MTG Salvation

Quote from Mortal Coil »

Quote from spellcheck »

Twin was inferior to Scapeshift and Jeskai Ascendancy as Dig decks. The Jeskai Ascendancy deck abusing Dig Through Time came out very late. It played like a Jeskai Control deck in the early game, but instead of killing you with Celestial Colonnade and Snapcaster Mage+Lightning Bolt, it used Jeskai Ascendancy and Fatestitcher with plenty of cantrips, including Gitaxian Probe. It felt like an improved version of Scapeshift, as it could interact more with the opponent in the early game yet it could kill faster. Once Dig Through Time was banned, the deck disappeared, as there is no other card capable of refilling your hand for so few mana that allows you to play a grindy game. Since then, Wizards has done a good job, unbanning Ancestral Vision and Jace and printing Teferi and Search for Azcanta as card advantage engines that can't be abused by combo or aggro decks.

I would say that the Twin lists I saw around in the TC meta weren't well optimized for Dig, rather than that its objectively worse than Jeskai Ascendency combo or Scapeshift. No Probe, No Bauble, no looting, and more of a focus on being able to grind it out with Snapcasters were the hallmarks of that era of Twin. When you run Dig in Twin, you're not playing the control game at all. It's an all in combo deck with a few pieces of interaction to protect your combo or stall for a turn or two. It's pretty good, too. Based on how that performs in NBLM, I'm pretty convinced that even without Chrome Mox it would have performed quite well in Modern.

All-in combo Twin was a thing for a while and then drifted away from that because it's not as good and considerably easier to disrupt. Putting Probes and Baubles in a deck that wants to play a long interactive game is a terrible idea. Which is why nobody did it, even for DTT.

The only thing I dislike from modern is how whinny have the players become. Every B&R announcement everyone is calling for a ban in the best deck. But there will always be a best deck. This is almost turning modern in a rotating format. I like non-interaction, and that should not be a reason for banning cards (like KCI) I can understand people who don't like linear strategies, because it's boring to play against them. It's also boring to play against UW control that goes t1 spell snare, t2: remand, t3 Mana leak and t4: cryptic command. If we would ban any deck we don't like, wouldn't have a format to play. People is screaming now for a faithless looting ban, without acknowledging how it is a pillar on the meta, and is important that it allows graveyard decks to exist. The "Phoenix" syndrome of a super popular deck is just a symptom of how wotc took it's design phylosophy since the end of theros block. MH isn't going to fix the problem just because wizards barely know something about modern. Is up to the players to understand that not everyone wants to play the game in the way they like it and that's a feature, not a con of the game. There's people who will play the best deck in the format just because it's the best, there's people who will play counter.dec because they want zero sum fun in the game. There's people who will play storm because they like counting to 20. Players should ask for unbans, not bans, and trying unbans should be done more often. Stoneforge, twin, preordain, and other cards are completely safe. But thanks to the players, the list just keep growing

I've been away from modern since like eldrazi winter, and I'm waiting for horizons to get back, I see no point in doing it now because the format will probably change a lot later.
On top of that, there is still that stupid deck (tron) that trumps all the types of decks I'd like to brew and test.

how whinny have the players become

I haven't seen a difference in years. There's always a part of the community that takes a huge frustrating pleasure at showing off what's not good in the game. You have your own share of complaints in your post :

I like non-interaction, and that should not be a reason for banning cards (like KCI)

MH isn't going to fix the problem just because wizards barely know something about modern

Players should ask for unbans, not bans, and trying unbans should be done more often. Stoneforge, twin, preordain, and other cards are completely safe. But thanks to the players, the list just keep growing

I believe players complain while they've not yet caught all the layers of a decision. I myself don't always understand why the balance of pros and cons led to a given decision.

About KCI, the card wasn't banned only because it's hard to interact with the combo. You can enjoy non-interaction and be in favor of KCI's ban, right ? Well, I am.
About Wizards, they probably know more about Modern as time flies. Employees who built MH1 aren't the same who built sets in the past. You complain before you even get your hands on the product !
About unbans, well it's not the only priority Wizards has, if it ever is one. New printings have way more chances to fix issues in the format, since Wizards can print anything they like, while unbannable cards are very seldom, and there's only a tiny chance they solve anything at a given time.
It baffles me how certain you seem to be about Wizards, as if the whinier part of the community had the power to make Wizards flinch. They gather data, professional and community feedback, and make a call in order to make the game more balanced, because it is a high priority aspect that leads to more attendance, more money, more influence on the market. Players should ask for whatever they want, and they will no matter what.

You claim Wizards know nothing about Modern, so they probably don't know how to print relevant cards in MH1, and that they also easily ban cards because people complain. But people complain because Wizards don't unban SFM, and I've yet to see the card in the format. Worse ! People complain about Twin (you do), and Wizards don't listen... Double standard anyone ?

So I can see it both ways. You are right that Dig Through Time did not PROVE too good in Modern, so that right there is a slap in the face to many. I can definitely see that. I felt the same way about it, but kind of gave up on supporting it through the years. You gotta pick and choose and your own biases help you do that, right?

I believe you both ignore the fact that we (and Wizards obv) can accurately judge the power of a card before it proved anything in a specific format.
First I'd say it proved to be very strong right away, you just don't remember people talked about DTT too, not only TC. Or rather the way the cards were talked about. It's not because a few articles said TC was better than DTT overall that they claimed DTT was okay. When LSV streamed Jeskai Ascendancy in Dec 2014, I remembered he laughed at the power of the deck and it was a DTT version. He anticipated the axe for the next ban announcement.
Second, we know the P9 would be too degenerate for Legacy. We don't need to see those cards prove anything in Legacy. Same goes with those delve spells in Modern. Wizards got caught by surprise (the same way they were with vehicles and energy in Standard), but reacted asap for the best.
I definitely disagree with you guys, imho Wizards made a smart / next level move that you now question, while you would have behaved bold and it would have led to a bad metagame for a little longer. Anticipation moves ara sometimes the most clever ones.

Quote from Nyzzeh »

I've been away from modern since like eldrazi winter, and I'm waiting for horizons to get back, I see no point in doing it now because the format will probably change a lot later.
On top of that, there is still that stupid deck (tron) that trumps all the types of decks I'd like to brew and test.

There have been a lot of cards printed recently that make the tron matchup less hard. Damping Sphere, Alpine Moon, Assassin's Trophy, and Field of Ruin are but a few examples. I used to hate playing against tron hard because it was so hard to interact with, but with this disruption paired with a relevant threat, my brews have gone from "Scoop to a t1 Urza's Tower Expedition Map" to being slightly favored.

Tron is still doing well because it is a resilient deck, but it is not the T3 Karn scoopfest it was in the past.

While this is true, also remember that Luis Scott-Vargas made a video saying that Grixis Shadow needed to be banned. A few good Human printings later and everything was fine again. I don't think anticipation moves are the right ones in my opinion. Yes, you have some hard feelings while a deck that is too good stomps for a month or so, but at least you don't have hard feelings for cards that never were (Dig Through Time for example, which I personally do feel that it is too good for Modern. Buuuut, I really have next to 0 proof)

The times that I treasure the most in Modern are where a deck is apparently oppressive, but players worked through it without bans. Collected Company was too good at one time. Eldrazi Tron was too good at one time. Lantern was getting close. I am so glad that anyone who wants to play these decks STILL CAN because Wizards was not too hasty.

Quote from FoodChainGoblins »

While this is true, also remember that Luis Scott-Vargas made a video saying that Grixis Shadow needed to be banned. A few good Human printings later and everything was fine again. I don't think anticipation moves are the right ones in my opinion. Yes, you have some hard feelings while a deck that is too good stomps for a month or so, but at least you don't have hard feelings for cards that never were (Dig Through Time for example, which I personally do feel that it is too good for Modern. Buuuut, I really have next to 0 proof)

The times that I treasure the most in Modern are where a deck is apparently oppressive, but players worked through it without bans. Collected Company was too good at one time. Eldrazi Tron was too good at one time. Lantern was getting close. I am so glad that anyone who wants to play these decks STILL CAN because Wizards was not too hasty.

I think this has to do with the sense of entitlement that the general society has, and magic players aren't any different. Without trying to make a social philosophy post out of this, I really feel that this is actually the reason why the ban mania exists in the first place. To be fair, if Wizards didn't mess up by hastily banning stuff they probably shouldn't, we wouldn't be on this situation because the precedent wasn't there. The problem is now that some things were banned with questionable rationale to support it, every single person feels entitled to make their own version of the modern ban list without any objective reasoning.

Pros, on the other hand, have the responsibility to try and put a stop to this by giving a reasonable approach to this matter and giving statistical reasoning to back up their arguments for advocating a certain ban/unban. Instead they are doing what the rest of the media does, creating really polarized opinions to "sell more". I'm not saying that all of them do, but there are a few that do that and they are actually known for that. The worst part is that these pros have a way more vocal following than the people that are more down to earth and have a more reasonable approach.

To stay on topic, I recently moved from UW back to GDS and I'm having a blast. After a miserable Day 1 at GP Bilbao where I tied the first round playing the mirror and then ending up on the 0-1-0 bracket... Then proceding to lose 2 games because Logic Knot isn't Counterspell I felt so frustrated that I dropped out of the tournament and put the deck on my binder. On the second Day I went out and played a couple of side events with GDS (after more than 1 year of not playing it) and managed to get a couple of Boxes out of it. Now I'm currently rocking the deck to FNMs and local events and it has felt great. It's amazing to have a proactive plan and be the one deciding the game (one way or the other). UW is a bit taxing emotionally because there are a couple of non-games where you're just at the mercy of your top deck and that's a miserable feeling for someone as competitive as I am.

Until CS gets printed in MH1 I'll play GDS or anything but UW Control... While I think that trying to master one deck is a good approach to the format, it's really important to not get burnt out of the format by changing the pace once in a while.

Yes, I agree with you on those sentiments. UW is a tough deck to consistently do well with. I have documented here how I tried it and went 4-0 at MNM, then 0-4 at FNM (smaller attendance and play skill level at FNM that particular week) simply because of drawing Path to Exile and then NOT drawing Path to Exile. There literally was nothing else different.

I personally believe that Grixis Shadow can have its (variance) moments as well. It just is in a better place in the current meta right now than UW. If Shadow did become too prominent, then UW is good against that, so it could change.

When I played Shadow, I drew too many lands. I did very mediocre with the deck and that is not what I am looking for. Many believe it's because of play skill and there's no denying that, but when you draw a lot of lands, you also draw few spells, so there are not as many decisions as someone would like to think. I did not remember any glaring mistakes, other than potentially playing discard early to stay on curve later on. Sideboarding probably was a bit of a crapshoot though, lol. My point is that variance happens with any deck. The first 4 rounds at FNM that I played with Shadow, I went 2-1-1 and I felt like I had more variance than I've had with Bogles.

But Shadow being better in the meta definitely leans it toward having less variance currently than UW. I'm glad you were able to salvage your Magic Fest by getting some solid wins under your belt. As for my last GP, I went 0-2, 0-4, and 0-4 in the last 10 rounds combined of each tournament (PTQ, GP Los Angeles, PTQ). It was easily my worst performance yet (that I remember at least after starting 3-1, 4-0, and 2-0 in each of these tournaments). It's SO easy to say that I lost my focus, losing so many in a row, but honestly there were so many tough mulligan decisions that I had with Titan Breach. I was not used to mulling to 4 and 5 with this deck; the reason I ran it is because I hoped that I wouldn't mulligan much.