"Have you ever been fatesealed to death? Its a horrible experience."
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
"Have you ever been fatesealed to death? Its a horrible experience."
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
"Have you ever been fatesealed to death? Its a horrible experience."
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
"Have you ever been fatesealed to death? Its a horrible experience."
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
"Have you ever been fatesealed to death? Its a horrible experience."
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
So The Professor understand how Splinter Twin works. And what's your point exactly?
The way you undersell your favorite deck, I'm surprised Twin ever won any games. Having to win via Snapcaster and Bolts every game because Twin was so bad against so many decks, it's a wonder it won at all. But then mean old Wizards decided that you weren't allowed to have fun and banned the deck because they couldn't stand the idea of a deck that wins primarily through Snapcaster and Bolts mattering. And then you and Jimi Hendrix went on to slay the Jabberwocky and save Narnia.
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
"Have you ever been fatesealed to death? Its a horrible experience."
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
Thanks for this. Didn't know that. Further reassurance that Splinter Twin is never getting unbanned. That's nice to know.
It goes to show that they prefer Bsttlecruiser Magic, which is a shame.
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
Thanks for this. Didn't know that. Further reassurance that Splinter Twin is never getting unbanned. That's nice to know.
It goes to show that they prefer Bsttlecruiser Magic, which is a shame.
No it does not at ANY level. Probably you haven't the power of control and Nexus in standard to say to. Also you are just portraying whatever you want in their statements.
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
Thanks for this. Didn't know that. Further reassurance that Splinter Twin is never getting unbanned. That's nice to know.
It goes to show that they prefer Bsttlecruiser Magic, which is a shame.
No it does not at ANY level. Probably you haven't the power of control and Nexus in standard to say to. Also you are just portraying whatever you want in their statements.
They specifically say they want to tap out and play their thing without the fear of meaningful repercussions. Also Nexus was a rare PD design mistake that has had numerous ban murmurs already.
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
Thanks for this. Didn't know that. Further reassurance that Splinter Twin is never getting unbanned. That's nice to know.
It goes to show that they prefer Bsttlecruiser Magic, which is a shame.
No it does not at ANY level. Probably you haven't the power of control and Nexus in standard to say to. Also you are just portraying whatever you want in their statements.
They specifically say they want to tap out and play their thing without the fear of meaningful repercussions. Also Nexus was a rare PD design mistake that has had numerous ban murmurs already.
No, they said they don't want to tap out on T3 just to LOSE on the next turn. There is a huge difference between meaningful repercussions and the game just ending
I find there's a bit of a difference between, "Meaningful Repercussions," and, "You Lose." Most people don't like the second one just because they tapped out once on Turn 3, especially if the deck in question has plenty of room for other interaction that can shut other people down while they wait for them to tap out and lose. Jund has a lot of interaction...but doesn't just kill you if you try and push through it with multiple spells a turn. Storm has a nasty combo that's fairly easy to interact with, but very little protection or interaction of their own. Twin just got to do both of those things, and a lot of people just don't seem to like that being a consistent thing in the format, WotC included.
Thanks for this. Didn't know that. Further reassurance that Splinter Twin is never getting unbanned. That's nice to know.
It goes to show that they prefer Bsttlecruiser Magic, which is a shame.
No it does not at ANY level. Probably you haven't the power of control and Nexus in standard to say to. Also you are just portraying whatever you want in their statements.
They specifically say they want to tap out and play their thing without the fear of meaningful repercussions. Also Nexus was a rare PD design mistake that has had numerous ban murmurs already.
No, they said they don't want to tap out on T3 just to LOSE on the next turn. There is a huge difference between meaningful repercussions and the game just ending
Sounds like they don't want to have to worry about interacting with the opponent... which is Battlecruiser Magic.
I really don't want to get into this again. Or how it is considerably easier to interact with than nearly every other obnoxious thing in Modern, especially compared to the number of things that require narrow and specific hate cards (though there were, and are, numerous additional narrow and specific hate cards here too).
