There needs to be separate threads for arguing and discussing. That is the difference. Some people just want to complain, while others just want to discuss.
...and who decides the definition of complain vs discuss? Those are highly subjective terms, and what makes one person more qualified to lay down that line?
That idea bothers me on SO many levels. A discussion where there are no alternative viewpoints is pointless. Do you think that a political discussion with everyone who agrees with each other would accomplish anything? Apau, would you think it was a good discussion on Metal music if only Glam-rock and Hair-Metal fans were allowed to contribute? During this season I am reminded of the immortal words: "You may be different from the rest, but who decides the test? The on who's really beat?"
For the 3 people that feel all they do is bad, many more feel they are doing it right. In the end there will be a format you will either play or complain about.
Who are you to say that a person feels "that all they do is bad"? This is a single topic- Is the ban list being managed well, so how can you draw from that the idea that we feel everything they do is wrong. I fundamentaly disagree with the approach they have taken to develop the banlist, but each decision is taken on it's own merits.
Oh, and BTW I do play. I play every freaken day. I would not bother sharing my opinion if I did not care or play.
Completely agree with this 110%. This forum seriously needs a "Complain/*****/moan/whine about Modern here" thread so people can vent there instead of everywhere on the forum. Other forums on the site have similar threads, so why not Modern too?
Again, who decides which is which? Is any point of view that is contrary to the the decisions made a complaint? What if they banned a card that the majority thought was stupid, like Birds of Paradise- so now the dogma turns towards against the decisions? Since it is popular to have that opinion is it now a discussion, rather than a complaint?
EDIT: I'm not trying to flame the posters I mentioned. You guys are all certainly entitled to your own opinions. However, those opinions seem to be mostly contrary to what WotC has envisioned for this format. Stating them over and over and over does not seem very helpful at this point, and their repitition is certainly making these forums less enjoyable for me personally.[/color]
...and stating over and over "it is so great that they banned Green Sun's Zenith" is adding something to the conversation? What would the replies be? "This", "I agree", "you are so right"
Now, as a person that is unhappy with the banlist, I get pretty irritated when SK takes a swipe at the format in every thread he posts in. He and I share a very general position, and every time he does that I groan beacause it it hurts our point of view. I have no problem with keeping all discussions about the banlist in one or two threads, and stamping out posts that are an attempt to steer the conversation that direction (intentionally or not) in threads where it is not appropriate. That is reasonable and prudent. However, making threads where in any dissenting or unpopular opinion is not allowed, is not only ignorant, it is pointless.
These forums are for "open discussion", and excluding the opinions that are not shared by the majority is not open...it is very much closed.
I am intensely disappointed by the suggestion, and that people who's opinion I respect have made it, but I would never take away their right to say it.
...and who decides the definition of complain vs discuss? Those are highly subjective terms, and what makes one person more qualified to lay down that line?
That idea bothers me on SO many levels. A discussion where there are no alternative viewpoints is pointless. Do you think that a political discussion with everyone who agrees with each other would accomplish anything? Apau, would you think it was a good discussion on Metal music if you only allowed Glam-rock and Hair-Metal fans to contribute? During this season I am reminded of the immortal words: "You may be different from the rest, but who decides the test? The on who's really beat?"
Discussion implies complacency. Complaining doesn't. It is that simple.
As a Metal-head- I do not like glam or hair bands (good example- BTW), but I could see seperate threads that are "Discuss Metal music" and "Complain about Metal Music"
I could discuss the awesomeness that is Black/Speed/death Metal in the discussion thread..and complain about hair/glam bands in the other (Skid Row- Worst evar)
It is not to promote everyone agreeing. I am not trying to quiet anyone here. In fact I want to make the conversation more streamlined, is all.
Discussion would still have difference of opinion, ergo argument. But instead of focusing on what isn't there, the argument would be revolved around what is.
Complaint means I do not like the state of the format and I want x, y , and z back.
I can assure you, I have opinions that would be considered to fit into both categories. I am not saying to not have differences of opinion. I am saying that people should be able to discuss without being told that we need X, Y, and Z.
There is a part of me that is complacent and patient enough to see how this format shapes up. That part doesn't need to be reminded of old extended or cards that are on the ban list. It is the part of me that is saying, "Okay, this is what we have. What does it look like? What are other problems?"
Then there is the other part of me that says, "Damn, if only Bitterblossom/Ancestral Vision were legal"
Each of those parts can be satisfied in either discussion. I am not trying to quiet anyone, in fact I am trying to create a place where people can voice either side.
@ Everyone- Worm is in my clan and does in fact play every day. I can vouch for that
@Slipknot. I can't be bothered to name all the decks it may or may not help, lets wait and see if any decks get better, if new decks pop up, etc.
Until then lets just pretend that Zoo is the only playable deck out there and that not a single deck has a favourable matchup against it.
nvr said that though. I can build a control deck with the sole intent of being zoo and have like 5% on it. All I said was that it was format warping. Kinda like DD was in extedned, although that didn't make several other decks unplayable. it just put a few extra cards in peoples main decks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Discussion implies complacency. Complaining doesn't. It is that simple.
As a Metal-head- I do not like glam or hair bands (good example- BTW), but I could see seperate threads that are "Discuss Metal music" and "Complain about Metal Music"
I could discuss the awesomeness that is Black/Speed/death Metal in the discussion thread..and complain about hair/glam bands in the other (Skid Row- Worst evar)
It is not to promote everyone agreeing. I am not trying to quiet anyone here. In fact I want to make the conversation more streamlined, is all.
Discussion would still have difference of opinion, ergo argument. But instead of focusing on what isn't there, the argument would be revolved around what is.
Complaint means I do not like the state of the format and I want x, y , and z back.
I can assure you, I have opinions that would be considered to fit into both categories. I am not saying to not have differences of opinion. I am saying that people should be able to discuss without being told that we need X, Y, and Z.
There is a part of me that is complacent and patient enough to see how this format shapes up. That part doesn't need to be reminded of old extended or cards that are on the ban list. It is the part of me that is saying, "Okay, this is what we have. What does it look like? What are other problems?"
Then there is the other part of me that says, "Damn, if only Bitterblossom/Ancestral Vision were legal"
Each of those parts can be satisfied in either discussion. I am not trying to quiet anyone, in fact I am trying to create a place where people can voice either side.
@ Everyone- Worm is in my clan and does in fact play every day. I can vouch for that
The problem is, complaining is part of discussing something. If you take a discussion, and take appart the complains, you don't have a discution anymore, but a converstion in wich the differents points of view converge.
I think it would be more reasonable to have a thread to discuss about what cards should be banned among the ones that are still legal, and another one to discuss what cards should be unbanned, among the cards that aren's legal. But wait! There's already a thread to discuss what cards should be banned! So that might be the reason why people come here to discuss what cards should be unbanned (wich I think is completely reasonable).
The problem is, complaining is part of discussing something. If you take a discussion, and take appart the complains, you don't have a discution anymore, but a converstion in wich the differents points of view converge.
I think it would be more reasonable to have a thread to discuss about what cards should be banned among the ones that are still legal, and another one to discuss what cards should be unbanned, among the cards that aren's legal. But wait! There's already a thread to discuss what cards should be banned! So that might be the reason why people come here to discuss what cards should be unbanned (wich I think is completely reasonable).
Example: the current discussion about threads within a thread: We are discussing and disagreeing and even arguing the pros and cons of having separate threads while not complaining about the fact that we can have this discussion.
A separate thread to complain about other threads may be warranted though.
Use this very discussion about threads as an analogy to what I am talking about. see what I did there?
This idea seems to work in the other Forums. Look at Standard.
After going through some articles I found something relevant to modern.
The Enigma
That being said, there are some decks that are just better than their contemporaries. These decks tend to be chock full of undercosted spells, generally those that generate incredible amounts of card advantage or time advantage,
If there is unity among The Enigma, it may be that for them to lose, generally the opponent must be aiming directly at that deck, because it is so effective against the bulk of the field.
