes Vision so good in heavily controlling decks and so bad in stuff like UB Faeries--all Faeries is getting is 3 more 1-for-1s, while Cruel Control can get 2-for-1s and 3-for-1s.
Also because Faeries plays more in the early game, and going down a card hurts them more.
What are the exact rules?
For example, will it be top 3 most voted cards as initially proposed, top 5 cards to promote more variety as Lantern proposed via friendly amendment, or is it 'pick your pet card and try to break it' as around half the posters thus far seem to think?
Will Pseudo-mirrors be used to confirm an increase in raw power?
Will Deck X with banned card be played against its current version that observes the banned list as is? In theory, grinding enough pseudo-mirrors should be able to conclusively confirm whether or not the deck gets objectively stronger (in a vacuum) using win% with the new addition because its raw power should be higher. Ex: Cruel control vs. Cruel Control w/ Ancestral Vision
Will the decks be run against each other in a traditional swiss + knockout format featuring a disproportionately high percentage of the decks running the experimentally unbanned cards in question, or will they be systematically ground through a gauntlet that closely resembles the current metagame?
Analysis of results from a 75%+ control-oriented metagame featuring mostly "Ancestral Vision U/x(x) control" and "Bitterblossom + AV Fae" and no Affinity, Jund, or Storm would be totally useless for matchup analysis. Also, if it were in a Swiss + knockout format, it would be prone to inconsistent results from variance due to small sample size of games played.
By comparison, assigning one pilot per experimentally unbanned card and putting it through a multi-match grind against a round-robin of current metagame gauntlet decks should allow for analytically sound conclusions on every match-up. To grind 10+ matches against each of a field of 10+ established gauntlet decks could take weeks and would only allow 2-3 people to play with experimentally unbanned cards and only 10-12 people to play overall. I suppose that would largely defeat the purpose of opening this up to the public though, so there is a non-unsubstantial trade off.
A "gauntlet" set-up could look somewhat similar to this for just AV and BB:
(Test-lists)
1. U/x/x Control featuring Ancestral Visions
2. UB Fae featuring Bitterblossom
3. BW Tokens featuring Bitterblossom
(Stock or slightly tweaked "Gauntlet" lists)
4. Aggro Robot "Affinity"
5. UWR Delver Tempo
6. Storm
7. Twin
8. Naya Pod
9. RG Tron
10. Jund Midrange
11. R/x Burn
12. UW Caw or UW Gifts Tron
Even in doing this, the uncontrolled variables might be too much to glean meaningful results from the matchups...play skill and familiarity will change from player to player in each match-up, so perhaps contacting the biggest advocates of a certain deck (e.g. wrote the primer) or only allowing 'experienced' players (based on PT & GP performance, ELO, or planeswalker points, etc) would be an ideal solution to getting meaningful data?
Speculate less. Test more.
that wouldn't be rebalancing, that would be crippling.
You already have Steelshaper's Gift in the format.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
The problem with Unbanning SFM is then they have to ban ALL the good equipment you can get with SFM. Bskull, The Swords, Warhammer, and the banlist would just grow to an obsurd length to STOP SFM from being broken and even then we'd all be fetching up Accorder's Sheilds with our SFM because hey card advantage.
Problem not solved, problem destroyed. that card would be pretty unplayable.
Sure, tutoring up a Sword of FaF is cool, but it makes it vulerable to hard counters.
It takes away what made SFM good, the ability to play stuff at a reduced cost without working about some sort of counter spell.
Now it's just squire Cantrip.
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
The Jund match-up was close to even, but the Twin Pod match-up was a steamroll in Pod's favour.
I also tested the same Faeries deck against RG Artifact Tron; the match-up was close to even again. Bitterblossom shined more in that match-up, but the biggest stuff Spellstutter Sprite could counter was Wurmcoil Engine (yes, it could never counter Karn Liberated).
GW/R Enchantress (Legacy) R/WG
RW/G/ Norin The Champion/Norin the Artist (Modern) B//WR
GU Eternal Bouncing Command (Modern) UG
WUBRG Wish On A Stick (Modern) GRBUW
If skullclamp was unbanned affinity would rule the world. And if it was restricted it would just be boring seeing it in every deck with a creature. And would just come down to who ever drew their coppy first
You have no clue what you're talking about if you think Skull Clamp would make modern healthy.
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com