"I'm fairly certain that X is the best deck in modern right now."
This sentiment has been proselytised and shared by players from the pro level down to the grass-roots level since the format began (and since magic began, in the wider context).
It speaks to a very human need to rationalise and reduce complex sets of information down to a simple opinion or choice. Sometimes it rings true in the wider sense and most of the time it doesn't.
Why do I bring this up?
What if the default state for modern was nebulous enough that a statement such as the above could never be true? How many players over the years have been bitten by reading an opinion piece and trusting the narrow judgment of "this is the best option right now", buying into a strategy or deck and getting summarily crushed in their local or time-sensitive meta?
"but purkle, everyone has an opinion, pros have to write about something. You're thought-policing!"
Whoah there, back up. We've all shared our thoughts on what we think is best-placed in modern. In fact it's one of the more fun and engaging topics of discussion (if nobody takes themselves too seriously!). No, this aspect is fine. Keep sharing those opinions!
What I'm suggesting is that we give players, especially *newer* players more of the tools to evaluate the format beyond blankly accepting the opinion of one or more influential players. In a word and being a bit cynical, I guess you could sum this up as education
We are lacking spaces, places and tools for newer and upcoming players to really attack the format in an educated way. Sure they can learn if they put the effort in, but this is a game, not a vocation. It behoves us as established players to bring in the latest generation of talent in the smoothest and most welcoming way possible.
The 'state of modern' thread in the forum is a hotbed of emotionally-charged arguments rather than a good primer for understanding modern. Individual deck threads are useful but a very narrow way to break into the format at large. The 'what deck should I play' is useful but also feeds back to this idea of opinion outweighing the tools to adequately evaluate said opinions.
And you know; even pros at the highest level of the game completely misunderstand modern. Their understanding of standard or draft is inadequate as a basis for succeeding in modern despite it being literally the same game. As a result, up until recently with some positive marketing, modern has born the brunt of a lot of criticism from pro players who dump on the foemat as a swingy uninteractive variance-fest. Proponents of the format have recently (and thankfully) found the words to explain and debunk this lazy line of thinking but we all recognise that people love a good scapegoat and if it's popular to hate modern then that's what will happen.
I propose a new place on the forums specifically for newer members of the format and those looking to learn the nuances and subtleties within. It should be completely free from loose ideas of what's best and from arguments about bannings. It should provide a framework and a supportive community who can help answer questions and give players the tools to look at articles and posts and break them down beyond taking them at face value. And most of all, it should provide links to great examples of modern theory and balanced viewpoints within articles, so that a starting player can begin their journey in the most unbiased way possible. It should include advice on the benchmarks of the format and how to brew or tweak effectively within modern. It should include a reference guide to some of the more impactful cards to expect from opponents.
I shouldn't have to say that a new player seeing "ban tron, unban twin, lantern is *******" every five minutes is going to have a hard time getting their best foot forward in this complex format. Let's change that.
Anyone interested in sharing links to really shining examples of modern articles, please do so. Don't link to any premium articles of course.
Anyone who's able to write a primer on 'how to understand your local meta vs the wider meta' your work would be greatly appreciated.
Anyone who's able to write a primer on 'the general misunderstanding and mistakes you might make when starting in modern and how to avoid them' again yohr help would be appreciated (especially with links to relevant articles such as from Frank Karsten)
Anyone who can write a primer on how to brew and tweak within modern should weigh in here as well.
And anyone willing to compile a list of most frequently seen and used impactful cards across the main strategies and sideboards in modern should give it a go
And anyone else who wants to contribute that would be awesome.
I agree a lot of players seem too look for the best deck, or think there is a best deck. But I think its a mindset (mostly from standard) that SHOULDNT exist in modern. It takes the average player to say to new players or old players stuck in this mindset, that it isnt true.
Modern has no best deck, but has trending decks. If you out time into mastering a deck, you will be successful.
I personally do this, and I think most players do. It was pros who didn't; disliking the massive time sink modern testing is and how theres no "One deck to win. But time has shown the pros opinions HAVE been drowned out by average players who get that.
"I'm fairly certain that X is the best deck in modern right now."
This sentiment has been proselytised and shared by players from the pro level down to the grass-roots level since the format began (and since magic began, in the wider context).
It speaks to a very human need to rationalise and reduce complex sets of information down to a simple opinion or choice. Sometimes it rings true in the wider sense and most of the time it doesn't.
Why do I bring this up?
What if the default state for modern was nebulous enough that a statement such as the above could never be true? How many players over the years have been bitten by reading an opinion piece and trusting the narrow judgment of "this is the best option right now", buying into a strategy or deck and getting summarily crushed in their local or time-sensitive meta?
"but purkle, everyone has an opinion, pros have to write about something. You're thought-policing!"
Whoah there, back up. We've all shared our thoughts on what we think is best-placed in modern. In fact it's one of the more fun and engaging topics of discussion (if nobody takes themselves too seriously!). No, this aspect is fine. Keep sharing those opinions!
What I'm suggesting is that we give players, especially *newer* players more of the tools to evaluate the format beyond blankly accepting the opinion of one or more influential players. In a word and being a bit cynical, I guess you could sum this up as education
We are lacking spaces, places and tools for newer and upcoming players to really attack the format in an educated way. Sure they can learn if they put the effort in, but this is a game, not a vocation. It behoves us as established players to bring in the latest generation of talent in the smoothest and most welcoming way possible.
The 'state of modern' thread in the forum is a hotbed of emotionally-charged arguments rather than a good primer for understanding modern. Individual deck threads are useful but a very narrow way to break into the format at large. The 'what deck should I play' is useful but also feeds back to this idea of opinion outweighing the tools to adequately evaluate said opinions.
And you know; even pros at the highest level of the game completely misunderstand modern. Their understanding of standard or draft is inadequate as a basis for succeeding in modern despite it being literally the same game. As a result, up until recently with some positive marketing, modern has born the brunt of a lot of criticism from pro players who dump on the foemat as a swingy uninteractive variance-fest. Proponents of the format have recently (and thankfully) found the words to explain and debunk this lazy line of thinking but we all recognise that people love a good scapegoat and if it's popular to hate modern then that's what will happen.
I propose a new place on the forums specifically for newer members of the format and those looking to learn the nuances and subtleties within. It should be completely free from loose ideas of what's best and from arguments about bannings. It should provide a framework and a supportive community who can help answer questions and give players the tools to look at articles and posts and break them down beyond taking them at face value. And most of all, it should provide links to great examples of modern theory and balanced viewpoints within articles, so that a starting player can begin their journey in the most unbiased way possible. It should include advice on the benchmarks of the format and how to brew or tweak effectively within modern. It should include a reference guide to some of the more impactful cards to expect from opponents.
I shouldn't have to say that a new player seeing "ban tron, unban twin, lantern is *******" every five minutes is going to have a hard time getting their best foot forward in this complex format. Let's change that.
Anyone interested in sharing links to really shining examples of modern articles, please do so. Don't link to any premium articles of course.
Anyone who's able to write a primer on 'how to understand your local meta vs the wider meta' your work would be greatly appreciated.
Anyone who's able to write a primer on 'the general misunderstanding and mistakes you might make when starting in modern and how to avoid them' again yohr help would be appreciated (especially with links to relevant articles such as from Frank Karsten)
Anyone who can write a primer on how to brew and tweak within modern should weigh in here as well.
And anyone willing to compile a list of most frequently seen and used impactful cards across the main strategies and sideboards in modern should give it a go
And anyone else who wants to contribute that would be awesome.
Modern has no best deck, but has trending decks. If you out time into mastering a deck, you will be successful.
I personally do this, and I think most players do. It was pros who didn't; disliking the massive time sink modern testing is and how theres no "One deck to win. But time has shown the pros opinions HAVE been drowned out by average players who get that.