For Mythic Championship II in London, we're going to be trying out a new mulligan rule that we have been playtesting internally for some time. We believe the new rule smooths out opening hand decisions even more, though it certainly has some implications for formats like Modern.
The rule we'll be testing in London is as such: When you mulligan for the Nth time, you draw seven cards, then put N cards on the bottom of your library in any order.
So, for example, let's say you're taking your second mulligan of a game, what we often call a mulligan to five. You would draw seven cards, select two, and place those two on the bottom of your library in any order. Then you would decide whether to keep or mulligan again.
While we have been testing this mulligan rule internally for a while, we are treating this tournament as a test. Once our game designers have reviewed the tournament, spoken to players, and looked at the data, we'll decide whether to implement the mulligan rule wider.
Level zero: combo decks get better.
Level one: decks that beat combo if they draw their sideboard bullets get better.
Level two: decks that beat combo and have game against the level one decks get better.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I can't say I'm pleased to see you and must warn you I may have to do something about it.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: URDelver
Modern: UGRDelver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
standard/limited/sealed: little to no impact imho. I can't see this making huge waves here.
Modern: I think decks like boggles get a serious shot in the arm, but I don't think this impacts too many of the Tier 1 decks game 1. Game 2 it lets you filter for sideboard hate better AND ensure you keep the resources to stick said hate ( you can mulligan to 3* and keep a Rest In Peace and two lands for example). I think it'll actually negatively impact decks like dredge or storm pretty hard in game 2/3 where those decks already have a ton of velocity to see sideboard cards as it is, so the impact is lessened for them while "fair" decks can find answers and resources with greater frequency. I think discard is stronger on the play. If opponents are keeping fragile hands to assemble a combo but choose to mulligan for early starts, discard is that much stronger if you can snag a key piece early on. All in all I don't think the net impact over a tournament is going to be huge?
Legacy: this is where it's kinda scary imo. Decks like reanimator (BR or UB) get quite consistent in looking for pieces to go off on turn 1 with force/chancellor backup to squash any reaction. Even if your opponent is mulluganing for a force, they need to hit two pieces of interaction potentially now because you're just looking for one.
As a combo player, and as a player who begrudgingly accepts the mana system, I welcome this change. Variance is important in games, but lands create a large portion of the feels bad moments in the game from my experience. I'm happy to be able to sculpt a smaller hand from 7 cards, rather than see a decreasing amount of cards and not even get to scry until after I've dug my own grave. I look forward to picking up Bogles and Ad Naus again under these rules. I really hope they decide to move forward with this.
It's a great rule. Anything that offers a slight improvement to the inherent variance in mulligans (mainly mana screw) is going to be positive.
I can see people saying it'll be "busted" and such, but the same thing was said about the scry mulligan. This will just become the new normal, and modern will rebalance.
We'd definitely see people, swayed by argument about combo getting a boost, picking up those decks for a short time in an effort to capitalise. But then the decks that beat them would rise up, and in turn decks that beat those would rise up, and we'd reach equilibrium again.
There's still variance. But let's be honest, a system that values play skill and deckbuilding choices higher than the chance of getting screwed on mana is a good system.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: G Tron, Vannifar, Jund, Druid/Vizier combo, Humans, Eldrazi Stompy (Serum Powder), Amulet, Grishoalbrand, Breach Titan, Turns, Eternal Command, As Foretold Living End, Elves, Cheerios, RUG Scapeshift
At least I think and hope that when you mulligan with these new rules, you SHUFFLE your old hand into your library before drawing a new one, just like before, right? Because part of me assumes that you put your old hand on the BOTTOM of your library instead with these new rules and then draw a new hand, which would definitely make these rules more broken. (For example, with the old-hand-bottomming mulligan, you can mulligan an infinite number (arbitrarily high number in practice) of times and stack your deck that way, at the cost of starting with no opening hand.)
im not a fan of this at all. For GY, Burn, and affinity how do you not just get the feels bad scenerio games 2-3? i just mull to my leyline or stoney and call it a day. Burn i think faces the most backlash from this as i already aggressively mulled to get life or leyline. now i dont know what they do. GY decks might have to start splashing green so they can deal with increased consistency of getting hated on. Overall though decks like Tron and eldrazi get better, pheonix stays the same, Combo gets better game 1's but worse game 2-3.
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
At least I think and hope that when you mulligan with these new rules, you SHUFFLE your old hand into your library before drawing a new one, just like before, right?
Lol, yes you do shuffle, don't worry.
For GY, Burn, and affinity how do you not just get the feels bad scenerio games 2-3? i just mull to my leyline or stoney and call it a day
That's where those decks play countermeasures and fight hate. It's been that way forever. It will encourage transformational SB plans too. Affi can play Karns for example. Burn already plays correctly VS Leyline, creatures and spells that don't target a player are quite common. Destructive Revelry & cie are already played.
I believe GY decks would adapt, I can think of spell-centered decks that would focus on prowess creatures in G2-3 and drop their use of the GY. Dredge and its variants would take a hit, but that's for the best, right ?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pioneer - A bunch of stuff Modern - Humans Legacy - Grixis Phoenix / Death & Taxes
The new rule just seems good to me. While more linear decks like dredge may suffer to more consistent hate, they now can more easily draw answers for the hate, answers for the answers, and will likely have to adapt to a new, more resilient game plan. I think the new rule will lead to some structural changes in established archetypes, but overall will just make modern a more interactive format with less variance which I believe will lead to better magic.
I don’t necessarily agree that reducing variance is objectively good. Some decks are inherently risky because they require a certain specific card to be broken, but the inherent variance of 4/60 means that it happens less frequently without some deck building costs like cantrips and library manipulation effects.
Honestly, I think this change would make Modern more of a sideboard format than it already is, which I have at best mixed feelings about. And also, I think we see more potential bans as the reduced variance leads to previously unproblematic cards becoming a repetitive nuisance.
Happy to be wrong, but I think the current mulligan rules handle things quite well. There will always be outliers on the variance spectrum that even this would not solve, so I think this may be an overcorrection to a high profile mull to 4.
Honestly, one of the main reasons I like the idea of this new rule is it would strengthen my bad FNM brews a lot. Having the ability to get the couple cards I need to enable my jank and to find the answers I need postboard makes the number of "viable" (x-1 record) decks I can play at my store increase dramatically.
I like what they are testing out for this new mulligan rule but I would prefer they modify the system and also add the old rule to it. So this is how it should look:
First Mulligan: Draw 7 cards, choose 6 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
Second Mulligan: Draw 6, choose 5 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
Third Mulligan: Draw 5, choose 4 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
So on and so forth afterwards. This I think reduces the chance of combo decks mulligan to the point of getting their combo and also prevents mulligan in second and third games to get your sideboard card (ex. Leylines).
I like what they are testing out for this new mulligan rule but I would prefer they modify the system and also add the old rule to it. So this is how it should look:
First Mulligan: Draw 7 cards, choose 6 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
Second Mulligan: Draw 6, choose 5 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
Third Mulligan: Draw 5, choose 4 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
So on and so forth afterwards. This I think reduces the chance of combo decks mulligan to the point of getting their combo and also prevents mulligan in second and third games to get your sideboard card (ex. Leylines).
That's a good idea but I think it's just too complicated. They need something that a new player will be able to grasp quickly.
This just enables Magic: the Shuffling. Imagine where you were encouraged to mull to 4 (shuffle 3 times), then play, while shuffling each time you fetch. Good luck control players (opponent: I'm not slow playing, I just need to shuffle a lot: those darned sideboard answers are buried).
Also, good/bad mulligans in decks is just part of magic. If you have a deck that mulligans poorly or needs certain cards to win a match, that's on you. Originally, there were no mulligans and then no-mana mulligans and all mana mulligans became a thing. Deck variance is a part of the game. If I wanted a game where the resources were all pre-available, I would play chess.
I mean, it probably won't be busted or anything. On the other hand, it's going to be really stupid when we have to sit there for 5-10 minutes in each game waiting on mulligan decisions and shuffling.
its literally the same amount of shuffling as the current mulligan system...
honestly from what ive read it sounds like people have this delusion that decks are going to be mulliganning aggressively left and right down to 5 (or better yet 4) to get these perfect hands all while conveniently ignoring that the current system helps to some degree.
what players need to consider is how much more the london rules help combat variance. for instance look at a comparison between the first mulligans in the two systems:
-draw 6 -> accept -> scry 1
-draw 7 -> accept -> put 1 on bottom
the difference between the two is in the single digits for improving the probability of finding certain cards.
where the improvement really starts to kick in is at mulling to 5. mostly its just to frontload information so you have a better shot at playing a functional game of magic, and its an improvement because the smaller your hand size the higher chance there is for it to be missing lands or castable spells; therefore making consecutive mulligans more likely to cause additional ones.
sure some decks can make better use of the london rules than others, because certain starts or combinations of cards (a+b+...), if left unchecked, provide an advantage greater than having X cards (in other words offsetting card disadvantage and then some).
this is what is worrisome, however you also have to consider that mulliganning aggressively isnt a sure thing and can backfire. if there is any increase in time it will be because some players will tank hard on their chances of throwing away a average to mediocre hand and getting something better; which is only moderately better rather than the hyperbolic improvement people are making it out to be.
tbh there arent many decks i can think of that exploit the london rules to great effect. tron does a decent job, but the deck is already fairly consistent at cobbling together turn 3-4 tron. dredge is the one that really comes to mind simply because the dredge mechanic laughs in the face of conventional gameplay, and getting it online is way more important than resources in hand; however it has always been a deck that mulligans extremely well so we will see.
id imagine the end result will be that decks get on average better goldfish starts, but in an amount that is only really noticeable in large sample sizes. decks looking to interact will also improve on average, but it will better showcase if these decks are built in a fashion where their 'good starts' have the adequate tools to compete.
personally i say bring it on. if anything this rules change will shine a light on the 'true' state of the format. perhaps that will give wizards the motivation iterate and try new things (if its found to be lacking). then maybe we can lay to rest the complaints about the ever present 'linear no skill goldfish format' malaise that lingers over modern.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
So what's the latest on this? Is it being implemented?
live test run happens at the new rules namesake mythic championship/pro-tour (april 26). it wont be allowed in sanctioned tournaments until afterwards and wizards gives it the head nod.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
A very interesting discussion by LSV and Matt Nass on the London Mulligan. TL:DW is that they like and welcome the new rule and they don't think it will break modern, even though they do agree that it might help dredge a bit too much and possibly (but they are not calling for it) a Faithless Looting ban. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzVvjHj48ag
After testing it a bit, I'm not sure if dredge is busted because it mulls so well or unplayable because everyone will be packing Leyline of the Void now.
The rule we'll be testing in London is as such: When you mulligan for the Nth time, you draw seven cards, then put N cards on the bottom of your library in any order.
So, for example, let's say you're taking your second mulligan of a game, what we often call a mulligan to five. You would draw seven cards, select two, and place those two on the bottom of your library in any order. Then you would decide whether to keep or mulligan again.
While we have been testing this mulligan rule internally for a while, we are treating this tournament as a test. Once our game designers have reviewed the tournament, spoken to players, and looked at the data, we'll decide whether to implement the mulligan rule wider.
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/competitive-gaming/mythic-championship-ii-format-and-london-test-2019-02-21
What could go wrong with that rule
Level one: decks that beat combo if they draw their sideboard bullets get better.
Level two: decks that beat combo and have game against the level one decks get better.
EDH: UGEdric
Pauper: UR Delver
Modern: UGR Delver
Draft my cube: Eric's 390 Unpowered
Overall it will reduce variance, making the match up more dependent on the specific decks playing.
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
I’d almost like the first mulligan to be a Vancouver mulligan, and each subsequent mulligan be draw 6 + tuck 1, draw 5 + tuck 1, etc.
RBGLiving EndRBG
EDH
UFblthpU
BRXantchaRB
BGVarolzGB
URWZedruuWRU
Modern: I think decks like boggles get a serious shot in the arm, but I don't think this impacts too many of the Tier 1 decks game 1. Game 2 it lets you filter for sideboard hate better AND ensure you keep the resources to stick said hate ( you can mulligan to 3* and keep a Rest In Peace and two lands for example). I think it'll actually negatively impact decks like dredge or storm pretty hard in game 2/3 where those decks already have a ton of velocity to see sideboard cards as it is, so the impact is lessened for them while "fair" decks can find answers and resources with greater frequency. I think discard is stronger on the play. If opponents are keeping fragile hands to assemble a combo but choose to mulligan for early starts, discard is that much stronger if you can snag a key piece early on. All in all I don't think the net impact over a tournament is going to be huge?
Legacy: this is where it's kinda scary imo. Decks like reanimator (BR or UB) get quite consistent in looking for pieces to go off on turn 1 with force/chancellor backup to squash any reaction. Even if your opponent is mulluganing for a force, they need to hit two pieces of interaction potentially now because you're just looking for one.
I can see people saying it'll be "busted" and such, but the same thing was said about the scry mulligan. This will just become the new normal, and modern will rebalance.
We'd definitely see people, swayed by argument about combo getting a boost, picking up those decks for a short time in an effort to capitalise. But then the decks that beat them would rise up, and in turn decks that beat those would rise up, and we'd reach equilibrium again.
There's still variance. But let's be honest, a system that values play skill and deckbuilding choices higher than the chance of getting screwed on mana is a good system.
Tooth & Nail........Grishoalbrand....Living Dominance....Tezzerator.........Vannifar Pod
My Decks that have been BANNED
DRS Jund | Kiki-Pod | Bloom Titan | Splinter Twin | KCI
Lol, yes you do shuffle, don't worry.
That's where those decks play countermeasures and fight hate. It's been that way forever. It will encourage transformational SB plans too.
Affi can play Karns for example. Burn already plays correctly VS Leyline, creatures and spells that don't target a player are quite common. Destructive Revelry & cie are already played.
I believe GY decks would adapt, I can think of spell-centered decks that would focus on prowess creatures in G2-3 and drop their use of the GY. Dredge and its variants would take a hit, but that's for the best, right ?
Honestly, I think this change would make Modern more of a sideboard format than it already is, which I have at best mixed feelings about. And also, I think we see more potential bans as the reduced variance leads to previously unproblematic cards becoming a repetitive nuisance.
Happy to be wrong, but I think the current mulligan rules handle things quite well. There will always be outliers on the variance spectrum that even this would not solve, so I think this may be an overcorrection to a high profile mull to 4.
RBGLiving EndRBG
EDH
UFblthpU
BRXantchaRB
BGVarolzGB
URWZedruuWRU
First Mulligan: Draw 7 cards, choose 6 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
Second Mulligan: Draw 6, choose 5 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
Third Mulligan: Draw 5, choose 4 and put one onto the bottom of your library. Scry 1
So on and so forth afterwards. This I think reduces the chance of combo decks mulligan to the point of getting their combo and also prevents mulligan in second and third games to get your sideboard card (ex. Leylines).
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
Also, good/bad mulligans in decks is just part of magic. If you have a deck that mulligans poorly or needs certain cards to win a match, that's on you. Originally, there were no mulligans and then no-mana mulligans and all mana mulligans became a thing. Deck variance is a part of the game. If I wanted a game where the resources were all pre-available, I would play chess.
I mean, it probably won't be busted or anything. On the other hand, it's going to be really stupid when we have to sit there for 5-10 minutes in each game waiting on mulligan decisions and shuffling.
honestly from what ive read it sounds like people have this delusion that decks are going to be mulliganning aggressively left and right down to 5 (or better yet 4) to get these perfect hands all while conveniently ignoring that the current system helps to some degree.
what players need to consider is how much more the london rules help combat variance. for instance look at a comparison between the first mulligans in the two systems:
-draw 6 -> accept -> scry 1
-draw 7 -> accept -> put 1 on bottom
the difference between the two is in the single digits for improving the probability of finding certain cards.
where the improvement really starts to kick in is at mulling to 5. mostly its just to frontload information so you have a better shot at playing a functional game of magic, and its an improvement because the smaller your hand size the higher chance there is for it to be missing lands or castable spells; therefore making consecutive mulligans more likely to cause additional ones.
sure some decks can make better use of the london rules than others, because certain starts or combinations of cards (a+b+...), if left unchecked, provide an advantage greater than having X cards (in other words offsetting card disadvantage and then some).
this is what is worrisome, however you also have to consider that mulliganning aggressively isnt a sure thing and can backfire. if there is any increase in time it will be because some players will tank hard on their chances of throwing away a average to mediocre hand and getting something better; which is only moderately better rather than the hyperbolic improvement people are making it out to be.
tbh there arent many decks i can think of that exploit the london rules to great effect. tron does a decent job, but the deck is already fairly consistent at cobbling together turn 3-4 tron. dredge is the one that really comes to mind simply because the dredge mechanic laughs in the face of conventional gameplay, and getting it online is way more important than resources in hand; however it has always been a deck that mulligans extremely well so we will see.
id imagine the end result will be that decks get on average better goldfish starts, but in an amount that is only really noticeable in large sample sizes. decks looking to interact will also improve on average, but it will better showcase if these decks are built in a fashion where their 'good starts' have the adequate tools to compete.
personally i say bring it on. if anything this rules change will shine a light on the 'true' state of the format. perhaps that will give wizards the motivation iterate and try new things (if its found to be lacking). then maybe we can lay to rest the complaints about the ever present 'linear no skill goldfish format' malaise that lingers over modern.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki
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
Either way get your Leylines before they spike.
What would a rule like that look like, in your opinion?
Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki