My eyes literally are rolling into the back of my head.
Now we are just going to accept Pro Tour driven unbans as the only logical thing to do? Nothing against you on this Niall, but I hate that. All this really tells me, is they dont actually manage the format based on health, unless things get tilted far too much, but instead its all about set, or event, shake up ban/unbans.
My eyes literally are rolling into the back of my head.
Now we are just going to accept Pro Tour driven unbans as the only logical thing to do? Nothing against you on this Niall, but I hate that. All this really tells me, is they dont actually manage the format based on health, unless things get tilted far too much, but instead its all about set, or event, shake up ban/unbans.
I really am not happy about that.
They are basically telling us that if the format is not a garbage fire or they can't make hype money, they do not care what happens. And even if it is a garbage fire, if another format is a bigger garbage fire, they also don't care what happens.
I guess the format is "fine" at the moment, especially at my local store, where most people are not playing a lot of the misery and woe that dwells at GP top tables and MTGO. But the acceptance of the PT dictating bans and unbans (substitute PT for any other non-metagame reason, like Master set reprints) is just lazy and meaningless "management." Which I guess would make sense for a company that has demonstrated little to no knowledge of the intricacies of most of their constructed formats, and draws their conclusions/makes decisions from data and random pro player opinions.
They are basically telling us that if the format is not a garbage fire or they can't make hype money, they do not care what happens. And even if it is a garbage fire, if another format is a bigger garbage fire, they also don't care what happens.
I guess the format is "fine" at the moment, especially at my local store, where most people are not playing a lot of the misery and woe that dwells at GP top tables and MTGO. But the acceptance of the PT dictating bans and unbans (substitute PT for any other non-metagame reason, like Master set reprints) is just lazy and meaningless "management." Which I guess would make sense for a company that has demonstrated little to no knowledge of the intricacies of most of their constructed formats, and draws their conclusions/makes decisions from data and random pro player opinions.
That sum's it up for me. And I get it, without Standard making them money, or a set to push an unbanned reprint, its a corporation it exists to make money. Feels like a pretty bad way to lay any kind of claim to management through logic, or fairness however.
I'm frankly not happy the decks at the top anymore, time for a break as the meta cycles I guess.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
Again - if the format was in a bad place, then yes, this would be a disaster of a day. But it's not. Things look really good. Like it has been during it's best days, if you're proficient with a deck you can play it to the top (within relative reason). I would love GSZ unbanned. Others want stronger cantrips. Others still want SFM. They'll come off in time. We just got insane unbans (that are still shaking out) less than 6 months ago.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
Are you calling Delver and the rest of the blue staples in legacy completely invalidated? Fat chance.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
DRS Delver had its run, and unlike Twin actually was suppressing the format, its a different thing. I also wouldnt buy in on a $5K deck, the fact I have several decks over $1k right now in Modern is stupid enough as is.
I dont know. I'm just frustrated. I feel dissonance over Stirrings being fine, but Preordain not, and that kind of thing sticks out to me like a splinter, it just drives me nuts.
I dont want cards to come off 'eventually' when Jace/BBE came off, that was a start, but its been months. They are not shaking up anything further at this point, and if you didnt see Search/Teferi, Jace wouldnt even be seen in the top 32 of any event.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
Are you calling Delver and the rest of the blue staples in legacy completely invalidated? Fat chance.
I honestly don't know Legacy well enough to make that statement. But it sure as hell happened to my blue staples in Modern for 2+ years. That's why it was so easy to slowly finish foiling out all my staples: they were fairly worthless for a LONG, LONG time, and therefore cheap to pick up.
Nobody's legacy deck got gutted...the duals, FOWs, etc are all still very playable cards. That's the good thing about a ban hitting a multicolor goodstuff type of deck - the cards retain value because they are still individually very powerful instead of being very synergistic and only being playable when you have everything.
I dont want cards to come off 'eventually' when Jace/BBE came off, that was a start, but its been months. They are not shaking up anything further at this point, and if you didnt see Search/Teferi, Jace wouldnt even be seen in the top 32 of any event.
I'm just disappointed I guess.
They might also look at Azcanta/Teferi as "Look! Standard cards making a difference! Just wait another indeterminate amount of sets and maybe you'll get more!"
Standard cards make a huge difference, every set has something that shakes up a deck or 2. The problem is..give us both. I know they wont. The equity in those cards is too much to ignore, but its simply so annoying...especially for something like Preordain that is somehow a $5 card...
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
Are you calling Delver and the rest of the blue staples in legacy completely invalidated? Fat chance.
I honestly don't know Legacy well enough to make that statement. But it sure as hell happened to my blue staples in Modern for 2+ years. That's why it was so easy to slowly finish foiling out all my staples: they were fairly worthless for a LONG, LONG time, and therefore cheap to pick up.
Fair. Legacy is definitely a different beast though and it actually opens up some blue space that wasn't there as a huge amount of the format had coalesced into 4c goodstuff decks. No one really lost any value from these bans, and even further than that, they can't be beholden to how much money people are willing to pump into their decks as it sets a terribly dangerous precedent. The vintage format would be better if they restricted Workshop - but then you're literally cutting ~$5k of value out of decks that people have been dedicated to for a long time. Vintage is quite a bit different as it caters to such a limited group, but it's still a bad spot to be in if you can't ban cards due to people overspending on their cardboard.
Let's face it. We all know SFM will do next to nothing if ever unbanned. They couldn't risk unbanning it without an immediate reprint because by the time it was actually reprinted, all the hype would've died down and there would not be nearly as much (artificial) hype for whatever set they put her in.
I think this is it right here.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
i may be disappointed that stoneforge wasnt unbanned (the same for preordain), but it was just something i wanted for the format rather than it needing it.
wizards owes players nothing other than making an enjoyable experience. modern is popular, and arguably is (and has been) the healthiest format by most observable metrics. there is a whole host of things i would change if i held the reins, but that doesnt make wizards wrong or incompetent if they decide to do something else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Let's face it. We all know SFM will do next to nothing if ever unbanned. They couldn't risk unbanning it without an immediate reprint because by the time it was actually reprinted, all the hype would've died down and there would not be nearly as much (artificial) hype for whatever set they put her in.
I think this is it right here.
Agreed.
And if they actually do want to unban Preordain, I bet it shows up in the same set.
but the cynical side of me sees it [SFM] has only had 1 printing before and would be a perfect sell for a product if it were unbanned as it was announced to get a reprint.
It doesn't take a cynical view to see this is what is happening; it is slapping us all in the face. If they unbanned it now with the goal of reprinting it next year, they risk it flopping in the format and their big ticket reprint being a card no one cares about.
I honestly don't blame them from a business perspective; it is clearly the right thing to do. But as a player it is ridiculously frustrating to beg for a SFM unban for 3 years, finally have nearly the entire community agree, and still have it not matter one bit.
There are other possible explanations. To be clear, I'm not saying that your suggested explanation is impossible, just that it is one of many.
To explain, in my line of work we have what's called "ORM", or, "operational risk management". This means that we carefully consider all possible risks involved for an evolution and evaluate the likelihood of them taking place. We then evaluate the severity of an occurrence of each risk. With objective analysis, we make risk decisions with consideration on how to mitigate risks to have a positive outcome of the evolution.
So, what you (and others) have done is provided one possible explanation, and assumed it to be true. This isn't necessarily the case. Let's say that Stoneforge Mystic is on the list to get reprinted for a future product. Well, if it were unbanned without an immediate reprint and it has the same issues that Golgari Grave-Troll had and has to be rebanned, then a lot of players will be faced with tough decisions. Do they just quit Magic for a while, since the deck that is dominating requires a playset of Mystics? Or, what if a deck with Mystics does warp the format and the players are given the choice to buy in after the spike or quit until the card is banned? Without a reprint available, there is no release valve on the supply to ease these possible issues.
While there are plenty of people who will boldly say that Mystic is fair in the current meta, the truth is they are relying on their own assumed superior judgment. Really, this is all just hubris if no one is willing to do the work to actually test the card extensively before presuming to definitively say that it's fair. And while it's easy to say that "the entire community" agrees, or "[some pro] says so", both of these are elementary fallacies that only serve to justify our bias' and beliefs.
Remember when both Jace and BBE were tested and found to be too good?
Remember when Pros said a Jace unban would kill off GW value decks, and be a 4 of with 4 Disrupting Shoal and 4 Cryptics?
When the fear of losing to Fateseal was just too much to handle?
Our testing and opinions are worthless, in the grand scheme of things. We who grind the format can make guesses, but that is as far as it goes, an educated guess.
Regardless, any unbans talk without a Masters product to push seems off the table.
Very disappointed, too. The statement basically reads: Several other formats are more messed up than Modern, so we'll focus on those and do nothing about Modern.
They literally said Modern was healthy. Why interpret this any other way?
but the cynical side of me sees it [SFM] has only had 1 printing before and would be a perfect sell for a product if it were unbanned as it was announced to get a reprint.
It doesn't take a cynical view to see this is what is happening; it is slapping us all in the face. If they unbanned it now with the goal of reprinting it next year, they risk it flopping in the format and their big ticket reprint being a card no one cares about.
I honestly don't blame them from a business perspective; it is clearly the right thing to do. But as a player it is ridiculously frustrating to beg for a SFM unban for 3 years, finally have nearly the entire community agree, and still have it not matter one bit.
There are other possible explanations. To be clear, I'm not saying that your suggested explanation is impossible, just that it is one of many.
To explain, in my line of work we have what's called "ORM", or, "operational risk management". This means that we carefully consider all possible risks involved for an evolution and evaluate the likelihood of them taking place. We then evaluate the severity of an occurrence of each risk. With objective analysis, we make risk decisions with consideration on how to mitigate risks to have a positive outcome of the evolution.
So, what you (and others) have done is provided one possible explanation, and assumed it to be true. This isn't necessarily the case. Let's say that Stoneforge Mystic is on the list to get reprinted for a future product. Well, if it were unbanned without an immediate reprint and it has the same issues that Golgari Grave-Troll had and has to be rebanned, then a lot of players will be faced with tough decisions. Do they just quit Magic for a while, since the deck that is dominating requires a playset of Mystics? Or, what if a deck with Mystics does warp the format and the players are given the choice to buy in after the spike or quit until the card is banned? Without a reprint available, there is no release valve on the supply to ease these possible issues.
While there are plenty of people who will boldly say that Mystic is fair in the current meta, the truth is they are relying on their own assumed superior judgment. Really, this is all just hubris if no one is willing to do the work to actually test the card extensively before presuming to definitively say that it's fair. And while it's easy to say that "the entire community" agrees, or "[some pro] says so", both of these are elementary fallacies that only serve to justify our bias' and beliefs.
"I am Jack's temporal lobe..."
For real though, I get what you are saying. I just have a hard time believing that what I stated wasn't by far the biggest factor in their equation.
Could you provide the source showing that both Jace and BBE were tested and found to be too good? Are you talking about the test in which Jace tested against decks like Bant Eldrazi, Infect, Ad Nauseum, and Affinity? There was the one where Bloodbraid in Jund mysteriously increased the win percentage against tier decks by a significant amount, and yet mysteriously these results did not correlate with what's actually happened? This implies that there is something very flawed in the testing (which is why peer review exists in science).
It's very easy to just say, "Nah, too hard, better to just use conjecture and opinion". But that sort of approach to the subject only shows that we aren't really interested in knowing the truth, and feel much more comfortable just arguing what we already think is true in forum threads like this.
Could you provide the source showing that both Jace and BBE were tested and found to be too good? Are you talking about the test in which Jace tested against decks like Bant Eldrazi, Infect, Ad Nauseum, and Affinity? There was the one where Bloodbraid in Jund mysteriously increased the win percentage against tier decks by a significant amount, and yet mysteriously these results did not correlate with what's actually happened? This implies that there is something very flawed in the testing (which is why peer review exists in science).
It's very easy to just say, "Nah, too hard, better to just use conjecture and opinion". But that sort of approach to the subject only shows that we aren't really interested in knowing the truth, and feel much more comfortable just arguing what we already think is true in forum threads like this.
The problem is that, if you unban SFM today, the meta it will emerge into will not be identical to the meta that exists now. You can't test a potential unban against currently existing decks, because those might change with the shift in meta. Obviously, you'll be able to see if the card is totally broken, but you also might miss a potential build or synergy that pushes the card over the top. There just does not exist a large enough testing arena to emulate the real world effects of an unban.
Not that this means we can just throw conjecture back and forth, we just can't twiddle our thumbs while we wait for some unhuman tester to go through each permutation of potential metas after a potential unban.
Remember when both Jace and BBE were tested and found to be too good?
Remember when Pros said a Jace unban would kill off GW value decks, and be a 4 of with 4 Disrupting Shoal and 4 Cryptics?
When the fear of losing to Fateseal was just too much to handle?
Our testing and opinions are worthless, in the grand scheme of things. We who grind the format can make guesses, but that is as far as it goes, an educated guess.
Regardless, any unbans talk without a Masters product to push seems off the table.
The problem with testing is thus too many variables. Sure I can predict how BBE natural home in say JUND, RG PONZA or GR ELDRAZI will change but I cannot predict how all the other decks will change due to it. Same for JTMS in UW, UWR and UR decks. That is not even counting new unrelated Deck Techs, I mean when they got unbanned and tested Grixis Death Shadow was King (the deck just recently started showing up again) and KCI is the new King based on recent GPs. Not to mention how new cards will change things as Jace alone didnt bring Control back it took Teferi and Search.
@13055: Fair, though I would argue that it'd be much more productive than throwing conjecture back and forth on a forum. If all the people who contribute to discussions like this were to instead be testing with eachother on Cockatrice and documenting results, we would all be much more productive and closer to knowing was is true rather than believing what we wish to be true.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
The cards they just banned are dirt cheap.
Duals will keep their value for sure.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Now we are just going to accept Pro Tour driven unbans as the only logical thing to do? Nothing against you on this Niall, but I hate that. All this really tells me, is they dont actually manage the format based on health, unless things get tilted far too much, but instead its all about set, or event, shake up ban/unbans.
I really am not happy about that.
Spirits
They are basically telling us that if the format is not a garbage fire or they can't make hype money, they do not care what happens. And even if it is a garbage fire, if another format is a bigger garbage fire, they also don't care what happens.
I guess the format is "fine" at the moment, especially at my local store, where most people are not playing a lot of the misery and woe that dwells at GP top tables and MTGO. But the acceptance of the PT dictating bans and unbans (substitute PT for any other non-metagame reason, like Master set reprints) is just lazy and meaningless "management." Which I guess would make sense for a company that has demonstrated little to no knowledge of the intricacies of most of their constructed formats, and draws their conclusions/makes decisions from data and random pro player opinions.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
That sum's it up for me. And I get it, without Standard making them money, or a set to push an unbanned reprint, its a corporation it exists to make money. Feels like a pretty bad way to lay any kind of claim to management through logic, or fairness however.
I'm frankly not happy the decks at the top anymore, time for a break as the meta cycles I guess.
EDIT: Honestly, I'm going to start looking into Legacy. They dont manage that format based on $ because they know its already a lost cause due to the reserve list.
Spirits
The sky isn't falling.
I'm sure as hell not. If you could imagine how mad I was at WOTC invalidating my $1500 Twin deck, I would be furious at them invalidating my $5000 Delver deck. I'm sure you could pick up the pieces and build something else, but I can tell you if I were playing Legacy right now, it would be Delver and I would be livid.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Are you calling Delver and the rest of the blue staples in legacy completely invalidated? Fat chance.
DRS Delver had its run, and unlike Twin actually was suppressing the format, its a different thing. I also wouldnt buy in on a $5K deck, the fact I have several decks over $1k right now in Modern is stupid enough as is.
I dont know. I'm just frustrated. I feel dissonance over Stirrings being fine, but Preordain not, and that kind of thing sticks out to me like a splinter, it just drives me nuts.
I dont want cards to come off 'eventually' when Jace/BBE came off, that was a start, but its been months. They are not shaking up anything further at this point, and if you didnt see Search/Teferi, Jace wouldnt even be seen in the top 32 of any event.
I'm just disappointed I guess.
Spirits
I honestly don't know Legacy well enough to make that statement. But it sure as hell happened to my blue staples in Modern for 2+ years. That's why it was so easy to slowly finish foiling out all my staples: they were fairly worthless for a LONG, LONG time, and therefore cheap to pick up.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
They might also look at Azcanta/Teferi as "Look! Standard cards making a difference! Just wait another indeterminate amount of sets and maybe you'll get more!"
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Spirits
Fair. Legacy is definitely a different beast though and it actually opens up some blue space that wasn't there as a huge amount of the format had coalesced into 4c goodstuff decks. No one really lost any value from these bans, and even further than that, they can't be beholden to how much money people are willing to pump into their decks as it sets a terribly dangerous precedent. The vintage format would be better if they restricted Workshop - but then you're literally cutting ~$5k of value out of decks that people have been dedicated to for a long time. Vintage is quite a bit different as it caters to such a limited group, but it's still a bad spot to be in if you can't ban cards due to people overspending on their cardboard.
I think this is it right here.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)wizards owes players nothing other than making an enjoyable experience. modern is popular, and arguably is (and has been) the healthiest format by most observable metrics. there is a whole host of things i would change if i held the reins, but that doesnt make wizards wrong or incompetent if they decide to do something else.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Agreed.
And if they actually do want to unban Preordain, I bet it shows up in the same set.
Modern: Storm
Legacy: ANT
There are other possible explanations. To be clear, I'm not saying that your suggested explanation is impossible, just that it is one of many.
To explain, in my line of work we have what's called "ORM", or, "operational risk management". This means that we carefully consider all possible risks involved for an evolution and evaluate the likelihood of them taking place. We then evaluate the severity of an occurrence of each risk. With objective analysis, we make risk decisions with consideration on how to mitigate risks to have a positive outcome of the evolution.
So, what you (and others) have done is provided one possible explanation, and assumed it to be true. This isn't necessarily the case. Let's say that Stoneforge Mystic is on the list to get reprinted for a future product. Well, if it were unbanned without an immediate reprint and it has the same issues that Golgari Grave-Troll had and has to be rebanned, then a lot of players will be faced with tough decisions. Do they just quit Magic for a while, since the deck that is dominating requires a playset of Mystics? Or, what if a deck with Mystics does warp the format and the players are given the choice to buy in after the spike or quit until the card is banned? Without a reprint available, there is no release valve on the supply to ease these possible issues.
While there are plenty of people who will boldly say that Mystic is fair in the current meta, the truth is they are relying on their own assumed superior judgment. Really, this is all just hubris if no one is willing to do the work to actually test the card extensively before presuming to definitively say that it's fair. And while it's easy to say that "the entire community" agrees, or "[some pro] says so", both of these are elementary fallacies that only serve to justify our bias' and beliefs.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
Remember when Pros said a Jace unban would kill off GW value decks, and be a 4 of with 4 Disrupting Shoal and 4 Cryptics?
When the fear of losing to Fateseal was just too much to handle?
Our testing and opinions are worthless, in the grand scheme of things. We who grind the format can make guesses, but that is as far as it goes, an educated guess.
Regardless, any unbans talk without a Masters product to push seems off the table.
Spirits
They literally said Modern was healthy. Why interpret this any other way?
"I am Jack's temporal lobe..."
For real though, I get what you are saying. I just have a hard time believing that what I stated wasn't by far the biggest factor in their equation.
It's very easy to just say, "Nah, too hard, better to just use conjecture and opinion". But that sort of approach to the subject only shows that we aren't really interested in knowing the truth, and feel much more comfortable just arguing what we already think is true in forum threads like this.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
The problem is that, if you unban SFM today, the meta it will emerge into will not be identical to the meta that exists now. You can't test a potential unban against currently existing decks, because those might change with the shift in meta. Obviously, you'll be able to see if the card is totally broken, but you also might miss a potential build or synergy that pushes the card over the top. There just does not exist a large enough testing arena to emulate the real world effects of an unban.
Not that this means we can just throw conjecture back and forth, we just can't twiddle our thumbs while we wait for some unhuman tester to go through each permutation of potential metas after a potential unban.
The problem with testing is thus too many variables. Sure I can predict how BBE natural home in say JUND, RG PONZA or GR ELDRAZI will change but I cannot predict how all the other decks will change due to it. Same for JTMS in UW, UWR and UR decks. That is not even counting new unrelated Deck Techs, I mean when they got unbanned and tested Grixis Death Shadow was King (the deck just recently started showing up again) and KCI is the new King based on recent GPs. Not to mention how new cards will change things as Jace alone didnt bring Control back it took Teferi and Search.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
The cards they just banned are dirt cheap.
Duals will keep their value for sure.