The long story short version is they want Timmy's to be able to play their big dumb spells and not be punished. That's why countermagic is garbage (3cmc or super narrow) and every creature has some ridiculous ETB (or better yet, death triggers or on cast triggers) to make sure you get something, even if it gets removed. Twin goes against this philosophy because you have to hold your proactive spells back in favor of interaction, which is the opposite of Battlecruiser Magic.
I mean yes answers have not kept pace with creatures. Good Creatures usually have ETBs with the best having Death Triggers, Recurssion and on Cast Triggers. Every counter is 3 CMC which is too slow to matter in Modern. Every wipe is 4 CMC with no Cost Reduction. The answers today basically need to place back on the bottom of the library or exile since plenty of threats have no issue recurring from mere death.
Also Nexus itself was fine some combo of Wilderness Reclamation, Teferi, Hero of Dominaria, Hydroid Krasis and Expansion/Explosion is what pushed Nexus over the top. Mostly the first one, the other three are basically finishers.
I mean yes answers have not kept pace with creatures. Good Creatures usually have ETBs with the best having Death Triggers, Recurssion and on Cast Triggers. Every counter is 3 CMC which is too slow to matter in Modern. Every wipe is 4 CMC with no Cost Reduction. The answers today basically need to place back on the bottom of the library or exile since plenty of threats have no issue recurring from mere death.
Also Nexus itself was fine some combo of Wilderness Reclamation, Teferi, Hero of Dominaria, Hydroid Krasis and Expansion/Explosion is what pushed Nexus over the top. Mostly the first one, the other three are basically finishers.
This is the reason I believe we need Prohibit to be reprinted into Modern or something similar which can also counter uncounterable creature spells.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight."
I don't think that helps. What uncounterable creature is 4 CMC or less? I guess it helps in Gruul in Standard. Rhythm of the Wild.
What Control needs is not because it got a good or okay very good Walker that means UW aint allowed to get good Control Spells. Green Decks have Vivian and not like WOTC was like gee Green has a good Walker therefore no good creatures for Green in Standard. Or gee Red got Chandra TOD so no good Red Spells allowed in Standard with her. Some fair standards would be nice.
its relative to the environment. for instance you may see 3cmc ounnters are unplayable garbage and thus a sign of a concerted effort to screw over control, yet absorb is one of the most played spells in standard with esper control one of the most played decks. they ARE giving control good stuff, and have been in the majority of standard formats.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
I never said 3 CMC counterspells were bad in Standard. They are quite fine and Absorb is especially good cause of Burn and various Aggro plans. The lifegain makes a difference. However, a 3 CMC counter with no cost reduction is not good enough in Modern, its unplayable.
Again I should note Maro himself specifically said Azorius didn't get the control stuff the guild is known for because of Teferi. My complaint that standard doesn't seem to apply to when other strategies get good Walkers like Chandra or Vivian.
I never said 3 CMC counterspells were bad in Standard. They are quite fine and Absorb is especially good cause of Burn and various Aggro plans. The lifegain makes a difference. However, a 3 CMC counter with no cost reduction is not good enough in Modern, its unplayable.
Again I should note Maro himself specifically said Azorius didn't get the control stuff the guild is known for because of Teferi. My complaint that standard doesn't seem to apply to when other strategies get good Walkers like Chandra or Vivian.
To be fair, Vivien Reid, while very powerful, doesn't hold the same sway over the format that Chandra, Torch of Defiance and Teferi, Hero of Dominaria have or had. Keep in mind that the lack of restraint around Chandra created a deck that dominated the format and got hit by a couple of bans, so I would describe that as more of a cautionary tale. After a string of dominant decks that got cards banned, effort that at least attempts to avoid that kind of quagmire is welcome.
There is no restraint with Red. Red gets better Fliers then Blue and White, Glorybringer, Rekindling and Arclight. Better Card Draw then Blue, Risk Factor and Light the Stage. Still gets good burn in Skewer the Critics and Risk Factor. Meanwhile Blue doesn't good card draw or counterspells. They don't even experiment like they do with Reds stuff, smfh. So even post Chandra they ain't showing much restraint with Red.
And as for White Maro is like oh Dawn of Hope might be too good of draw for White meanwhile Red keeps toasting itself with great card draw and superior fliers. SMFH. The Double Standards annoy me.
There is no restraint with Red. Red gets better Fliers then Blue and White, Glorybringer, Rekindling and Arclight. Better Card Draw then Blue, Risk Factor and Light the Stage. Still gets good burn in Skewer the Critics and Risk Factor. Meanwhile Blue doesn't good card draw or counterspells. They don't even experiment like they do with Reds stuff, smfh. So even post Chandra they ain't showing much restraint with Red.
And as for White Maro is like oh Dawn of Hope might be too good of draw for White meanwhile Red keeps toasting itself with great card draw and superior fliers. SMFH. The Double Standards annoy me.
The color pie is a double standard. That's the whole point. Also stop acting like Lyra and the rest of her angel crew don't exist. If she'd shared a standard with Glorybringer, the flying crocodile might well have been pushed out of the format. Since when has complaining about mechanical distribution ever achieved anything?
The lack of Splinter Twin does not mean battlecruiser Magic is the only viable thing in Modern. Simply because battlecruiser isn't the only viable thing in Modern. Infact, I'm not sure what decks are battlecruiser beside maybe... Does Tron count? Battlecruiser basically means EDH or Rise of the Eldrazi limited, neither of which resemble Modern at all.
Anyways. It's ridiculous to have a deck exist that you cannot tap out against on turn 3 onwards. That's all it is. There's a difference between that and that it's horrible to be fatesealed to death against Jace, in regards to the WotC quotes. You cannot tap out against Splinter Twin turn 3. It only got worse over time due to being a blue deck with permission. This was the situation when the deck was legal. Whether being fatesealed to death was a thing would depend on the strength of Jace, which they never tested as he was never in the format. Wizards has data on the first, the second was a wrong assumption with reasonable justification behind it.
There is no restraint with Red. Red gets better Fliers then Blue and White, Glorybringer, Rekindling and Arclight. Better Card Draw then Blue, Risk Factor and Light the Stage. Still gets good burn in Skewer the Critics and Risk Factor. Meanwhile Blue doesn't good card draw or counterspells. They don't even experiment like they do with Reds stuff, smfh. So even post Chandra they ain't showing much restraint with Red.
And as for White Maro is like oh Dawn of Hope might be too good of draw for White meanwhile Red keeps toasting itself with great card draw and superior fliers. SMFH. The Double Standards annoy me.
The color pie is a double standard. That's the whole point. Also stop acting like Lyra and the rest of her angel crew don't exist. If she'd shared a standard with Glorybringer, the flying crocodile might well have been pushed out of the format. Since when has complaining about mechanical distribution ever achieved anything?
They exist sure but they see little to no Standard or Modern play ergo they are not as good fliers as Arclight and Glorybringer that is for sure. We can debate if they are better then Rekindling.
Yes the Color Pie means different colors get different things. White and Blue are suppose to have the best fliers but they don't Red gets them of late. Blue is suppose have the best card draw but it doesn't get it Red does. Maro is afraid of White getting any Card Draw meanwhile has no problem giving Red and Green plenty of Card Draw. Red still gets good burn. Meanwhile Blue cannot get a good counterspell and White is stuck with overcosted board wipes and enchantment based spot removal.
Not to mention Green gets hexproof and uncounterable stuff often and Gruul gets anti Settle Tech and no counters allowed. Now you think that come with actual good counters but nope the counters are what they have been for years while the counters to counters are better then ever.
Anyways. It's ridiculous to have a deck exist that you cannot tap out against on turn 3 onwards. That's all it is.
At what point has that been a stated goal for the format, or ban criteria? Are we retroactively justifying bans because we don't like to play against a certain deck? And simply making things up to support an otherwise-unjust action?
If we get to just decide what should be banned because because I don't like what the deck does, should we ban Lantern, Tron, Primeval Titan, Bogles, Infect, Storm, and other obnoxious nonsense?
if 'obnoxious nonsense' was this binary where you were either it or not with no scale or context; then yes you would ban those decks and pretty much every other deck in the format.
its absolutely in wizards purview to ban for those reasons, or any of the other grey areas they deal with when determining what is 'healthy' or aligns best with their goal for the format. these reasons also arent isolated, but are just an inclusion in a list of evidence spanning any number of factors.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Anyways. It's ridiculous to have a deck exist that you cannot tap out against on turn 3 onwards. That's all it is.
At what point has that been a stated goal for the format, or ban criteria? Are we retroactively justifying bans because we don't like to play against a certain deck? And simply making things up to support an otherwise-unjust action?
If we get to just decide what should be banned because because I don't like what the deck does, should we ban Lantern, Tron, Primeval Titan, Bogles, Infect, Storm, and other obnoxious nonsense?
alright, back up.
"Are we retroactively justifying bans because we don't like to play against a certain deck? And simply making things up to support an otherwise-unjust action?"
at this point, you're not participating in this discussion in good faith. Your comment here sidelines what people are saying, in an attempt to justify your own biases (see clearly in bold, emphasis mine). If this was a college assignment, there would be a red line through this part, and a note saying "irrelevant/bias/emotional plea". Bear that in mind, because communication with your peers needs to be conducted in good faith otherwise you're just shouting insular opinions at each other without any discourse or understanding on either side.
"If we get to just decide what should be banned because because I don't like what the deck does, should we ban Lantern, Tron, Primeval Titan, Bogles, Infect, Storm, and other obnoxious nonsense?"
again, bold indicates your clear bias and lack of good faith discussion, emphasis mine. Green text indicates a fallacy. we don't get to decide anything so I don't know where you're going with that. Purple in your quote indicates another fallacy. Nothing in Modern gets banned because someone "doesn't like" it. That's not how it works, and yet you've twisted your bias into an argument where something you like was removed from Modern, which apparently must mean that someone else didn't like it. Unfortunately this isn't a zero-sum concept and it doesn't work that way.
Stop making this all into an emotional plea where you get to decide what's "obnoxious" based on your personal grievances. Modern is Modern, decks are decks and people play them and enjoy them. there aren't ethically/morally good and bad decks as you seem keen to imply, there aren't obnoxious decks and nice decks, there's just decks. It's diverse and people get to play what they want from a wide range of archetypes, the extent of which is unrivaled by any other format currently in MTG. Modern is the only place you get to legitimately play stuff like Tron, Lantern and primeval titan decks, as you listed. Modern is the home of all of these different archetypes you can't play anywhere else, where you have a chance to spike an FNM or a GP with whatever weird thing you're playing. Accept that Modern is this way, people love to play their decks, having a mix of different styles of deck is important and that you have no right to claim that people's favourite decks are "obnoxious" and move on. I'm so done with reading this garbage negativity, it's putting people down without achieving anything and it's irritating. Stow it. Enjoy the game. Or, if you can't, at least put together a coherent rationale instead of angry rants, because what you're currently saying isn't anything to do with the "state of Modern", being instead an entirely personal gripe you want to vent about.
I guess the obvious sarcastic hyperbolic tone to illustrate the double standard wasn't as clear as it was in my head when typing. We have long since passed any serious discussion about Twin and nobody on either side is changing their minds.
Those where the words over and over and over, from pro's and commentators and writers. Its seriously not worth the debate. The ban list is not based on just power, or just tournament run time, but on past fears, that some people refuse to critically think about.
Spirits
"I can't tap out on turn 3 because of Splinter Twin."
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
I thought we were talking about unfounded fears, not your favorite decks actual gameplan.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Would you like me to list all the unfounded fears? Because I'm sure most people here don't. Are you purposely provoking a response and trolling?
My comment actually directly references a recent WOTC interview from The Professor, in which WOTC people repeat this BS line again: https://youtu.be/TjCDBiybnro?t=2184
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
So The Professor understand how Splinter Twin works. And what's your point exactly?
The way you undersell your favorite deck, I'm surprised Twin ever won any games. Having to win via Snapcaster and Bolts every game because Twin was so bad against so many decks, it's a wonder it won at all. But then mean old Wizards decided that you weren't allowed to have fun and banned the deck because they couldn't stand the idea of a deck that wins primarily through Snapcaster and Bolts mattering. And then you and Jimi Hendrix went on to slay the Jabberwocky and save Narnia.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
It goes to show that they prefer Bsttlecruiser Magic, which is a shame.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
They specifically say they want to tap out and play their thing without the fear of meaningful repercussions. Also Nexus was a rare PD design mistake that has had numerous ban murmurs already.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
I really don't want to get into this again. Or how it is considerably easier to interact with than nearly every other obnoxious thing in Modern, especially compared to the number of things that require narrow and specific hate cards (though there were, and are, numerous additional narrow and specific hate cards here too).
The long story short version is they want Timmy's to be able to play their big dumb spells and not be punished. That's why countermagic is garbage (3cmc or super narrow) and every creature has some ridiculous ETB (or better yet, death triggers or on cast triggers) to make sure you get something, even if it gets removed. Twin goes against this philosophy because you have to hold your proactive spells back in favor of interaction, which is the opposite of Battlecruiser Magic.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Also Nexus itself was fine some combo of Wilderness Reclamation, Teferi, Hero of Dominaria, Hydroid Krasis and Expansion/Explosion is what pushed Nexus over the top. Mostly the first one, the other three are basically finishers.
This is the reason I believe we need Prohibit to be reprinted into Modern or something similar which can also counter uncounterable creature spells.
What Control needs is not because it got a good or okay very good Walker that means UW aint allowed to get good Control Spells. Green Decks have Vivian and not like WOTC was like gee Green has a good Walker therefore no good creatures for Green in Standard. Or gee Red got Chandra TOD so no good Red Spells allowed in Standard with her. Some fair standards would be nice.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Again I should note Maro himself specifically said Azorius didn't get the control stuff the guild is known for because of Teferi. My complaint that standard doesn't seem to apply to when other strategies get good Walkers like Chandra or Vivian.
To be fair, Vivien Reid, while very powerful, doesn't hold the same sway over the format that Chandra, Torch of Defiance and Teferi, Hero of Dominaria have or had. Keep in mind that the lack of restraint around Chandra created a deck that dominated the format and got hit by a couple of bans, so I would describe that as more of a cautionary tale. After a string of dominant decks that got cards banned, effort that at least attempts to avoid that kind of quagmire is welcome.
And as for White Maro is like oh Dawn of Hope might be too good of draw for White meanwhile Red keeps toasting itself with great card draw and superior fliers. SMFH. The Double Standards annoy me.
The color pie is a double standard. That's the whole point. Also stop acting like Lyra and the rest of her angel crew don't exist. If she'd shared a standard with Glorybringer, the flying crocodile might well have been pushed out of the format. Since when has complaining about mechanical distribution ever achieved anything?
Anyways. It's ridiculous to have a deck exist that you cannot tap out against on turn 3 onwards. That's all it is. There's a difference between that and that it's horrible to be fatesealed to death against Jace, in regards to the WotC quotes. You cannot tap out against Splinter Twin turn 3. It only got worse over time due to being a blue deck with permission. This was the situation when the deck was legal. Whether being fatesealed to death was a thing would depend on the strength of Jace, which they never tested as he was never in the format. Wizards has data on the first, the second was a wrong assumption with reasonable justification behind it.
They exist sure but they see little to no Standard or Modern play ergo they are not as good fliers as Arclight and Glorybringer that is for sure. We can debate if they are better then Rekindling.
Yes the Color Pie means different colors get different things. White and Blue are suppose to have the best fliers but they don't Red gets them of late. Blue is suppose have the best card draw but it doesn't get it Red does. Maro is afraid of White getting any Card Draw meanwhile has no problem giving Red and Green plenty of Card Draw. Red still gets good burn. Meanwhile Blue cannot get a good counterspell and White is stuck with overcosted board wipes and enchantment based spot removal.
Not to mention Green gets hexproof and uncounterable stuff often and Gruul gets anti Settle Tech and no counters allowed. Now you think that come with actual good counters but nope the counters are what they have been for years while the counters to counters are better then ever.
At what point has that been a stated goal for the format, or ban criteria? Are we retroactively justifying bans because we don't like to play against a certain deck? And simply making things up to support an otherwise-unjust action?
If we get to just decide what should be banned because because I don't like what the deck does, should we ban Lantern, Tron, Primeval Titan, Bogles, Infect, Storm, and other obnoxious nonsense?
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
its absolutely in wizards purview to ban for those reasons, or any of the other grey areas they deal with when determining what is 'healthy' or aligns best with their goal for the format. these reasons also arent isolated, but are just an inclusion in a list of evidence spanning any number of factors.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)alright, back up.
"Are we retroactively justifying bans because we don't like to play against a certain deck? And simply making things up to support an otherwise-unjust action?"
at this point, you're not participating in this discussion in good faith. Your comment here sidelines what people are saying, in an attempt to justify your own biases (see clearly in bold, emphasis mine). If this was a college assignment, there would be a red line through this part, and a note saying "irrelevant/bias/emotional plea". Bear that in mind, because communication with your peers needs to be conducted in good faith otherwise you're just shouting insular opinions at each other without any discourse or understanding on either side.
"If we get to just decide what should be banned because because I don't like what the deck does, should we ban Lantern, Tron, Primeval Titan, Bogles, Infect, Storm, and other obnoxious nonsense?"
again, bold indicates your clear bias and lack of good faith discussion, emphasis mine. Green text indicates a fallacy. we don't get to decide anything so I don't know where you're going with that. Purple in your quote indicates another fallacy. Nothing in Modern gets banned because someone "doesn't like" it. That's not how it works, and yet you've twisted your bias into an argument where something you like was removed from Modern, which apparently must mean that someone else didn't like it. Unfortunately this isn't a zero-sum concept and it doesn't work that way.
Stop making this all into an emotional plea where you get to decide what's "obnoxious" based on your personal grievances. Modern is Modern, decks are decks and people play them and enjoy them. there aren't ethically/morally good and bad decks as you seem keen to imply, there aren't obnoxious decks and nice decks, there's just decks. It's diverse and people get to play what they want from a wide range of archetypes, the extent of which is unrivaled by any other format currently in MTG. Modern is the only place you get to legitimately play stuff like Tron, Lantern and primeval titan decks, as you listed. Modern is the home of all of these different archetypes you can't play anywhere else, where you have a chance to spike an FNM or a GP with whatever weird thing you're playing. Accept that Modern is this way, people love to play their decks, having a mix of different styles of deck is important and that you have no right to claim that people's favourite decks are "obnoxious" and move on. I'm so done with reading this garbage negativity, it's putting people down without achieving anything and it's irritating. Stow it. Enjoy the game. Or, if you can't, at least put together a coherent rationale instead of angry rants, because what you're currently saying isn't anything to do with the "state of Modern", being instead an entirely personal gripe you want to vent about.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate