to play devils advocate here... how many of you are willing to pay an extra 2 -4 life a game? It's already widely joked about around my play groups that modern life totals basically start at 15 when you consider mana bases and thoughtseize. I'm not really suggesting it be unbanned, just pointing out a strong difference between legacy and modern.
I don't think you're allowed to ask that kind of question, even as DA, when you have Necropotence as your avatar.
AV would almost certainly be played in Twin, or at least some version of it. The only way for Twin to gain card advantage now is Snapcaster, which doesn't really provide the power to play a real control game. People would definitely try AV as a way to go more controlling. So don't look at the current Twin lists in thinking about AV, consider what Twin could be. Is Twin the greatest beneficiary of AV, I don't think so, but it will get tried.
here is the top8 list of splinter twin from prague.
what 4 cards do you want to cut from that deck without hurting either the control or the combo plan, because if you want to run Visions you run 4 of them as you wan't to have it in your opener.
And keep in mind that Visions only has synergies with the control half of the deck not the combo half.
Or simply put, why aren't you just playing URx Control and play Control cards and a few finishers in the slots of clunky combocards instead at this point?
You can try and distill it down to these basic premises, but it just doesn't work that way.
Tempo Twin is already half a control deck, with the advantage of an immediate win threatening at any time. It's similar to something like Thundermaw or Geist, yes, but it's not the same thing.
Ancestral Vision is just solid value, nothing more. It's a bad topdeck in the late game (similar to Discard spells), but it's often an amazing turn 1 play. The fact that it draws into more spells obviously still furthers BOTH the combo and control elements of something like Tempo Twin. Control needs the fuel to keep the game in check, while drawing a missing combo piece (maybe for the 2nd or 3rd time even) allows the pilot to close the game if it ever gets to that point.
I'm not sure what Ancestral Vision's place would be in something like Twin, but I would be surprised if it didn't show up at all. Dismissing it as "only for control decks" is just plain ignorance, and makes you resemble an Albino Troll rather than a logical contributor.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MODERN RGB Jund BGR WGB Junk/Abzan Company WGB
LEGACY RUGB Delver GURB
EDH UW Geist of Saint Traft Aggro-Control WU RUG Riku of Two Reflections Combo GUR BBB Skithiryx Control BB
People don't get that bans will only happens in very high dominance scenarios (BBE) or combo decks that breaks the turn 4 rule too often (Storm) or other major issue (Eggs).
In the BBE jund era, the jund meta share was around 25% AND jund was WINNING several major events and that lasted really long. (non stop from DRS printing until BBE ban)
On the current meta no deck keeps more than 20% for longer than 3 months, no deck is taking the cup of many major events, no decks breaks the turn 4 rule often enough, no decks cause major logistic issues on tournament. Why the hell some people still hope for bans? Outside of being butthurt against specific card ("i hate DRS" people) there is no reason for a card to be banned now.
A unban, while could be beneficial, had it's chance really lowered by the recent GPs results. From the cards with the better chances of comming out, Preordain, AV and Blossom, preordian and AV will probably not come out due to the last GPs and BB is part of a deck that wizards fear too much.
A unban, while could be beneficial, had it's chance really lowered by the recent GPs results. From the cards with the better chances of comming out, Preordain, AV and Blossom, preordian and AV will probably not come out due to the last GPs and BB is part of a deck that wizards fear too much.
I think the lack of aggro might help push for a Wild Nacatl unban. I have been swayed in the past month to support this unban and I am 110% for it.
umm, i didn't say that you absolutly can't make the card work in twin.
My point was that if you try to make it work it would be just better to drop the twincombo and be a control deck without playing suboptimal cards.
If you add Visions you add cards that make you wan't to drag the game into the lategame so that you can put the cardadvantage from AV to good use.
So if that is your plan why aren't you dropping 2/1 and 1/4 for 3 and 4 mana enchantments and 2/2s for 5 for cards that help you to get to that point, or cards that help you to close out the game once you are at that point?!?
The answer is because it's awesome to win turn 4. I'm being facetious, but I think you are undervaluing that possibility. I get what you are saying though, which is why I said I'm not sure that Twin would be AV's biggest beneficiary on the previous page. You are right in the sense that AV helps control's game plan more, but you are wrong in the sense that AV would help Twin play a very flexible game. Basically, even if I'm a control deck, it's powerful to be able to threaten a combo from t4 onwards.
Sometimes, I'd be playing for the end game, and AV's card advantage would let me win there. Sometimes, I'd try to win in the midgame with the combo, and AV would be like insurance to help me recover if I failed.
tl; dr - It's more powerful to focus only on either combo or control, but being flexible lets you play differently in different match-ups, which can be better than raw power.
Wait, did this guy just claim that ancestral vision is good in Splinter Twin?
Why do people come to this thread if they don't even have the slightiest ability to evaluate cards?
Here, you jump down the throat of another poster, clearly making the point that Ancestral Vision would be absolutely terrible in any Twin deck.
Yet, I can nearly guarantee that if AV were unbanned today, MODO would be filled with pilots running 4 copies of AV in their Splinter Twin decks, and by Monday we'd probably see at least a couple folks 4-0 with such a build.
Where it would go from there is anyone's guess, but it's very likely most Blue decks would dabble in some number of Visions. It is Ancestral after all.
As for why run Twin over Control? Well, people like to combo. Combos are powerful, and win much more quickly than Colonnades and Resto Angels. You didn't even stop to think that maybe the shell stays basically the same, only you can afford to cut down on Splinter Twins now that you have a card that digs even deeper into your deck.
No one knows for sure what would happen if Ancestral was unbanned. Just don't pretend that ultimatums are going to hold up in this theorycrafting discussion. Dismissing a possibility like Ancestral Vision in Twin is just blind disobedience.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MODERN RGB Jund BGR WGB Junk/Abzan Company WGB
LEGACY RUGB Delver GURB
EDH UW Geist of Saint Traft Aggro-Control WU RUG Riku of Two Reflections Combo GUR BBB Skithiryx Control BB
DRS would be a great ban. I think Scooze fills the role now for grave hate and it isn't a 1 mana planeswalker. If Wizards had made it a 1/1 then none of this would be an issue.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In case I didn't tell you, I don't care about your opinion I just want your facts. And not the facts that make you seem smart. I want the ones that are actual facts.
Here, you jump down the throat of another poster, clearly making the point that Ancestral Vision would be absolutely terrible in any Twin deck.
Yet, I can nearly guarantee that if AV were unbanned today, MODO would be filled with pilots running 4 copies of AV in their Splinter Twin decks, and by Monday we'd probably see at least a couple folks 4-0 with such a build.
Where it would go from there is anyone's guess, but it's very likely most Blue decks would dabble in some number of Visions. It is Ancestral after all.
As for why run Twin over Control? Well, people like to combo. Combos are powerful, and win much more quickly than Colonnades and Resto Angels. You didn't even stop to think that maybe the shell stays basically the same, only you can afford to cut down on Splinter Twins now that you have a card that digs even deeper into your deck.
No one knows for sure what would happen if Ancestral was unbanned. Just don't pretend that ultimatums are going to hold up in this theorycrafting discussion. Dismissing a possibility like Ancestral Vision in Twin is just blind disobedience.
The whole point of Splinter Twin is that it is a consistent Turn 4 combo. If it cut Serum Visions for Ancestral Vision and cut some pieces of its combo for more control, then it would be winning on turn 5-6 on average. Twin is much worse as a late-game combo/control deck than Scapeshift. It wouldn't see play if it wasn't trying to combo on turn 4.
About Blossom in Jund or BG more concretely, probably wouldn't be a staple like Tarmogoyf or Dark Confidant, but would just compete with Lingering Souls for a slot in those versions that play it. What I meant is that the card can be played in more archetypes than just Faeries, and that Faeries would have a bad time against Jund, moreover if there is a bunch of flying tokens to chumpblock.
The point is that even if this is true, it would be competing with other cards that are often better. It isn't necessarily better than Lingering Souls. It dies to removal, it doesn't work with Liliana, it can be discarded or countered effectively, it makes you lose life, and it doesn't immediately stall the game, which makes it much worse than Lingering Souls against aggro.
Realistically, if you look as the rationale for the only card in Modern to be unbanned:
[QUOTE]We wanted a card that would not easily slot into an existing top deck and also wanted to enable a deck with a different play pattern than the current top decks.
What WON'T be unbanned:
Ancestral Vision: UWR can play it
Wild Nacatl: Zoo can play it
Cantrips, rituals: Storm can play it, Twin can play cantrips
That quote specifically said top decks. Zoo hasn't done much of anything for a while and pure creature aggro doesn't exist in Modern. Also, Storm is a Tier 3 deck, not a top deck. You are probably right about Ancestral Vision and the cantrips for now, especially after GP Prague.
What MIGHT be unbanned:
1) Golgari Grave-Troll
Why it can come off: Dredge needs Dread Return (still banned) to actually do anything
Why it can't come off: Wizards hates Dredge
Wizards hates a lot of things. One can hope that they don't let that decide what gets banned.
2) Bitterblossom
Why it can come off: Enables Faeries*
Why it can't come off: Punishing Fire is still banned
We did testing. Bitterblossom was not broken. It still has a lot of bad matchups.
3) Sword of the Meek
Why it can come off: Needs Chrome Mox and possibly artifact lands (still banned) to be good
Why it can't come off: Drags out rounds**
It doesn't drag out games as much as Second Sunrise or Sensei's Top do. It isn't enough to get it banned.
*I do not buy "Abrupt Decay exists" as a reason. It can't be countered...big deal. Flash in Scion of Oona, oops, you just wasted a Decay.
How are you flashing in Scion of Oona on turn 2?
**"Control mirrors always drag out rounds, WTF are you talking about???" There's one difference with Sword: the Thopter Sword combo gains life. This makes it even harder to end the game.
Humor me for a moment, did you play Pokemon in Gen III? Do you know what happens when two Wobbuffets end up fighting each other? Here are the facts:
1) Their ability, Shadow Tag, prevents either player from switching to a different Pokemon. So your Wobbuffet is stuck trying to kill the other Wobbuffet.
2) Wobbuffet has very high defenses but is basically useless for offense. In fact, Wobbuffet doesn't even have direct-damage attacks. It only gains a direct damage attack, Struggle, when it runs out of PP. This could take upward of 60 turns.
3) Struggle has a base damage of 50 (which is considered very low), and deals 1/4 of the damage inflicted on the opponent back to the user. (So if Struggle ends up dealing 16HP of damage to the opponent, the user loses 4HP.) Seems like this means that there'll eventually be a conclusion to the battle, right?
4) Wrong. All Wobbuffet hold Leftovers (it's not compulsory, but it is the best item). This item heals 1/16 of the user's HP every turn and never runs out (unless the user goes to 0HP, in which case it has no effect; it can't revive dead guys). Which is way more than the opposing Wobbuffet's Struggle, combined with its own Struggle recoil, could deal.
What does all this mean? In short, the battle never ends. Neither Wobbuffet can switch out, and they can't kill each other because Leftovers heals more damage than they can deal.
This was so bad that in the next generation, Shadow Tag was tweaked so that two Pokemon with Shadow Tag could switch out from each other. Additionally, Struggle dealt 1/4 of the user's total HP, instead of 1/4 of the damage inflicted (so if your max HP was 521, you took 130 recoil damage from Struggle, no matter how much damage the Struggle dealt to your opponent).
Now of course Magic is different - eventually you'll deck out. But can you deck out twice within 50 minutes, without any mill from your opponent? I doubt that.
This is false, because in a control mirror, either your opponent will counter a piece of the combo or you will assemble it. If it is countered/discarded then the game won't take any longer than if it was a normal control mirror. If you assemble the combo, then you will win. Nothing in there makes the game take longer. Even in a mirror with both players playing the combo, each player can still counter/discard the opponent's combo and a player will eventually get manascrewed and not be able to make as many tokens as the opponent. Yes, mirror matches between two Thopter Sword decks take a while. But it would not be as bad as Top/Sunrise and it is not enough to get the deck banned.
So, the cards that could possibly come off (as in, I'm putting myself in Wizards' position - the below cards are not what I think should be unbanned, but what I think Wizards will unban, if any) are:
Grave-Troll
BB
Sword
And what will be banned:
Something from BGx
Wizards has shown with Storm that they're not afraid of banning cards from 1 deck twice. And, BGx has been putting a lot of people into GP Top 8s. Personally I think DRS should have been banned instead of BBE, but the RTR cash cow hadn't been milked dry at the time yet. Oh well.
BGx has been doing well, but it hasn't been dominating online and it hasn't actually won any tournaments. It is not getting a ban.
If I were to read WotC actions regarding the Nacatl banning. It would appear that it's a temporary ban until the other aggro decks like RG Zoo, Boros, etc are competitive enough that even though Nacatl is legal, you still have the benefit of staying in 2 colors. They are already fixing this with Theros Devotion mechanic since Devotion is limited to 1 or 2 colors. They just need the same scenario that BGx decks have right now where there is benefit in going straight BG, BGR, BGW and BGRW. So I think they needed to ban Nacatl at that moment until the other aggro archetype can catch-up.
So they banned Nacatl before they even knew that they would be doing devotion in Theros so that it could be unbanned when other decks were viable? And they couldn't have just left Nacatl in the format until those decks were viable? When Nacatl was unbanned we had two aggro decks. Right now we have two aggro decks. I don't think that they banned Nacatl just because they wanted to unban it when Boros and Gruul were viable decks. If new cards would make those specific decks viable, then they would make them just as viable if Nacatl was in the format before than if it was unbanned immediately after they were printed.
Wild nacatl should not have been banned in the first place. The decks that were playing nacatl also had green sun's zenith which is what really made the deck too good. Nacatl is no more oppressive than delver or expirement 1.
I think that what Modern needs right now is some unbannings, and not bannings, to make the format more diverse. We're still lacking a true control deck and there are very few aggro decks. My opinion on some of the cards that have been mentioned:
Wild Nacatl: I didn't understand why it was banned at first, but unbanning it now wouldn't make Gruul or Burn worse aggro decks, but add Naya to that list.
Golgari Grave-Troll: without Dread Return to power up some silly combo starts, I don't think Dredge can consistently break the turn 4 rule. Moreover, Scavenging Ooze keeps graveyards in check.
Ancestral Visions: it could be thought as the tool control decks need to surge again, but in the past it was actually used by tempo decks (Faeries or Next Level Blue). I think it could push Twin too much to be worth unbanning.
Bitterblossom: it would allow Faeries to become a deck, which would suffer against aggro decks and wouldn't have an easy Jund match-up, moreover if Jund plays also Bitterblossom. Outside Faeries, the card is easily playable, and would definitely bury the hopes of control decks to appear in Modern.
Sword of the Meek: I didn't play the Extended format where it was legal, but besides being too slow, I don't see it powerful enough to be banned, and can be easily hated (Ooze is played maindeck, Stony Silence and Rest in Peace in sideboards). It could be the cheap finisher control decks need in this format, so I'd try it as they did with Valakut.
Seething Song: the problem with that one isn't only Storm, but Through the Breach turn 3 (or turn 2 with Simian Spirit Guide). I don't think it will get unbanned when Storm is still a popular deck in Magic Online.
Mental Misstep: it was a card that had a huge impact in Legacy (until it got banned) but was barely played in Standard. Modern, despite not rotating and having a large pool, is a format more similar to Standard than to Legacy, so I don't think it would be that harmful. Yet again, the problem is that giving Twin a tool to fight discard and removal is too dangerous.
Artifact lands: with the new legend rule, Mox Opal is more powerful than artifact lands in Affinity. Moreover, artifact lands can be used in more decks with Trinket Mage, Thirst for Knowledge or any planeswalker named Tezzeret, while Mox Opal is played only in that archetype. Moreover, an Affinity deck relying in artifact lands would be easier to hate, so I'd try that change.
Although I think WotC wanted Modern to be a midrange format and they're succeeding at it, so there shouldn't be any changes.
Ancestral Vision: I already explained why it wouldn't be played in Splinter Twin. And yes, it would be played in Tempo. There is one Tier 1.5 Tempo deck and three Tier 3 tempo decks in Modern. It is less of the meta than any other archetype. It needs an unban. Ancestral Vision could be that unban.
Bitterblossom: Do you have any proof of it being played in decks other than Faeries, BW Tokens, and Polymorph?
Seething Song: Storm is Tier 2 at best online, it could use an unban (though I do realize that giving it back the cantrips and Seething Song would make it too fast, and the format needs the cantrips more). Also, it wouldn't be played in Griselbrand Reanimator. That combo of yours needs 3 specific cards, with only one of them having another equivalent card. It is too inconsistent to work.
Artifact Lands: Um, no. Ravager Affinity was the most broken Standard deck since the Urza Block. Think of how much more broken it would be with all of the Scars of Mirrodin cards. It would easily break the Turn 4 Rule and warp the format to the point at which people would be playing maindeck Stony Silence to answer it.
Modern being a Midrange format: Last time I checked, Modern was a combo format, not a midrange format.
Don't hold your breath for Sword of the Meek, its probably never coming off. It crushed a format that was much faster than Modern is and is way better if games tend to go long like they do in modern. The only thing that has changed is that there are two more real answers and one of them is extremely beatable, Rest in Peace and Abrupt Decay.
Granted we don't have all the pieces from UW Foundry as Artifact Lands and Chrome Mox are banned and both are semi-important to the deck. However I think if Sword was to be unbanned right now it either would not be good enough to see play due to lack of support or be the best deck as it gives control an win condition that can out grind anything Midrange is doing while being compact enough to enable those decks to pack answers to combo and aggro. To me this seems like a lose-lose situation, it either does nothing or too much, that's why its not worth the risk of unbanning when there are much more reasonable cards which are on the list.
You may be forgetting that Dark Depths+Thopter/Sword was what made it broken, not just one or the other.
Actually thopter and DD were 2 different decks that merged into a dominating deck in Extended. Both had there bad match ups back then, but together they nullified some of them. Even after the format devolved into thopter/dd decks and those deck trying to beat thopter/DD decks, there wasnt enough hate to slow it down.
As for DRS being banned, I doubt it will happen as long as DRS is still in Standard. Wotc wants as many selling as possible.
This will not happen, the fact that we have affinity at tier 1, merfok at tier 1.5 and many others at tier 2 is reason enough for wizards to not push aggro up via unbans.
Specially nacatl, that would push many tier 2 aggro out just to push one aggro to tier 1.
Wild nacatl should not have been banned in the first place. The decks that were playing nacatl also had green sun's zenith which is what really made the deck too good. Nacatl is no more oppressive than delver or expirement 1.
Totally wrong. The difference between them is stellar.
Nacatl is always a 3/3 once the condition is met, (wich is by the way the easiest condition to pull from the three) both delver and experiment one need to be build up after they enter the field.
A turn 1 nacatl with two turn 2 nacatl gives you three 3/3
A turn 1 delver with two turn 2 delver gives you one 3/2 and two 1/1
A turn 1 E1 with two turn 2 E1 gives you three 1/1
While this is not a common scenario it shows the huge difference between them. Bounces and blinks can reset E1 and Delver, but not nacatl.
Actually thopter and DD were 2 different decks that merged into a dominating deck in Extended. Both had there bad match ups back then, but together they nullified some of them. Even after the format devolved into thopter/dd decks and those deck trying to beat thopter/DD decks, there wasnt enough hate to slow it down.
That is my point. They only needed bans when they were combined. If Sword of the Meek was taken off without Dark Depths being taken off, it wouldn't be broken.
That is my point. They only needed bans when they were combined. If Sword of the Meek was taken off without Dark Depths being taken off, it wouldn't be broken.
I don't agree with this, I think the UW Tezz Foundary deck was the best deck not close before Thepths was created. People seem to focus on Thepths and forget that other decks played the combo before that and did extremely well. In fact LSV and teams' UW Tezz was the real breakout deck of World that year with a bunch of very good finishes. And before Thespian Stage I would have said that I'm not even afraid of Dark Depths in this format, its so hilariously beatable, especially with no Chrome Mox to power out early Confidants (the real reason the deck was actually good) and Chalices on 1.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Mono Black in Commander:
Quote from BlackJack68 »
But whomever your commander is, Cabal Coffers is really in charge.
Don't really get people saying that Wild Nacatl will push out other aggro decks. For starters Affinity, as it is, is probably better then Zoo with Wild Nacatl since it's way more explosive then Zoo could ever dream to be.
Merfolk aren't exactly a cakewalk either, especially if you factor in the 12+ lords, Master of Waves and the fact that Zoo starts most of their games at a virtual 15 life more often then not.
Compared to all of those, Wild Nacatl in Zoo is just a regular Joe doing his thing from nine to five. A vanilla 3/3 on an instalment plan doesn't exactly invalidate as many decks as people might think.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In my dream, the world had suffered a terrible disaster. A black haze shut out the sun, and the darkness was alive with the moans and screams of wounded people. Suddenly, a small light glowed. A candle flickered into life, symbol of hope for millions. A single tiny candle, shining in the ugly dark. I laughed and blew it out.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
Don't really get people saying that Wild Nacatl will push out other aggro decks. For starters Affinity, as it is, is probably better then Zoo with Wild Nacatl since it's way more explosive then Zoo could ever dream to be.
Merfolk aren't exactly a cakewalk either, especially if you factor in the 12+ lords, Master of Waves and the fact that Zoo starts most of their games at a virtual 15 life more often then not.
Compared to all of those, Wild Nacatl in Zoo is just a regular Joe doing his thing from nine to five. A vanilla 3/3 on an instalment plan doesn't exactly invalidate as many decks as people might think.
When Nacatl's being talked about, it's in the context of the aggro decks in Naya colors that become inferior when you can just build Naya Zoo instead, not in the grand scheme of all aggro varieties.
When Nacatl's being talked about, it's in the context of the aggro decks in Naya colors that become inferior when you can just build Naya Zoo instead, not in the grand scheme of all aggro varieties.
Since Gruul and Boros aren't doing well right now anyways and Hatebears, Burn, Soul Sisters, and Bogles are different enough that they wouldn't be invalidated, Nacatl wouldn't push anything out of the format.
Since Gruul and Boros aren't doing well right now anyways and Hatebears, Burn, Soul Sisters, and Bogles are different enough that they wouldn't be invalidated, Nacatl wouldn't push anything out of the format.
YES THEY WOULD.
JUST BECAUSE BOROS ISN'T PLACING DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN'T.
YES THEY WOULD.
JUST BECAUSE BOROS ISN'T PLACING DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN'T.
Burn still existed when Nacatl was in the format. Soul Sisters and Bogles have a huge advantage against fair decks. Adding Nacatl to the format might make them do better. Hatebears is strong enough in the unfair matchups that I think that it could stick around. And good luck with Boros.
The whole point of Splinter Twin is that it is a consistent Turn 4 combo. If it cut Serum Visions for Ancestral Vision and cut some pieces of its combo for more control, then it would be winning on turn 5-6 on average. Twin is much worse as a late-game combo/control deck than Scapeshift. It wouldn't see play if it wasn't trying to combo on turn 4.
Have you been paying any attention to the Splinter Twin decks that have been seeing success lately? Allow me to quote Patrick Dickmann, who posts here as Darguad, and won GP Antwerp with Splinter Twin:
The journey towards Tempo Twin began in small steps. With an increasing amount of experience, I was less and less excited to end games as soon as possible and instead went for the long game. At that time I was able to establish my own take on the traditional game plan. I came to realize that constantly threatening a combo attempt was much more powerful than actually going for it most of the time. It was simple. By delaying the combo by a turn it was possible to restrain about three of your opponents’ mana sources each and every single turn and to force an unpleasant decision upon them: “Do I trade a precious removal one for one with a Pestermite/Deceiver Exarch?” If the answer is “Yes!”, just play another Exarch and once they run out of removal, you win. However, if the answer is “No!” you take a toll on their life total. Back then all of my opponents had a tough time beating this strategy. The more I refined my new game plan, the more I understood that the deck in its current form was not suited to playing the game I was looking for.
The Twin decks that are winning these days (consistently) aren't winning on turn 4. They're just presenting that threat. If you follow the deck's trajectory, pilots are actually looking to see how many combo win conditions they can realistically shave to make the deck apply more traditional pressure, while still being able to threaten combo.
Does this mean Twin would play Ancestral Visions if it became unbanned? I don't think we would (because we need our topdecks to be good more than we need raw card advantage). But it's not as ridiculous of a claim as you suggest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's not your job to win games of Magic where you're mana screwed.
It's your job win every game of Magic where you're not.
Have you been paying any attention to the Splinter Twin decks that have been seeing success lately? Allow me to quote Patrick Dickmann, who posts here as Darguad, and won GP Antwerp with Splinter Twin:
The Twin decks that are winning these days (consistently) aren't winning on turn 4. They're just presenting that threat. If you follow the deck's trajectory, pilots are actually looking to see how many combo win conditions they can realistically shave to make the deck apply more traditional pressure, while still being able to threaten combo.
Does this mean Twin would play Ancestral Visions if it became unbanned? I don't think we would (because we need our topdecks to be good more than we need raw card advantage). But it's not as ridiculous of a claim as you suggest.
But as you said, they have to present the threat. Removing Serum Visions and Kiki-Jiki and reducing the number of Splinter Twins would remove that threat, which would place the deck in Scapeshift's territory, which it is not suited for.
Burn still existed when Nacatl was in the format. Soul Sisters and Bogles have a huge advantage against fair decks. Adding Nacatl to the format might make them do better. Hatebears is strong enough in the unfair matchups that I think that it could stick around. And good luck with Boros.
Thats a lot of theory crafting. Burn is T1.5, maybe T2 in the format right now. Its a meta call, can be solid, can be terrible. Bogle is in a bad place at the moment. So much hate and people have learned to play against the deck. Life gain (Soul sisters) is another meta call. Life gain doesnt always get you there. And Hatebears, The deck was built to feast on Jund. Hatebears would probably loose some ground with full aggro Zoo in the format.
So more or less what you are asking for is moving a T1.5-T2 deck, current Zoo, to T1, hurting a couple other decks along the way.
Lets not forget about Affinity. Zoo had good match ups with Affinity pre bans. Would they be the same or worse now? I dont see how they could get much worse.
Thats a lot of theory crafting. Burn is T1.5, maybe T2 in the format right now. Its a meta call, can be solid, can be terrible. Bogle is in a bad place at the moment. So much hate and people have learned to play against the deck. Life gain (Soul sisters) is another meta call. Life gain doesnt always get you there. And Hatebears, The deck was built to feast on Jund. Hatebears would probably loose some ground with full aggro Zoo in the format.
So more or less what you are asking for is moving a T1.5-T2 deck, current Zoo, to T1, hurting a couple other decks along the way.
Lets not forget about Affinity. Zoo had good match ups with Affinity pre bans. Would they be the same or worse now? I dont see how they could get much worse.
Soul Sisters and Bogles both can easily beat Naya Zoo (Really, see how much your Wild Nacatls do when your opponent has a Serra Ascendant and 2 Soul Sisters on the board. Or if your opponent has a hexproof 6/6 creature with vigilance, lifelink, and first strike). And other than decks with lifegain improving to combat Naya Zoo, I can't see Burn doing any worse because of Nacatl Naya. I can see your point on Hatebears though, especially since Tron would get worse with more aggro decks that can survive Pyroclasm in the format. I think moving Soul Sisters to Tier 1.5, Bogles to Tier 2, and Naya Zoo to Tier 1 is worth it even if Burn, Hatebears, and Death and Taxes get a little worse.
Dont forget, Zoo is the colors of the enchantment hate that would feast on Bogles. Also sliding pyroclasm or some other red sweeper in the side wouldnt be a stretch at all. Bogles only run 12-16 creatures.
Zoo has the ability to fight off most other aggro decks. Adding kitty just gives the deck bigger quicker beats.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't think you're allowed to ask that kind of question, even as DA, when you have Necropotence as your avatar.
You can try and distill it down to these basic premises, but it just doesn't work that way.
Tempo Twin is already half a control deck, with the advantage of an immediate win threatening at any time. It's similar to something like Thundermaw or Geist, yes, but it's not the same thing.
Ancestral Vision is just solid value, nothing more. It's a bad topdeck in the late game (similar to Discard spells), but it's often an amazing turn 1 play. The fact that it draws into more spells obviously still furthers BOTH the combo and control elements of something like Tempo Twin. Control needs the fuel to keep the game in check, while drawing a missing combo piece (maybe for the 2nd or 3rd time even) allows the pilot to close the game if it ever gets to that point.
I'm not sure what Ancestral Vision's place would be in something like Twin, but I would be surprised if it didn't show up at all. Dismissing it as "only for control decks" is just plain ignorance, and makes you resemble an Albino Troll rather than a logical contributor.
RGB Jund BGR
WGB Junk/Abzan Company WGB
LEGACY
RUGB Delver GURB
EDH
UW Geist of Saint Traft Aggro-Control WU
RUG Riku of Two Reflections Combo GUR
BBB Skithiryx Control BB
In the BBE jund era, the jund meta share was around 25% AND jund was WINNING several major events and that lasted really long. (non stop from DRS printing until BBE ban)
On the current meta no deck keeps more than 20% for longer than 3 months, no deck is taking the cup of many major events, no decks breaks the turn 4 rule often enough, no decks cause major logistic issues on tournament. Why the hell some people still hope for bans? Outside of being butthurt against specific card ("i hate DRS" people) there is no reason for a card to be banned now.
A unban, while could be beneficial, had it's chance really lowered by the recent GPs results. From the cards with the better chances of comming out, Preordain, AV and Blossom, preordian and AV will probably not come out due to the last GPs and BB is part of a deck that wizards fear too much.
I think the lack of aggro might help push for a Wild Nacatl unban. I have been swayed in the past month to support this unban and I am 110% for it.
RELEASE THE KITTIES!
RGOmnath, Locus of ManaRG
URThe Locust godUR
Modern
UWMiraclesUW
Legacy
BGIce Station Zebra (Living Fins)BG
UBRGrixis ControlUBR
RGLandsRG
The answer is because it's awesome to win turn 4. I'm being facetious, but I think you are undervaluing that possibility. I get what you are saying though, which is why I said I'm not sure that Twin would be AV's biggest beneficiary on the previous page. You are right in the sense that AV helps control's game plan more, but you are wrong in the sense that AV would help Twin play a very flexible game. Basically, even if I'm a control deck, it's powerful to be able to threaten a combo from t4 onwards.
Sometimes, I'd be playing for the end game, and AV's card advantage would let me win there. Sometimes, I'd try to win in the midgame with the combo, and AV would be like insurance to help me recover if I failed.
Don't believe me? I mean, why would you? I'm just some random dude on the internet. But if you want to see how Twin could evolve, take a look at the deck Mr. Snapcaster, Tiago Chan played at a recent Modern GP: http://blog.mtgmadness.com/index.php/multiple-angles-of-attack-mid-range-kiki-jiki/tiago-chan
The title, Multiple Angles of Attack says it all.
tl; dr - It's more powerful to focus only on either combo or control, but being flexible lets you play differently in different match-ups, which can be better than raw power.
Here, you jump down the throat of another poster, clearly making the point that Ancestral Vision would be absolutely terrible in any Twin deck.
Yet, I can nearly guarantee that if AV were unbanned today, MODO would be filled with pilots running 4 copies of AV in their Splinter Twin decks, and by Monday we'd probably see at least a couple folks 4-0 with such a build.
Where it would go from there is anyone's guess, but it's very likely most Blue decks would dabble in some number of Visions. It is Ancestral after all.
As for why run Twin over Control? Well, people like to combo. Combos are powerful, and win much more quickly than Colonnades and Resto Angels. You didn't even stop to think that maybe the shell stays basically the same, only you can afford to cut down on Splinter Twins now that you have a card that digs even deeper into your deck.
No one knows for sure what would happen if Ancestral was unbanned. Just don't pretend that ultimatums are going to hold up in this theorycrafting discussion. Dismissing a possibility like Ancestral Vision in Twin is just blind disobedience.
RGB Jund BGR
WGB Junk/Abzan Company WGB
LEGACY
RUGB Delver GURB
EDH
UW Geist of Saint Traft Aggro-Control WU
RUG Riku of Two Reflections Combo GUR
BBB Skithiryx Control BB
Cockatrice username: Blackcat77
RGB Jund BGR
WGB Junk/Abzan Company WGB
LEGACY
RUGB Delver GURB
EDH
UW Geist of Saint Traft Aggro-Control WU
RUG Riku of Two Reflections Combo GUR
BBB Skithiryx Control BB
The whole point of Splinter Twin is that it is a consistent Turn 4 combo. If it cut Serum Visions for Ancestral Vision and cut some pieces of its combo for more control, then it would be winning on turn 5-6 on average. Twin is much worse as a late-game combo/control deck than Scapeshift. It wouldn't see play if it wasn't trying to combo on turn 4.
January 27th is when the banned list will be updated.
The point is that even if this is true, it would be competing with other cards that are often better. It isn't necessarily better than Lingering Souls. It dies to removal, it doesn't work with Liliana, it can be discarded or countered effectively, it makes you lose life, and it doesn't immediately stall the game, which makes it much worse than Lingering Souls against aggro.
What WON'T be unbanned:
Ancestral Vision: UWR can play it
Wild Nacatl: Zoo can play it
Cantrips, rituals: Storm can play it, Twin can play cantrips
That quote specifically said top decks. Zoo hasn't done much of anything for a while and pure creature aggro doesn't exist in Modern. Also, Storm is a Tier 3 deck, not a top deck. You are probably right about Ancestral Vision and the cantrips for now, especially after GP Prague.
Wizards hates a lot of things. One can hope that they don't let that decide what gets banned.
We did testing. Bitterblossom was not broken. It still has a lot of bad matchups.
It doesn't drag out games as much as Second Sunrise or Sensei's Top do. It isn't enough to get it banned.
How are you flashing in Scion of Oona on turn 2?
This is false, because in a control mirror, either your opponent will counter a piece of the combo or you will assemble it. If it is countered/discarded then the game won't take any longer than if it was a normal control mirror. If you assemble the combo, then you will win. Nothing in there makes the game take longer. Even in a mirror with both players playing the combo, each player can still counter/discard the opponent's combo and a player will eventually get manascrewed and not be able to make as many tokens as the opponent. Yes, mirror matches between two Thopter Sword decks take a while. But it would not be as bad as Top/Sunrise and it is not enough to get the deck banned.
BGx has been doing well, but it hasn't been dominating online and it hasn't actually won any tournaments. It is not getting a ban.
So they banned Nacatl before they even knew that they would be doing devotion in Theros so that it could be unbanned when other decks were viable? And they couldn't have just left Nacatl in the format until those decks were viable? When Nacatl was unbanned we had two aggro decks. Right now we have two aggro decks. I don't think that they banned Nacatl just because they wanted to unban it when Boros and Gruul were viable decks. If new cards would make those specific decks viable, then they would make them just as viable if Nacatl was in the format before than if it was unbanned immediately after they were printed.
Green Sun's Zenith was already banned when Nacatl was banned.
Ancestral Vision: I already explained why it wouldn't be played in Splinter Twin. And yes, it would be played in Tempo. There is one Tier 1.5 Tempo deck and three Tier 3 tempo decks in Modern. It is less of the meta than any other archetype. It needs an unban. Ancestral Vision could be that unban.
Bitterblossom: Do you have any proof of it being played in decks other than Faeries, BW Tokens, and Polymorph?
Seething Song: Storm is Tier 2 at best online, it could use an unban (though I do realize that giving it back the cantrips and Seething Song would make it too fast, and the format needs the cantrips more). Also, it wouldn't be played in Griselbrand Reanimator. That combo of yours needs 3 specific cards, with only one of them having another equivalent card. It is too inconsistent to work.
Artifact Lands: Um, no. Ravager Affinity was the most broken Standard deck since the Urza Block. Think of how much more broken it would be with all of the Scars of Mirrodin cards. It would easily break the Turn 4 Rule and warp the format to the point at which people would be playing maindeck Stony Silence to answer it.
Modern being a Midrange format: Last time I checked, Modern was a combo format, not a midrange format.
You may be forgetting that Dark Depths+Thopter/Sword was what made it broken, not just one or the other.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
As for DRS being banned, I doubt it will happen as long as DRS is still in Standard. Wotc wants as many selling as possible.
Specially nacatl, that would push many tier 2 aggro out just to push one aggro to tier 1.
Totally wrong. The difference between them is stellar.
Nacatl is always a 3/3 once the condition is met, (wich is by the way the easiest condition to pull from the three) both delver and experiment one need to be build up after they enter the field.
A turn 1 nacatl with two turn 2 nacatl gives you three 3/3
A turn 1 delver with two turn 2 delver gives you one 3/2 and two 1/1
A turn 1 E1 with two turn 2 E1 gives you three 1/1
While this is not a common scenario it shows the huge difference between them. Bounces and blinks can reset E1 and Delver, but not nacatl.
That is my point. They only needed bans when they were combined. If Sword of the Meek was taken off without Dark Depths being taken off, it wouldn't be broken.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
I don't agree with this, I think the UW Tezz Foundary deck was the best deck not close before Thepths was created. People seem to focus on Thepths and forget that other decks played the combo before that and did extremely well. In fact LSV and teams' UW Tezz was the real breakout deck of World that year with a bunch of very good finishes. And before Thespian Stage I would have said that I'm not even afraid of Dark Depths in this format, its so hilariously beatable, especially with no Chrome Mox to power out early Confidants (the real reason the deck was actually good) and Chalices on 1.
Merfolk aren't exactly a cakewalk either, especially if you factor in the 12+ lords, Master of Waves and the fact that Zoo starts most of their games at a virtual 15 life more often then not.
Compared to all of those, Wild Nacatl in Zoo is just a regular Joe doing his thing from nine to five. A vanilla 3/3 on an instalment plan doesn't exactly invalidate as many decks as people might think.
Many thanks to HotP Studios. Special thanks to DNC for this great sig.
When Nacatl's being talked about, it's in the context of the aggro decks in Naya colors that become inferior when you can just build Naya Zoo instead, not in the grand scheme of all aggro varieties.
Since Gruul and Boros aren't doing well right now anyways and Hatebears, Burn, Soul Sisters, and Bogles are different enough that they wouldn't be invalidated, Nacatl wouldn't push anything out of the format.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
YES THEY WOULD.
JUST BECAUSE BOROS ISN'T PLACING DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN'T.
Burn still existed when Nacatl was in the format. Soul Sisters and Bogles have a huge advantage against fair decks. Adding Nacatl to the format might make them do better. Hatebears is strong enough in the unfair matchups that I think that it could stick around. And good luck with Boros.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Then why has it not placed? Its not like it has not had plenty of chances.
Have you been paying any attention to the Splinter Twin decks that have been seeing success lately? Allow me to quote Patrick Dickmann, who posts here as Darguad, and won GP Antwerp with Splinter Twin:
The Twin decks that are winning these days (consistently) aren't winning on turn 4. They're just presenting that threat. If you follow the deck's trajectory, pilots are actually looking to see how many combo win conditions they can realistically shave to make the deck apply more traditional pressure, while still being able to threaten combo.
Does this mean Twin would play Ancestral Visions if it became unbanned? I don't think we would (because we need our topdecks to be good more than we need raw card advantage). But it's not as ridiculous of a claim as you suggest.
It's your job win every game of Magic where you're not.
But as you said, they have to present the threat. Removing Serum Visions and Kiki-Jiki and reducing the number of Splinter Twins would remove that threat, which would place the deck in Scapeshift's territory, which it is not suited for.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Thats a lot of theory crafting. Burn is T1.5, maybe T2 in the format right now. Its a meta call, can be solid, can be terrible. Bogle is in a bad place at the moment. So much hate and people have learned to play against the deck. Life gain (Soul sisters) is another meta call. Life gain doesnt always get you there. And Hatebears, The deck was built to feast on Jund. Hatebears would probably loose some ground with full aggro Zoo in the format.
So more or less what you are asking for is moving a T1.5-T2 deck, current Zoo, to T1, hurting a couple other decks along the way.
Lets not forget about Affinity. Zoo had good match ups with Affinity pre bans. Would they be the same or worse now? I dont see how they could get much worse.
Soul Sisters and Bogles both can easily beat Naya Zoo (Really, see how much your Wild Nacatls do when your opponent has a Serra Ascendant and 2 Soul Sisters on the board. Or if your opponent has a hexproof 6/6 creature with vigilance, lifelink, and first strike). And other than decks with lifegain improving to combat Naya Zoo, I can't see Burn doing any worse because of Nacatl Naya. I can see your point on Hatebears though, especially since Tron would get worse with more aggro decks that can survive Pyroclasm in the format. I think moving Soul Sisters to Tier 1.5, Bogles to Tier 2, and Naya Zoo to Tier 1 is worth it even if Burn, Hatebears, and Death and Taxes get a little worse.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Zoo has the ability to fight off most other aggro decks. Adding kitty just gives the deck bigger quicker beats.