Only point I have on this is that the newer players can spike events especially in the case of combo decks by narrowing their vision on just executing their plan.
This is why they can see some success whereas an established player may overthink plays and hedge against certain risks that may not be present.
It may be you beating yourself by not going for it in very tight spots and committing all in. Since you have a great wealth of knowledge on the format it may be that you are biased in your plays.
It may also be your own desire to succeed that hinders your success as strange as that can be.
Personally I have found myself doing this in arena or in paper because I am playing against myself by crediting my opponent too much.
Either way, I think you can bounce back from the state of things and you can make it back to success.
Only point I have on this is that the newer players can spike events especially in the case of combo decks by narrowing their vision on just executing their plan.
This is why they can see some success whereas an established player may overthink plays and hedge against certain risks that may not be present.
It may be you beating yourself by not going for it in very tight spots and committing all in. Since you have a great wealth of knowledge on the format it may be that you are biased in your plays.
It may also be your own desire to succeed that hinders your success as strange as that can be.
Personally I have found myself doing this in arena or in paper because I am playing against myself by crediting my opponent too much.
Either way, I think you can bounce back from the state of things and you can make it back to success.
Keep your chin up foodchaingoblins.
Thanks. I think my own bias towards playing decks that are well positioned AND good against Burn have held me back. I'm about to ditch Dredge for Phoenix soon.
When I play an opponent, I consider what's the best hand that they can have for how many cards they have. For example, I'm obviously not saying that they can have 4 Thought-Knot Seer and 4 Eldrazi Temple when my opponent mulled to 5. But I also take into consideration their draw step. Then I scale down from there, based on what they play. If they did not make the optimal play, considering the best possible X cards in hand, then I consider that to not be in their hand. I also consider how much is to gain by them bluffing that they don't have the optimal hand and how much is to be lost. It's a rare fig when my opponent plays something I don't expect - rather it's me considering the best possible hand that they can have and them playing the optimal line or a solid line for that type of hand. Sometimes I consider a slightly less than nuts hand because I know that I can't beat the nuts, so why ponder over what to do about it?
Right now, I expect 2-4 Surgical Extraction in every Modern SB or main board (not usually). I expect my opponent to have at least 1 of these in their hand after SB. Sometimes it's just that the draws don't line up where I can even beat 0 Surgical, much less 1. Dredge usually does fine against Surgical because they have so many threats. Now, Leyline of the Void or Rest in Peace (UGH!!!) are much more devastating, especially if we can't draw to Nature's Claims.
*It may be a self fulfilling prophecy to expect the best card in each situation, but for me, I feel safer knowing than not knowing. Maybe if I don't think about it, it won't happen? (but I don't believe that)
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 know you are on twitter, so I know that you have seen me provide the answer to the formats issues, and it's not bans.
EDIT: That said there are only 2 paths. Unban's, or ban a lot. I have zero hope for any improved Cantrips after this passed weekend, and I would be stunned if there are any in Horizons.
I also feel you are not engaging in good faith, and it may just be time to go our separate ways on things.
I won't say much about your other points, but this one here is a classic sign of burnout (as idSurge said). I can guarantee you this isn't a Modern-specific issue, as we have an extensive, large N dataset showing that neither grinders nor top pros nor average joes/janes do measurably better/worse from an MWP/standings perspective in Modern vs. Standard or Legacy (not sure about Limited). Anyone is capable of succeeding in any of these big Constructed formats. If you are suddenly experiencing significant difficulties with a format, there are probably a series of small to large issues with your format engagement that are leading to those difficulties. Possibilities include attitude, tunnelvision, autopilot, deck/card choices, lack of perspective, self-expectation, and many others. Goodness knows I've had most/all of those. In fact, I had a similar performance drop in the recent year and did take a break from both Modern and Standard before returning and feeling better. But I don't think any of us would be able to point to a specific thing to work on.
That said, from my own personal experience, the number one culprit for me and some friends/players I know tends to be attitude issues. This includes cynicism at formats/decks, unwillingness to self-analyze and admit mistakes, taking losses really hard, and general saltiness. Again, I don't know if that's at play with you, but I know it's a rampant issue in this game and community. That makes it a good starting point for self-diagnosis.
I know I've had issues with all of these things, but I've always had some of those issues at all times. Yes, success breeds a positive attitude, but part of that positive attitude can also be ignorance of why you've really been winning. I try to have no delusions about that.
I was 2-1 in a 6 round tournament with Dredge 2 weeks ago. I was facing Mono Red Phoenix. My first game went like this...
1. Creeping Chill, Narcomoeba, Prized Amalgam, land, land, Conflagrate, Golgari Thug - I mulligan the slow hand.
2. Creeping Chill, Narcomoeba, Prized Amalgam, Life from the Loam, Life from the Loam, Cathartic Reunion - I mulligan because I need 2 lands.
3. Creeping Chill, Narcomoeba, Prized Amalgam, land, Golgari Thug - Nonfunctional hand.
4. Creeping Chill, Narcomoeba, Prized Amalgam, Conflagrate - no land.
5. Creeping Chill, Narcomoeba, Prized Amalgam - I'm not kidding. I remember this hand like it was the back of my hand.
6. Narcomoeba, land - keep, I doubt I'll find a 1 card hand that has land and then draw Faithless Looting off the top. Scry Prized Amalgam to the bottom.
In Round 1, I drew just bad enough to not get there against a very strong Eldrazi Taxes draw in games 1 and 3 on the draw. In Rounds 2, 3, 5, and 6, I drew literally the absolute nuts. My tournament report is in "Dredge" for reference. I shuffled about the same way the whole tournament, outside of Round 4 when I tried different methods, including semi-riffle shuffling my deck. I nearly asked a Judge to shuffle my deck this round because no matter how I shuffled my deck, I knew it would do the same thing, but I assumed I'd draw differently in Games 2 and 3. Sure, this match was an extreme version of what I feel has been happening a bunch in Modern, to me AND to my opponents as well. I dredged 3 Creeping Chill on turn 2 against Burn; he scooped on the spot. I played a strong deck. I shuffled well in 5 rounds. I certainly didn't play perfectly. I feel if I had, it's possible that I could have just barely lost in Round 1, but after analyzing part of the match on Twitchtv, I actually didn't see anything differently I could have done, other than not shuffling my opponent to turn 2 Thought-Knot Seer on the play after a mediocre hand by me.
*You may have noticed I was able to utilize the copypasta option to describe my hands, despite intensive shuffling. I realize that part of this is playing 4 ofs, but the variance is real in that round. I have never, never mulliganed to 2 in my life and especially not rightfully so!
Those hands sound awful and I doubt there was much you could do to prevent those situations. I had a similar situation in Arena the other day where I had three back-to-back BO3 series with Simic Nexus (25 lands+4 Opt) where an opening 7 had either no lands or a single Forest with no playables, my 6 had literally all lands, and my 5 had a single land. Needless to say, I was very unhappy after those essentially free-win games for my opponent, and I was incredibly salty about the shuffler, variance, luck, etc. But, as with your case at the GP, these kinds of things are guaranteed to happen in a card game. Sometimes you can't win a game. Period. No amount of diagnosing will prevent a loss. That's why the absolute best players on earth tend to hover in the 60%-65% MWP for all formats across a large enough sample. They are going to lose games by no fault of their own, and that's on top of losses to misplays, getting straight outplayed, or tight games that come down to tiny edges where someone's eventually gotta win.
I've seen a lot of players online and those I know personally get frustrated when their performance doesn't meet an expected standard. For many of those players, the expect standard is unrealistic. Common scenario: someone wants to win 100% of games due to their own tight gameplay. Any deviation from that leads to attitude issues about variance, the shuffler, bad luck, bad matchups, lucksack opponents, opposing "nut draws", etc. But those deviations are natural and part of the game. The subsequent attitude issues, however, are not. They are natural to humans, yes, but not to Magic mechanics. Unfortunately, those human attitude issues tend to lead to later losses and gameplay shortcomings which could've been avoided with a more positive disposition. Indeed, this is where many (not all) pros have an advantage: they can pivot in major events after significant losses (like my Simic Nexus or your Dredge draws) that would turn the average player into a salt mine.
Pivoting from misfortune is a major Magic skill, but it's not a strict mechanical gameplay skill. Similarly, having realistic expectations is a skill, but also not a Magic mechanics skill. That means knowing and accepting you will lose games without recourse. It also means understanding that a 60%-65% MWP is good at major events. It also means knowing that a 65% MWP can go 2-4 drop at a GP and not be a bad player, or have a cold streak on Arena/MTGO/at an LGS and not be a scrub. If you want to see a Twitch streamer that has changed my own attitude towards Magic, watch Ben Stark. He is unerringly positive and realistic in games, he accepts losses with grace, he admits his own faults, and he's not afraid to admit when a game is simply lost when there is nothing he could do about it. And in those cases, he doesn't let it take his performance in subsequent games.
Last note. As idSurge has said, as izzetmage always reminds us, and as I have said in basically every combo/Ux control/Ux midrange thread I have ever posted in, PLAY CANTRIPS. Also, play decks that support cantrips! If Magic is a card game that revolves around variance, you are doing a disservice to yourself by not doing what you can to minimize variance. Cantrips are one way to do that and probably the best/most consistent way to do that. Modern has plenty of viable cantrip-heavy decks, and if variance is something that you know will tilt you into oblivion or just make you pissed, those decks are the way to go. But even there, you'll still just lose to things outside of your power and it's important to accept that, move on, and keep playing.
PS: Is this thread going to replace the Modern metagame/bans discussion? If yes, and if the mods think this is wrong, they should let us/me know, and we will stop it immediately
Not a mod anymore, but I doubt this thread is intended to replace State of Modern. That's why I am largely avoiding ban talk and primarily focusing on enjoyment issues, like FCG's situation above.
@gkourou Serious question. What is the logic behind why you think Phoenix is overrated?
If it's just being carried by a wave of popularity, logically, there would be higher representation but lower conversion, but this is not the case.
Tampa: 19.5% Day 2 share, 10 UR Phoenix in top 32 so 31.25% of top 32 (4 in top 8)
Bilbao: 22.5% Day 2 share, 5 UR Phoenix in top 16 so also 31.25% of top 16 (2 in top 8)
Based on these 2, UR Phoenix over-performed in conversion to top places relative to share of day 2.
What is the reasoning behind claiming that a deck which over-performed, is actually overrated?
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
I think some of the views of Modern are similar to how bocephus would constantly tell players to get better and adapt, even throughout Eldrazi Winter. He would ignore any result of any big tournament and all of MTGO by citing his multiple LGS stories and random Leagues to show how everything is fine and Modern is healthy and diverse.
I wish I could enjoy the format as much as those people. I wish I could be playing the format these people are playing.
As I noted, people can have opinion's that wildly diverge from the average. If someone says a 3 deck meta is healthy, who are we to disagree? What is 'healthy'? Its about as meaningless as 'linear' and 'fair'.
That said, there are actual truth's. No, you cannot take your 'Standard deck' and win a GP. No you cannot 'take anything' add some 'targeted GY Hate' and win a GP, and yes, there is an overwhelming best deck, and its not 'overrated'.
These are truth's, and to claim otherwise is disingenuous, if not outright lying in the face of the GLOBAL RESULTS of the last weekend.
Breaking news: MTG has a lot of variance. Sometimes you go X-0 because you have nut draws, opponents have bad draws, you play against your best matches and so on. Sometimes you draw your sideboard, sometimes you don't.
If you wanna play a game with little to no variance play chess, where skill is much more important.
That being said cantrips help reduce variance, that's why lots of combo decks use blue and why WotC has nerfed them and banned them, why black no longer gets good draw engines and so on.
Looting and Stirrings reduce variance, that's what everyone wants to do in order to win. Your options are to either build a deck that can be as consistent or play the same deck as everyone else.
This is neither friendly to new users, nor respectful to other people's opinions.
Do you think that there is this minor possibility that some people have invested thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of their life into a format they once loved, only to see it transform in to an amalgamation of trash and frustration that bares no resemblance to what it once was? And that the kinds of decks and archetypes they enjoyed playing are essentially unplayable in a competitive sense, after multiple years of WOTC ham-fistedly trying to help them and make up for destroying them in the first place? And that maybe, just maybe, those people are having a hard time enjoying a format whose top decks for nearly 3 years have nearly all been obnoxious miserable decks to play against, and promote awful play lines and incredibly swingy, variance-dependent gameplay?
As I said I WISH I could enjoy the format as much as others seem to. But I don't enjoy the aggro rat race, nor do I enjoy battles of sideboards. But least of all, I can't stand losing to the parings board in matches that essentially feel completely out of my control. Keep on keepin' on. Keep saying everything is fine.
This thread was not made to be another "state of modern" thread focusing on ban discussions.
This is supposed to be a poll thread to map whether people enjoy the Phoenix Era of Modern, because there was a lot of discussion on the other thread about the existence of silent groups and/or majorities.
People who vote have the opportunity to also state why they do/don't enjoy the current metagame, and that's about it I think (although of course I am not a mod, but I made the thread).
The mods locked the other thread, and I believe for good reason, so let's not just try to take over other threads for the sake of a beaten to death discussion.
I think this thread and the poll has shown that claiming that there are silent groups that don't discuss because they like/don't like modern and thus they are too focused playing it or too disheartened to talk about it is a bit of an invalid argument, since they exist in both camps.
The poll has also shown that, at least for people interested enough to view (not necessarily post) in the forum, a good majority enjoys the format or would play it anyway.
At the same time only a very small % refuses to play the format, and as such the argument that this metagame drives people away is a bit moot at this point. However, it needs to taken into account that almost a third don't enjoy the format.
At the same time only a very small % refuses to play the format, and as such the argument that this metagame drives people away is a bit moot at this point. However, it needs to taken into account that almost a third don't enjoy the format.
If they have been driven away, are they gonna vote.
I have a foil/promo deck that cost me thousands of dollars and two years to put together. Whether I like the format or not, I'm playing that deck because it would be a complete and utter waste not to. I probably get more enjoyment out of simply looking at my opening hand than I do actually playing most rounds of Magic these days.
At the same time only a very small % refuses to play the format, and as such the argument that this metagame drives people away is a bit moot at this point. However, it needs to taken into account that almost a third don't enjoy the format.
If they have been driven away, are they gonna vote.
They did clearly (as you did, since you voted for #5)
At the same time only a very small % refuses to play the format, and as such the argument that this metagame drives people away is a bit moot at this point. However, it needs to taken into account that almost a third don't enjoy the format.
If they have been driven away, are they gonna vote.
They did clearly (as you did, since you voted for #5)
For real thats your answer? I've gone on 8 Month+ breaks before. Nearly completely missed the Treasure Cruise era. If this poll happened then? I would never have seen it.
You are more reasonable than this. If someone is completely checked out, they would not bother to vote. They would be 'step 6' on your poll. 'I dont even care about Modern at all at this point.'
This is neither friendly to new users, nor respectful to other people's opinions.
Do you think that there is this minor possibility that some people have invested thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of their life into a format they once loved, only to see it transform in to an amalgamation of trash and frustration that bares no resemblance to what it once was? And that the kinds of decks and archetypes they enjoyed playing are essentially unplayable in a competitive sense, after multiple years of WOTC ham-fistedly trying to help them and make up for destroying them in the first place? And that maybe, just maybe, those people are having a hard time enjoying a format whose top decks for nearly 3 years have nearly all been obnoxious miserable decks to play against, and promote awful play lines and incredibly swingy, variance-dependent gameplay?
As I said I WISH I could enjoy the format as much as others seem to. But I don't enjoy the aggro rat race, nor do I enjoy battles of sideboards. But least of all, I can't stand losing to the parings board in matches that essentially feel completely out of my control. Keep on keepin' on. Keep saying everything is fine.
Like iD said: That's, like, your opinion man.
Personally, I'm enjoying modern more than ever, because I can play whatever deck I'm feeling and still expect to do well. I did well with Jeskai Delver, I did well with UW control, I did well with phoenix (even with the very first lists) and I'm doing well with UW Midrange. And that's just the past 7-8 months.
I'll agree with Gkourou on one thing: Phoenix's numbers shouldn't be that high, because it's not THAT good. It's not 20% good, it's 10% good. Dredge and other similar strategies keep its natural predators down, and I'm talking from much experience.
I expected that you, of all people, would enjoy a UR deck, with high velocity, a strong Plan A that's difficult to disrupt, that when it is interacted with, can fall back to good Plan B and a mediocre Plan C. A deck that out of the sideboard can morph into a great Blood Moon deck, but can also interact with it's opponents plans.
Phoenix's numbers shouldn't be that high, because it's not THAT good. It's not 20% good, it's 10% good. Dredge and other similar strategies keep its natural predators down, and I'm talking from much experience.
At the same time only a very small % refuses to play the format, and as such the argument that this metagame drives people away is a bit moot at this point. However, it needs to taken into account that almost a third don't enjoy the format.
If they have been driven away, are they gonna vote.
They did clearly (as you did, since you voted for #5)
For real thats your answer? I've gone on 8 Month+ breaks before. Nearly completely missed the Treasure Cruise era. If this poll happened then? I would never have seen it.
You are more reasonable than this. If someone is completely checked out, they would not bother to vote. They would be 'step 6' on your poll. 'I dont even care about Modern at all at this point.'
My signature says it all.
If someone completely checked out, then there is not way for us to count them right? This poll, as I said multiple times, is about the people IN THIS FORUM and to map the interest THEY have on the format. I don't know why this is not clear.
If people bring in arguments of how there are many players who have "completely been driven out of the format", then these people might as well come with some data to back this up, because just claiming it is not enough.
Again, for the people in THIS forum, the result is rather clear. Attendance in events has not dropped as well, so I am not sure where this narrative is coming from, but I guess personal experience is a strong feeling.
I believe I am quite clear about the purpose of the thread.
I expected that you, of all people, would enjoy a UR deck, with high velocity, a strong Plan A that's difficult to disrupt, that when it is interacted with, can fall back to good Plan B and a mediocre Plan C. A deck that out of the sideboard can morph into a great Blood Moon deck, but can also interact with it's opponents plans.
I do not enjoy the linear play lines it promotes with any of its main game plans. I wish I could discuss this (and several other things you mention) further, but I don't need more infractions. Luckily I have enough redundant pieces and staples to have it and GDS fully sleeved up at any point, but I generally choose to enjoy a deck that plays with my opponent, rather than at them. I enjoy Phoenix about as much as I enjoyed the (very brief) stint I had with Storm.
I have a foil/promo deck that cost me thousands of dollars and two years to put together. Whether I like the format or not, I'm playing that deck because it would be a complete and utter waste not to. I probably get more enjoyment out of simply looking at my opening hand than I do actually playing most rounds of Magic these days.
Staying on topic with this thread, I did get a chance to play in paper last night and saw a ton of modern players. Got a good vibe overall regarding the format and played some good games. A lot of players who invest into modern decks aren't always the spikiest of spikes. They seem to just enjoy playing the decks they've purchased. That's fine for that level of play, and it made me rethink my entire perspective on bannings. While there were groans about lootings not one of them expressed the kind of frustration that KCI presented before it's exit.
There is the casual modern player and then there's us. I grind mtgo, have competed at regionals, prepped for GP's and done the whole team testing blah blah. We are invested in the actual gameplay of the format. We have a much different take on what's acceptable at the higher levels of play. If I could change me answer it would be #2. We need some changes, but after seeing good average Joe's enjoying their decks, consistently asking for ban hammers doesn't solve everything. I like the format, yes there are things I dislike, but seeing the locals last night changed my mtgo hive mind sentiments a bit.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard Arena: Eh? Gruul or Die
Modern: Decks I'm playing right now: G Mono Green Tron (34-10-3 paper record, only SCG/Regionals/PPTQ record) C Eldrazi Tron (9-5) UG Infect RW Burn
but seeing the locals last night changed my mtgo hive mind sentiments a bit.
Playing Commander with those same locals and randoms and friends will do wonders for your overall enjoyment of Magic, IMO. Whereas competitive Modern will have the opposite effect, as you seem to recognize as well!
This is why they can see some success whereas an established player may overthink plays and hedge against certain risks that may not be present.
It may be you beating yourself by not going for it in very tight spots and committing all in. Since you have a great wealth of knowledge on the format it may be that you are biased in your plays.
It may also be your own desire to succeed that hinders your success as strange as that can be.
Personally I have found myself doing this in arena or in paper because I am playing against myself by crediting my opponent too much.
Either way, I think you can bounce back from the state of things and you can make it back to success.
Keep your chin up foodchaingoblins.
Thanks. I think my own bias towards playing decks that are well positioned AND good against Burn have held me back. I'm about to ditch Dredge for Phoenix soon.
When I play an opponent, I consider what's the best hand that they can have for how many cards they have. For example, I'm obviously not saying that they can have 4 Thought-Knot Seer and 4 Eldrazi Temple when my opponent mulled to 5. But I also take into consideration their draw step. Then I scale down from there, based on what they play. If they did not make the optimal play, considering the best possible X cards in hand, then I consider that to not be in their hand. I also consider how much is to gain by them bluffing that they don't have the optimal hand and how much is to be lost. It's a rare fig when my opponent plays something I don't expect - rather it's me considering the best possible hand that they can have and them playing the optimal line or a solid line for that type of hand. Sometimes I consider a slightly less than nuts hand because I know that I can't beat the nuts, so why ponder over what to do about it?
Right now, I expect 2-4 Surgical Extraction in every Modern SB or main board (not usually). I expect my opponent to have at least 1 of these in their hand after SB. Sometimes it's just that the draws don't line up where I can even beat 0 Surgical, much less 1. Dredge usually does fine against Surgical because they have so many threats. Now, Leyline of the Void or Rest in Peace (UGH!!!) are much more devastating, especially if we can't draw to Nature's Claims.
*It may be a self fulfilling prophecy to expect the best card in each situation, but for me, I feel safer knowing than not knowing. Maybe if I don't think about it, it won't happen? (but I don't believe that)
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)EDIT: That said there are only 2 paths. Unban's, or ban a lot. I have zero hope for any improved Cantrips after this passed weekend, and I would be stunned if there are any in Horizons.
I also feel you are not engaging in good faith, and it may just be time to go our separate ways on things.
Spirits
Those hands sound awful and I doubt there was much you could do to prevent those situations. I had a similar situation in Arena the other day where I had three back-to-back BO3 series with Simic Nexus (25 lands+4 Opt) where an opening 7 had either no lands or a single Forest with no playables, my 6 had literally all lands, and my 5 had a single land. Needless to say, I was very unhappy after those essentially free-win games for my opponent, and I was incredibly salty about the shuffler, variance, luck, etc. But, as with your case at the GP, these kinds of things are guaranteed to happen in a card game. Sometimes you can't win a game. Period. No amount of diagnosing will prevent a loss. That's why the absolute best players on earth tend to hover in the 60%-65% MWP for all formats across a large enough sample. They are going to lose games by no fault of their own, and that's on top of losses to misplays, getting straight outplayed, or tight games that come down to tiny edges where someone's eventually gotta win.
I've seen a lot of players online and those I know personally get frustrated when their performance doesn't meet an expected standard. For many of those players, the expect standard is unrealistic. Common scenario: someone wants to win 100% of games due to their own tight gameplay. Any deviation from that leads to attitude issues about variance, the shuffler, bad luck, bad matchups, lucksack opponents, opposing "nut draws", etc. But those deviations are natural and part of the game. The subsequent attitude issues, however, are not. They are natural to humans, yes, but not to Magic mechanics. Unfortunately, those human attitude issues tend to lead to later losses and gameplay shortcomings which could've been avoided with a more positive disposition. Indeed, this is where many (not all) pros have an advantage: they can pivot in major events after significant losses (like my Simic Nexus or your Dredge draws) that would turn the average player into a salt mine.
Pivoting from misfortune is a major Magic skill, but it's not a strict mechanical gameplay skill. Similarly, having realistic expectations is a skill, but also not a Magic mechanics skill. That means knowing and accepting you will lose games without recourse. It also means understanding that a 60%-65% MWP is good at major events. It also means knowing that a 65% MWP can go 2-4 drop at a GP and not be a bad player, or have a cold streak on Arena/MTGO/at an LGS and not be a scrub. If you want to see a Twitch streamer that has changed my own attitude towards Magic, watch Ben Stark. He is unerringly positive and realistic in games, he accepts losses with grace, he admits his own faults, and he's not afraid to admit when a game is simply lost when there is nothing he could do about it. And in those cases, he doesn't let it take his performance in subsequent games.
Last note. As idSurge has said, as izzetmage always reminds us, and as I have said in basically every combo/Ux control/Ux midrange thread I have ever posted in, PLAY CANTRIPS. Also, play decks that support cantrips! If Magic is a card game that revolves around variance, you are doing a disservice to yourself by not doing what you can to minimize variance. Cantrips are one way to do that and probably the best/most consistent way to do that. Modern has plenty of viable cantrip-heavy decks, and if variance is something that you know will tilt you into oblivion or just make you pissed, those decks are the way to go. But even there, you'll still just lose to things outside of your power and it's important to accept that, move on, and keep playing.
Not a mod anymore, but I doubt this thread is intended to replace State of Modern. That's why I am largely avoiding ban talk and primarily focusing on enjoyment issues, like FCG's situation above.
If it's just being carried by a wave of popularity, logically, there would be higher representation but lower conversion, but this is not the case.
Tampa: 19.5% Day 2 share, 10 UR Phoenix in top 32 so 31.25% of top 32 (4 in top 8)
Bilbao: 22.5% Day 2 share, 5 UR Phoenix in top 16 so also 31.25% of top 16 (2 in top 8)
Based on these 2, UR Phoenix over-performed in conversion to top places relative to share of day 2.
What is the reasoning behind claiming that a deck which over-performed, is actually overrated?
I wish I could enjoy the format as much as those people. I wish I could be playing the format these people are playing.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
That said, there are actual truth's. No, you cannot take your 'Standard deck' and win a GP. No you cannot 'take anything' add some 'targeted GY Hate' and win a GP, and yes, there is an overwhelming best deck, and its not 'overrated'.
These are truth's, and to claim otherwise is disingenuous, if not outright lying in the face of the GLOBAL RESULTS of the last weekend.
PLEASE MODS UNLOCK THE STATE OF MODERN.
Spirits
If you wanna play a game with little to no variance play chess, where skill is much more important.
That being said cantrips help reduce variance, that's why lots of combo decks use blue and why WotC has nerfed them and banned them, why black no longer gets good draw engines and so on.
Looting and Stirrings reduce variance, that's what everyone wants to do in order to win. Your options are to either build a deck that can be as consistent or play the same deck as everyone else.
Spirits
Do you think that there is this minor possibility that some people have invested thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of their life into a format they once loved, only to see it transform in to an amalgamation of trash and frustration that bares no resemblance to what it once was? And that the kinds of decks and archetypes they enjoyed playing are essentially unplayable in a competitive sense, after multiple years of WOTC ham-fistedly trying to help them and make up for destroying them in the first place? And that maybe, just maybe, those people are having a hard time enjoying a format whose top decks for nearly 3 years have nearly all been obnoxious miserable decks to play against, and promote awful play lines and incredibly swingy, variance-dependent gameplay?
As I said I WISH I could enjoy the format as much as others seem to. But I don't enjoy the aggro rat race, nor do I enjoy battles of sideboards. But least of all, I can't stand losing to the parings board in matches that essentially feel completely out of my control. Keep on keepin' on. Keep saying everything is fine.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
This is supposed to be a poll thread to map whether people enjoy the Phoenix Era of Modern, because there was a lot of discussion on the other thread about the existence of silent groups and/or majorities.
People who vote have the opportunity to also state why they do/don't enjoy the current metagame, and that's about it I think (although of course I am not a mod, but I made the thread).
The mods locked the other thread, and I believe for good reason, so let's not just try to take over other threads for the sake of a beaten to death discussion.
I think this thread and the poll has shown that claiming that there are silent groups that don't discuss because they like/don't like modern and thus they are too focused playing it or too disheartened to talk about it is a bit of an invalid argument, since they exist in both camps.
The poll has also shown that, at least for people interested enough to view (not necessarily post) in the forum, a good majority enjoys the format or would play it anyway.
At the same time only a very small % refuses to play the format, and as such the argument that this metagame drives people away is a bit moot at this point. However, it needs to taken into account that almost a third don't enjoy the format.
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
If they have been driven away, are they gonna vote.
Spirits
I have a foil/promo deck that cost me thousands of dollars and two years to put together. Whether I like the format or not, I'm playing that deck because it would be a complete and utter waste not to. I probably get more enjoyment out of simply looking at my opening hand than I do actually playing most rounds of Magic these days.
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
For real thats your answer? I've gone on 8 Month+ breaks before. Nearly completely missed the Treasure Cruise era. If this poll happened then? I would never have seen it.
You are more reasonable than this. If someone is completely checked out, they would not bother to vote. They would be 'step 6' on your poll. 'I dont even care about Modern at all at this point.'
My signature says it all.
Spirits
Like iD said: That's, like, your opinion man.
Personally, I'm enjoying modern more than ever, because I can play whatever deck I'm feeling and still expect to do well. I did well with Jeskai Delver, I did well with UW control, I did well with phoenix (even with the very first lists) and I'm doing well with UW Midrange. And that's just the past 7-8 months.
I'll agree with Gkourou on one thing: Phoenix's numbers shouldn't be that high, because it's not THAT good. It's not 20% good, it's 10% good. Dredge and other similar strategies keep its natural predators down, and I'm talking from much experience.
I expected that you, of all people, would enjoy a UR deck, with high velocity, a strong Plan A that's difficult to disrupt, that when it is interacted with, can fall back to good Plan B and a mediocre Plan C. A deck that out of the sideboard can morph into a great Blood Moon deck, but can also interact with it's opponents plans.
I wish we could discuss this further.
Spirits
If people bring in arguments of how there are many players who have "completely been driven out of the format", then these people might as well come with some data to back this up, because just claiming it is not enough.
Again, for the people in THIS forum, the result is rather clear. Attendance in events has not dropped as well, so I am not sure where this narrative is coming from, but I guess personal experience is a strong feeling.
I believe I am quite clear about the purpose of the thread.
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
My bad.
Spirits
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
Surely they will print some answers on Horizons.
There is the casual modern player and then there's us. I grind mtgo, have competed at regionals, prepped for GP's and done the whole team testing blah blah. We are invested in the actual gameplay of the format. We have a much different take on what's acceptable at the higher levels of play. If I could change me answer it would be #2. We need some changes, but after seeing good average Joe's enjoying their decks, consistently asking for ban hammers doesn't solve everything. I like the format, yes there are things I dislike, but seeing the locals last night changed my mtgo hive mind sentiments a bit.
Modern: Decks I'm playing right now:
G Mono Green Tron (34-10-3 paper record, only SCG/Regionals/PPTQ record)
C Eldrazi Tron (9-5)
UG Infect
RW Burn
Playing Commander with those same locals and randoms and friends will do wonders for your overall enjoyment of Magic, IMO. Whereas competitive Modern will have the opposite effect, as you seem to recognize as well!
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Bold assumption there, considering Horizons has been in the works since long before Phoenix's reign.
Abzan Traverse / Traverse Shadow / UR Kiki