How about it? Should Modern shift to a 20 card sideboard?
I'm in favor as Modern seems to be very diverse right now. Hard to plan a SB when you could be facing a multitude of decks from different angles. Also seems like there aren't a lot of interactions between some of these decks right now as well. It could increase interactiveness.
I'm sure its been asked before, but I thought it could be interesting to see what people think. Put your 2 cents in.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Absolutely not. The plan would backfire so hard. People always forget they're not the only ones who get to run more cards. With larger sb's deck 1 can add more against deck 7 but deck 7 also gets to add things that negate what deck 1 adds. It's all just a wash no matter what the number is.
I would say temporary yes. There are too many strategies to have a chance with 15 cards. A few months ago I might have had a different answer, but Dredge adds a new, powerful angle to the fotmat, it requires answers, and it's not like we have lost other must-answer threats since Twin.
That said, once it's been a few years, if we are given more answers, the next Decay or something, I could see reevaluating it, maybe going back, but with narrow answers, more could be healthier
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
I would say temporary yes. There are too many strategies to have a chance with 15 cards. A few months ago I might have had a different answer, but Dredge adds a new, powerful angle to the fotmat, it requires answers, and it's not like we have lost other must-answer threats since Twin.
That said, once it's been a few years, if we are given more answers, the next Decay or something, I could see reevaluating it, maybe going back, but with narrow answers, more could be healthier
while I disagree with your answer to the yes or no question, your post otherwise hits the nail on the head.
In vintage for a long time you needed at least 4 cards against dredge, at least 4 cards against shops, and the rest of your board for everything else. But vintage gets to play great filter and catch-all answer cards. Modern just needs more of those, not more sb slots.
We see transnational boards at 15 cards, just every deck to be running some transnational plan with 5 extra cards. The ability to negate what people are siding in against you, while presenting a legitimate threat is huge.
20 cards is 5 play sets of cards that can be swapped out. Dredge can just turn into Jund, another powerful strategy that doesn't care if you are eating/negating their yard.
IMHO you would see more people running a transnational board each game, turning the G2 and G3 into more skewed guessing games.
If you start to make the sideboards bigger you can just bring a second deck and switch it instead of sideboarding.
Maybe that would be nice, lets all bring two decks a maindeck and a sidedeck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Reanimator
Modern - Burn
EDH - Neheb the Eternal
having more cards in your SB kinda takes away an important aspect of the game which is meta gaming. If you can just pack an answer for everything what would be the point of meta gaming and choosing an appropriate deck to get through the field? 15 is fine.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Tooth & Nail........Grishoalbrand....Living Dominance....Tezzerator.........Vannifar Pod
My Decks that have been BANNED
DRS Jund | Kiki-Pod | Bloom Titan | Splinter Twin | KCI
No way. This just increases the sideboard and matchup lottery, aka more variance, aka ***** Modern doesn't need, aka ***** Wizards doesn't want. The 20 card sideboard idea seeks to solve a problem it doesn't actually solve (although it is a problem that needs solving).
Thats an easy problem to solve. Increase sideboard size but put a cap on how many slots you can exchange. So say have a 20 card SB and only allow 15 slots to be exchanged. Also you could make sideboarding an option only after game one, which would save tournament time between games two and three.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Thats an easy problem to solve. Increase sideboard size but put a cap on how many slots you can exchange. So say have a 20 card SB and only allow 15 slots to be exchanged. Also you could make sideboarding an option only after game one, which would save tournament time between games two and three.
I was going to bring that up. It lets you respond to the diversity of the meta, but caps transformative side boarding. I'd even go with 20 SB and cap it at 10 cards sided in.
I have a feeling those people playing decks they don't want disrupted are going to side with 15 and those that want to play more interaction are going to be in favor of 20. If I had to guess.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Thats an easy problem to solve. Increase sideboard size but put a cap on how many slots you can exchange. So say have a 20 card SB and only allow 15 slots to be exchanged. Also you could make sideboarding an option only after game one, which would save tournament time between games two and three.
I was going to bring that up. It lets you respond to the diversity of the meta, but caps transformative side boarding. I'd even go with 20 SB and cap it at 10 cards sided in.
I have a feeling those people playing decks they don't want disrupted are going to side with 15 and those that want to play more interaction are going to be in favor of 20. If I had to guess.
I'm sorry but that's utterly ridiculous. It's so convoluted and so different than the rules of any other format. And you'll have an incredibly hard time enforcing it. Deck checks would be nightmares.
I also already bring in more than 10 cards in some matchups, and I don't run a "transformative" SB. Just a regular Jund deck and SB.
Thats an easy problem to solve. Increase sideboard size but put a cap on how many slots you can exchange. So say have a 20 card SB and only allow 15 slots to be exchanged. Also you could make sideboarding an option only after game one, which would save tournament time between games two and three.
I was going to bring that up. It lets you respond to the diversity of the meta, but caps transformative side boarding. I'd even go with 20 SB and cap it at 10 cards sided in.
I have a feeling those people playing decks they don't want disrupted are going to side with 15 and those that want to play more interaction are going to be in favor of 20. If I had to guess.
As RC said above, this would be a logistical nightmare and would make deck checks significantly harder. It's also complicated and confusing for players coming from Standard or learning Constructed Magic.
Oh boohoo. Seriously. People would figure it out. As to variance, how does it affect it any more than already is there? The deck you bring isn't going to change anymore than it did before on a game by game basis. It would simply allow more elasticity on a match by by match basis. The good far outweighs the growing pains it would bring. By good I mean more stuff could come off the banned list and the deck pool would become deeper and those decks would be able to have better performances across a wider spectrum of opposing decks games 2 and 3. I suppose some decks wouldn't survive but that is only because they are bad(poorly designed/non-interactive) decks to begin with.(Well their game ones would still be fine but it would likely mean a worse game two and three.) They would have to evolve and become flexible to deal with threats just like fair decks have to hope they get lucky and draw a silver bullet.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Anyone could say the same to you. You don't like the format? Boohoo. Go play Legacy or Standard or Pokemon.
I agree that Modern could use some better answers but an increased sideboard (especially with modified rules for the number of cards brought in per game) is an unnecessarily complicated non-solution.
Oh boohoo. Seriously. People would figure it out. As to variance, how does it affect it any more than already is there? The deck you bring isn't going to change anymore than it did before on a game by game basis. It would simply allow more elasticity on a match by by match basis. The good far outweighs the growing pains it would bring. By good I mean more stuff could come off the banned list and the deck pool would become deeper and those decks would be able to have better performances across a wider spectrum of opposing decks games 2 and 3. I suppose some decks wouldn't survive but that is only because they are bad(poorly designed/non-interactive) decks to begin with.(Well their game ones would still be fine but it would likely mean a worse game two and three.) They would have to evolve and become flexible to deal with threats just like fair decks have to hope they get lucky and draw a silver bullet.
I agree with you. We may be in the minority on this one, hopefully we get a few more responding. Change scares people. It may be tougher to enforce and shake things up but I feel it could be an overall positive. I'd like to see it implemented on a small scale at first to give it a test run somewhere then see what the feedback from players on it is. If Modern continues to grow and more archetypes emerge, we are going to find a 15 card sideboard is not up to the task of keeping pace with the meta. Guess we will see what happens.
I'm sorry but that's utterly ridiculous. It's so convoluted and so different than the rules of any other format. And you'll have an incredibly hard time enforcing it. Deck checks would be nightmares.
I also already bring in more than 10 cards in some matchups, and I don't run a "transformative" SB. Just a regular Jund deck and SB.
The only thing "utterly ridiculous" is the panicked knee-jerk reaction of several in this thread not even willing to discuss how it could help the format if implemented correctly. Relax its not a matter of life and death, a simple question was thrown out. The world continues to spin around. Lets discuss it civilly.
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
There was nothing knee jerk about it. I read your idea, I thought about it, and the multiple posts I've made in the thread sum up very well what I think about it.
1. It's ridiculous
2. It's completely unnecessary
3. It just exacerbates the problem instead of fixing it
4. It's ridiculous
5. It presents logistical hurdles that aren't worth it, especially since even without the hurdles the idea solves nothing
6. It's ridiculous
On the contrary, I love the format and I love the game, but it could be better. And I don't think we need to promote power creep to get there. Answers exist for everything, deckspace is, however, woefully inadequate.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Why?The problem exists so it is clear "something" is necessary. What problem does it exacerbate? Logistical hurdles can always be overcome. Education takes a little time but people would pick it up. ANd if you think new players couldn't "get it" you horribly underestimate people.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern GB Rock U Flooding Merfolk RUG Delver Midrange WU Monks UW Tempo Geist GW Bogle GW Liege UR Tron B Vampires
Affinity Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity EDH W Akroma GBW Ghave BRU Thrax GR Ruric I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
On the contrary, I love the format and I love the game, but it could be better. And I don't think we need to promote power creep to get there. Answers exist for everything, deckspace is, however, woefully inadequate.
Really? What 'answers' exist for Suicide Zoo or Infect that people aren't already running?
On the contrary, I love the format and I love the game, but it could be better. And I don't think we need to promote power creep to get there. Answers exist for everything, deckspace is, however, woefully inadequate.
Really? What 'answers' exist for Suicide Zoo or Infect that people aren't already running?
Bolt-Snap-Bolt comes to mind. Woefully underrepresented.
On the contrary, I love the format and I love the game, but it could be better. And I don't think we need to promote power creep to get there. Answers exist for everything, deckspace is, however, woefully inadequate.
Really? What 'answers' exist for Suicide Zoo or Infect that people aren't already running?
Bolt-Snap-Bolt comes to mind. Woefully underrepresented.
Those cards are great, Snap is already the best blue creature and Bolt is the most played card in Modern. Grixis Delver won a GP this weekend using playsets of both MB.
I meant something that people don't currently have room for that they would be able to play if they had five extra sideboard slots. Something that would actually make a difference in those matchups.
There was nothing knee jerk about it. I read your idea, I thought about it, and the multiple posts I've made in the thread sum up very well what I think about it.
1. It's ridiculous
2. It's completely unnecessary
3. It just exacerbates the problem instead of fixing it
4. It's ridiculous
5. It presents logistical hurdles that aren't worth it, especially since even without the hurdles the idea solves nothing
6. It's ridiculous
You are entitled to your opinion, however ridiculous it may be.
Answers exist for everything, deckspace is, however, woefully inadequate.
BINGO, we have a winner! Couldn't have said it better myself.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm in favor as Modern seems to be very diverse right now. Hard to plan a SB when you could be facing a multitude of decks from different angles. Also seems like there aren't a lot of interactions between some of these decks right now as well. It could increase interactiveness.
I'm sure its been asked before, but I thought it could be interesting to see what people think. Put your 2 cents in.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
15 cards is more than enough to fill with powerful hate. 20 would be overkill, IMO.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
That said, once it's been a few years, if we are given more answers, the next Decay or something, I could see reevaluating it, maybe going back, but with narrow answers, more could be healthier
In vintage for a long time you needed at least 4 cards against dredge, at least 4 cards against shops, and the rest of your board for everything else. But vintage gets to play great filter and catch-all answer cards. Modern just needs more of those, not more sb slots.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
20 cards is 5 play sets of cards that can be swapped out. Dredge can just turn into Jund, another powerful strategy that doesn't care if you are eating/negating their yard.
IMHO you would see more people running a transnational board each game, turning the G2 and G3 into more skewed guessing games.
If you start to make the sideboards bigger you can just bring a second deck and switch it instead of sideboarding.
Maybe that would be nice, lets all bring two decks a maindeck and a sidedeck.
Modern - Burn
EDH - Neheb the Eternal
Tooth & Nail........Grishoalbrand....Living Dominance....Tezzerator.........Vannifar Pod
My Decks that have been BANNED
DRS Jund | Kiki-Pod | Bloom Titan | Splinter Twin | KCI
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
I was going to bring that up. It lets you respond to the diversity of the meta, but caps transformative side boarding. I'd even go with 20 SB and cap it at 10 cards sided in.
I have a feeling those people playing decks they don't want disrupted are going to side with 15 and those that want to play more interaction are going to be in favor of 20. If I had to guess.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
I also already bring in more than 10 cards in some matchups, and I don't run a "transformative" SB. Just a regular Jund deck and SB.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
As RC said above, this would be a logistical nightmare and would make deck checks significantly harder. It's also complicated and confusing for players coming from Standard or learning Constructed Magic.
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
I agree that Modern could use some better answers but an increased sideboard (especially with modified rules for the number of cards brought in per game) is an unnecessarily complicated non-solution.
I agree with you. We may be in the minority on this one, hopefully we get a few more responding. Change scares people. It may be tougher to enforce and shake things up but I feel it could be an overall positive. I'd like to see it implemented on a small scale at first to give it a test run somewhere then see what the feedback from players on it is. If Modern continues to grow and more archetypes emerge, we are going to find a 15 card sideboard is not up to the task of keeping pace with the meta. Guess we will see what happens.
The only thing "utterly ridiculous" is the panicked knee-jerk reaction of several in this thread not even willing to discuss how it could help the format if implemented correctly. Relax its not a matter of life and death, a simple question was thrown out. The world continues to spin around. Lets discuss it civilly.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
1. It's ridiculous
2. It's completely unnecessary
3. It just exacerbates the problem instead of fixing it
4. It's ridiculous
5. It presents logistical hurdles that aren't worth it, especially since even without the hurdles the idea solves nothing
6. It's ridiculous
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
GB Rock
U Flooding Merfolk
RUG Delver Midrange
WU Monks
UW Tempo Geist
GW Bogle
GW Liege
UR Tron
B Vampires
Affinity
Legacy
Fish
Goblins
Burn
Reanimator
Dredge
Affinity
EDH
W Akroma
GBW Ghave
BRU Thrax
GR Ruric
I advocate for the elimination of the combo archetype in Modern. I believe it is degenerate and unfun by its very nature and will always limit design space and cause unnecessary bans.
Really? What 'answers' exist for Suicide Zoo or Infect that people aren't already running?
Bolt-Snap-Bolt comes to mind. Woefully underrepresented.
Those cards are great, Snap is already the best blue creature and Bolt is the most played card in Modern. Grixis Delver won a GP this weekend using playsets of both MB.
I meant something that people don't currently have room for that they would be able to play if they had five extra sideboard slots. Something that would actually make a difference in those matchups.
You are entitled to your opinion, however ridiculous it may be.
BINGO, we have a winner! Couldn't have said it better myself.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."