There have been many decks to touch The Enigma-level status over the years; following are some of the most hated, most feared, and least popular opponents you can have faced. Many of these decks have appeared in multiple tournaments, with different incarnations and diverse pilots... I have chosen a selection from Top 8 and/or first place finishes in various Premiere Events.
This essentially sums up zoo. It does not have stompy's traditional weakness to heavy board control because it is not stompy. It is all of the best aggressive cards, with a bit of countersliver, a sligh mana curve, with midrange powered creatures at reduced cost.(goyf, KotR)
It is legion which also makes it the enigma.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
The fact is that other creature strategies are bound to pop up, so gunning for Zoo means you get to have splash damage, or a wider net cast with necessary "deal with creature" spells...It is why Ancient Grudge is a good SB option, for example. You get to hose Affinity and anything else that runs annoying artifacts.
And the fact that Zoo is trying to Mana Leak/Negate/Spell Pierce stuff should be a joke to "control" decks...(in quotes because I can admit that most control decks in the format are aggro/control, save Teachings and Gifts variants).
Aether Vial decks, like Death and Taxes, happen to be very good against the Aggro Control decks that can have a good matchup against Zoo. But my MD Wrath/Spot Removal/random defenders are still going to but me time against both...
Just one example. Rock/paper/scissors is the goal right?
The fact is that other creature strategies are bound to pop up, so gunning for Zoo means you get to have splash damage, or a wider net cast with necessary "deal with creature" spells...
And the fact that Zoo is trying to Mana Leak/Negate/Spell Pierce stuff should be a joke to "control" decks...(in quotes because I can admit that most control decks in the format are aggro/control, save Teachings and Gifts variants)
But labeling zoo the enigma in the format seems proper. Most stopy decks fold over hard to Weissman or board control decks. Zoo Isn't strong against them, but as their worst match up it is definitely around 50/50 unless you devote your deck to them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
But labeling zoo the enigma in the format seems proper. Most stopy decks fold over hard to Weissman or board control decks. Isn't strong against them, but as their worst match up it is definitely around 50/50 unless you devote your deck to them.
I can concede the point. Zoo is a great basis for an enigma because it can run everything that is efficient. I also don't think it has more than 50% against the field, and that it is actually worse or better depending on the MU. It has weakness though, tempo. If the tempo is disrupted, it loses on a harder slope incrementally than I do.
You know what I think would be a great place to start? Unbanning everything and letting commander into the format. Clearly I never played in the dark days of affjnity. But maybe the threat of other fast resiliant combos would keep it at bay
Also, we never got to see the impact of flusterstorm or misstep, which I think could serve as modern solutions to the (lack of )force of will problem.
Maybe its just me but now that people know about the
advantages of diffrnt modern decks we can build a diverse and powerful.Meta?
sorry bout typos written from my phone.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When does lightning bolt kill Emrakul? When your opponent's at three.
Then goblins would be the best deck lol. You can't have legacy goblins in modern lol. Goblins are either almost broke or crappy. No way to really have middle ground.
Legacy Goblins has Ringleader, Piledriver, Warchief, Lackey, Gempalm Inincerator, Wasteland and Port that make it so good. You can't really argue that letting 2 of these into the format would create a dominant deck, especially when Zoo (one of it's worst MUs) is the best deck in the format
I'm excited about Modern. I read this forum multiple times everyday, but I rarely post here due to the extreme negativity and frequent complaining across multiple threads from 3 certain users: Slipknot, honestabe, DrWorm. It's so bad that Slipknot's finally got the "honor" of being the first and only MTGS user on my ignore list.
A forum free from complaints would be fantastic. Even a single thread would be a tremendous first step.
Whining = OMG THIS SUX BLA BLA BLA
Stating oppinion = OMG THIS SUX; here's why, and here's what they could do to fix it.
I like to think I do a significant amount more of the latter. Please don't think I came here just to troll, I was a HUGE proponent of Modern, until WoTC went on a ban spree. If anything else, I'm more upset with the way WoTC's been going about things (thier logic, and reasoning) than I am about the actual format.
You also have to understand that a forum isn't just a bunch of people talking about how much they agree with each other. It's a place for people to voice their oppinions, debate, and hopefully give WoTC a view of what the players really think is going on. Sorry, you don't like my oppinion, but quite frankly, go stick it up your ass if you think I'm wrong, or am detracting from the forum for stating my oppinion.
Please also note, it wouldn't take a lot for WoTC to please me. I'd have been thrilled if they unbanned even one card 2 days ago.
Moderator Action: While the forum is a place to voice opinions, it is not a place to verbally attack other users. Flame Infraction Issued. t_c
You know what I think would be a great place to start? Unbanning everything and letting commander into the format. Clearly I never played in the dark days of affjnity. But maybe the threat of other fast resiliant combos would keep it at bay
Also, we never got to see the impact of flusterstorm or misstep, which I think could serve as modern solutions to the (lack of )force of will problem.
Maybe its just me but now that people know about the
advantages of diffrnt modern decks we can build a diverse and powerful.Meta?
sorry bout typos written from my phone.
Some cards like Skullclamp and Hypergenesis (with eldrazi) are simply too broken to ever be allowed in the format. Though I would be in favor for a larger card pool, most cards from the commander decks are probably too strong, and they all have freaking sol ring in them. If WoTC thought combo was too good without them, imagine with.
This is a double post, but I don't want to merge it due to having modded the previous post. He should have used the edit button. t_c
[color=purple]
Yes, please, please let this happen!
I'm excited about Modern. I read this forum multiple times everyday, but I rarely post here due to the extreme negativity and frequent complaining across multiple threads from 3 certain users: Slipknot, honestabe, DrWorm. It's so bad that Slipknot's finally got the "honor" of being the first and only MTGS user on my ignore list.
So, you want a forum where the only opinion is "Modern is great, and there is nothing I would change"? See, I agree with the first part, but not with the second.
Having an opinion and voicing it repeatedly is less fine.
Having an opinion, and throwing it at every single person who has a differing opinion is not a discussion, its a barrage of misery.
If people were voicing over and over, "Wizards is really doing a great job in the ban list, and I support each of their decisions", it is okay, but voicing "Wizards is potentially harming the format because of their approach to each ban and their frequency" is not? That seems like a double standard. I have stopped trying to convince people like bocephus of the logic of my position, so the only time I continue my attempt to provide an alternate viewpoint is when an new point has been brought up, or a new person comments and references my position. At that point I make an attempt to answer them.
If a new person came in to one of these threads (where I contain my posts on this subject) and said "Wizards is really doing a great job in the ban list, and I support each of their decisions", I would not feel moved to comment. Nothing new is added, and there is no reference to a post of mine or the position I support. If, on the other hand, people were to post " "Wizards is really doing a great job in the ban list, and anyone who can't see that just wants blue to be dominant like it is in every other format and should shut up and learn to play real magic", then I feel that my position is being referenced, and in this case maligned. I will feel compelled to respond, and when I do I am a long-winded old man, so my posts are ginormous.
The problem is, complaining is part of discussing something. If you take a discussion, and take appart the complains, you don't have a discution anymore, but a converstion in wich the differents points of view converge.
Well said.
I think it would be more reasonable to have a thread to discuss about what cards should be banned among the ones that are still legal, and another one to discuss what cards should be unbanned, among the cards that aren's legal.
I could get behind that segregation. It is a complicated issue, and unbans will inevtably effect bans, so the converation might merge at times, but I would comply with that.
I can concede the point. Zoo is a great basis for an enigma because it can run everything that is efficient. I also don't think it has more than 50% against the field, and that it is actually worse or better depending on the MU. It has weakness though, tempo. If the tempo is disrupted, it loses on a harder slope incrementally than I do.
it is pretty hard to attack zoos tempo though. their threats are as cheap or cheaper than our answers. This is part of why chrome mox was so important in control because it allowed remand to be a turn 1 spell. I don't know the proper place for a general how to beat zoo thread(without losing to everything else) so I am going to get a bit further on topic.
and say that somethings should have been removed from the list. golgari grave troll at the very least since it has 0 purpose to be on there with dread return on the list.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
The format is already good as it is, why don't people enjoy it already. There's nothing degenerate, people can play various types of aggro, aggrocontrol, pure boring control, and combo. Daily events are full of different decks. What else can you ask for?
...and who decides the definition of complain vs discuss? Those are highly subjective terms, and what makes one person more qualified to lay down that line?
That idea bothers me on SO many levels. A discussion where there are no alternative viewpoints is pointless. Do you think that a political discussion with everyone who agrees with each other would accomplish anything? Apau, would you think it was a good discussion on Metal music if only Glam-rock and Hair-Metal fans were allowed to contribute? During this season I am reminded of the immortal words: "You may be different from the rest, but who decides the test? The on who's really beat?"
Who are you to say that a person feels "that all they do is bad"? This is a single topic- Is the ban list being managed well, so how can you draw from that the idea that we feel everything they do is wrong. I fundamentaly disagree with the approach they have taken to develop the banlist, but each decision is taken on it's own merits.
I agree with you in this regard. People are taking constructive criticism as just complaining and trying to make this thread one sided. I don't deny that I have complained about this format. My complaints are justified in the sense that, it is my point of view and it involves the ban list which this discussion is about. If we are all in agreement that the ban list is just perfect and that everything about this format is just great (which in my opinion is delusional) then what is there to discuss? I wont disagree that some cards belong in the ban list. I just feel some don't and bringing them back would balance things more and give more diversity to decks. My opinion is just ban all the extremely broken combos or cards and leave the rest and see how the meta plays out over a longer period of time and then ban some more if necessary. Ban wild nactl??? what's up with that? The same people defending not banning goyf are in agreement that nactl should go with their argument that goyf is just a vanilla fatty.....so is nactl lol. I can understand dark depths, hypergen and other cards of this sort being banned though some of the bannings are ridiculous. Modern will become standard with larger card pool excluding a lot of the fun cards that make the game interesting (the ban list). This is going to happen because any card printed in future sets will all be designed with standard format in mind and a lot of the cards needed in modern to balance the format without taking away the power level significantly will never be reprinted because it will ruin the standard format. Wizards will always promote standard no matter what. They are a business and a rotating format keeps people buying cards from new sets. I think the solution to this is just reprinting certain cards that are desperately needed in modern and then just banning them in standard. that solves the problem though wizards wont do that. They will just keep nerfing the format until it is an eternal format that is as bland as standard. This is why I will likely not come back to this format unless things change. I just dont want to play anything similar to standard....I tried it and found that it mostly consisted of dimwits turning creatures sideways and complaining about everything. I'm not trying to insult any of u playing standard....unfortunately where I live most people who only play standard are very annoying and don't know jack squat about magic and are one dimensional having no skill....don't ask me why. Look I'm not just complaining. I've made suggestions on how the format could keep its power level and not disrupt standard. To me this is constructive criticism. If I just said modern sucks and standard sucks and that's that and gave no reasoning behind my opinion then yes it would be senseless.
The problem is, complaining is part of discussing something. If you take a discussion, and take appart the complains, you don't have a discution anymore, but a converstion in wich the differents points of view converge.
I think it would be more reasonable to have a thread to discuss about what cards should be banned among the ones that are still legal, and another one to discuss what cards should be unbanned, among the cards that aren's legal. But wait! There's already a thread to discuss what cards should be banned! So that might be the reason why people come here to discuss what cards should be unbanned (wich I think is completely reasonable).
Perfect solution.
Please wait at least 2 days between doubleposts, thanks.
Kors
You know what I think would be a great place to start? Unbanning everything and letting commander into the format. Clearly I never played in the dark days of affjnity. But maybe the threat of other fast resiliant combos would keep it at bay
Also, we never got to see the impact of flusterstorm or misstep, which I think could serve as modern solutions to the (lack of )force of will problem.
Maybe its just me but now that people know about the
advantages of diffrnt modern decks we can build a diverse and powerful.Meta?
sorry bout typos written from my phone.
No, you don't want that. With 8 Moxes and Skullclamp, Affinity would be able to act like a Combo deck. I tossed it together the other day, and I am able to ramp up to 9 mana on turn three, with a full hand, and a lethal board, and that's without actually "playing"; I sacked everything to Skullclamp + Ravager, and if I had actually planned it out, I could have easily won with Disciple triggers. On top of that, I can run Ethersworn Canonist, Tidehollow Sculler, and Pithing Needle, to hose any other Combo, and any attempt to disrupt me.
Misstep might work in Modern, because there is an even spread of threat density, and there is no Daze and FoW to back it up. It would act more like removal than anything else.
Everyone knows that good luck and good game are such insincere terms that any man who does not connect his right hook with the offender's jaw on the very utterance of such a phrase is no man I would consider as such.
The format is already good as it is, why don't people enjoy it already. There's nothing degenerate, people can play various types of aggro, aggrocontrol, pure boring control, and combo. Daily events are full of different decks. What else can you ask for?
Why can't you respect and allow opinions that differ from yours? If people are saying they do not enjoy it for their own reasons, why can't you accept that?
Personally, I enjoy the format very much (most days), but that does not mean that there are not things that I think would make the format more enjoyable. Additionally, while very few of the bans have been of cards I would actually play, I do have issues with the apparent reasoning behind the bans- fearing that the same reasoning could be used in the future on cards I do enjoy playing. That is why I speak up.
The format is already good as it is, why don't people enjoy it already. There's nothing degenerate, people can play various types of aggro, aggrocontrol, pure boring control, and combo. Daily events are full of different decks. What else can you ask for?
Honestly DEs are really hard to judge. I bet I could get a 3-1 finish with a standard deck If Played enough of them and didn't play against a bad match up one event.
I am doing a new type of statistical analysis to check strength of each deck vs one another based off of DEs. I will post that when finished. I might way till later because I don't have enough data yet to even assume extra numbers.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
Honestly DEs are really hard to judge. I bet I could get a 3-1 finish with a standard deck If Played enough of them and didn't play against a bad match up one event.
I am doing a new type of statistical analysis to check strength of each deck vs one another based off of DEs. I will post that when finished. I might way till later because I don't have enough data yet to even assume extra numbers.
The dailies are not at a place of statistical significance yet either. There are so many decks with such little observations that you would only be able to have an analysis on the more played decks, which would be Storm variants and Zoo.
@thread- If you think what I am suggesting for separate threads is being a "thought police" you are sadly mistaken. I am the last person who would suggest such an idea. It is too totalitarian. The problem, is that this thread, more than any other here, always degenerates into flaming. Plus the opinions expressed here creep into other threads, which is annoying for people who would normally like to discuss without screaming at a wall or having to hear "well that deck would be good if they unbanned x" at every ****ing corner.
The fact is that you can complain about the state of the ban list without always bringing up cards that are banned or how they got there. Those are valid complaints that derail the discussion.
Really, I am just trying to tone down the flames. I don't think everyone has to agree, but arguing the same points over and over is also detrimental to a real discussion. I don't know how many of you pay attention to this thread, but I constantly see the same opinions over and over again anyway, which is the very thing you are protesting by making a separate thread (How ironic).
I think the discussion should be divided into Ban List Discussion/Cards that need banned & Cards that need to be unbanned or The Ban Policy, because, again, although related, these are separate discussions.
Plus the opinions expressed here creep into other threads, which is annoying for people who would normally like to discuss without screaming at a wall or having to hear "well that deck would be good if they unbanned x" at every ****ing corner.
I completely agree.
The fact is that you can complain about the state of the ban list without always bringing up cards that are banned or how they got there. Those are valid complaints that derail the discussion.
Stated that way, I agree. I am not sure if I am guilty of this, but if I am I will try to tone it down. What I will say is that in 3 months, if a card is banned that I feel is done for the same reasons as PF, I am likely to use the same argument. That said, unless addressed directly or indirectly, I have nothing new to add at this point.
Really, I am just trying to tone down the flames. I don't think everyone has to agree, but arguing the same points over and over is also detrimental to a real discussion.
I agree with this as well, and I think it can said of both sides. Pein and Bocephus are just as guilty of this as SK or honestabe (or myself if you feel I am as well), and I think that both sides feel the need to get the last word in, so when they do it perpetuates the other.
The problem lies in how this "regulation" can be implemented and maintained. I think we are narrowing it down to what should be added, and what should be removed, and that is a good place to start.
After going over the whole thread and taking everyone's opinions into consideration, I'm actually in agreement that constantly complaining about certain cards being unbanned does derail the point of the thread so going forward, what can be done to improve this format? I gave modern a shot and just cant seem to find enough people interested in it. Most of my play group are into legacy so that may be why they find modern so bland. I already invested a lot of money into modern and it would suck for me to have to just give up on it because of wizard's inability to properly judge what to ban and unban in order to keep the format balanced and interesting at the same time. I'm sick of hearing about zoo and how over powered it is. I've been playing zoo in modern and there are many decks that beat it and it certainly isn't invincible. Instead of just complaining about which decks are a dominating force and what cards should be unbanned and banned, we should focus more on developing new decks to trump the current top tier decks and perhaps bring more diversity into the format given the current meta. I know this would have to be a completely different thread all together though it's just suggestion. I'm just not looking forward to this format becoming more and more like standard and hoping it will become easier to find more people who are willing to give the format a try...though wizards isn't making it easy. Anyways I'm gonna start checking out what decks people are coming up with in the developing section and see what other variants of decks that are now viable due to the current meta. Anyways I'm not trying to derail this topic either so back to the ban list discussion.
No, you don't want that. With 8 Moxes and Skullclamp, Affinity would be able to act like a Combo deck. I tossed it together the other day, and I am able to ramp up to 9 mana on turn three, with a full hand, and a lethal board, and that's without actually "playing"; I sacked everything to Skullclamp + Ravager, and if I had actually planned it out, I could have easily won with Disciple triggers. On top of that, I can run Ethersworn Canonist, Tidehollow Sculler, and Pithing Needle, to hose any other Combo, and any attempt to disrupt me.
Misstep might work in Modern, because there is an even spread of threat density, and there is no Daze and FoW to back it up. It would act more like removal than anything else.
I don't think chrome mox would really work in affinity. They didn't run it in extended, and for good reason. A lot of people forget that you have to pitch a colored card to it or it doesn't do anything. Also for a deck that often runs out of gas so easily taking a -2 hit on card advantage for a faster rampant growth really isn't ideal.
@ thread in general
People has a strange ideology when it comes to that card. For decks without thirst for knowledge it is probably wrong to take the -2 card advantage. Not to mention the fact that you only have a 23% chance of getting it out on turn one anyways. The best and mostly only use for chrome mox is to play 3-5 mana spells early enough that they actually matter in the game.
Another funny argument is it will just make zoo or RDW faster. This is not true by any stretch of the imagination. Decks that have tight curves cant use it to any effect. Hooray turn 1 tarmogoyf yes now it can easily just die to a lightning bolt so I two for 1ed myself.
And then there is the argument "well it will make storm better."
What are they going to pitch to it a ritual? A cantrip effect? A grapeshot?
The only combo deck that I see using that card is possible Ad Nasuem, which is pretty weak. It is slower, weaker to hate, and requires 2 cards neither of which you can really search for.
/rant
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In life all we can do is try to make things better. Sitting lost in old ways and fearing change only makes us outdated and ignorant.
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
Albert Einstein
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
That idea bothers me on SO many levels. A discussion where there are no alternative viewpoints is pointless. Do you think that a political discussion with everyone who agrees with each other would accomplish anything? Apau, would you think it was a good discussion on Metal music if only Glam-rock and Hair-Metal fans were allowed to contribute? During this season I am reminded of the immortal words: "You may be different from the rest, but who decides the test? The on who's really beat?"
Who are you to say that a person feels "that all they do is bad"? This is a single topic- Is the ban list being managed well, so how can you draw from that the idea that we feel everything they do is wrong. I fundamentaly disagree with the approach they have taken to develop the banlist, but each decision is taken on it's own merits.
Oh, and BTW I do play. I play every freaken day. I would not bother sharing my opinion if I did not care or play.
Again, who decides which is which? Is any point of view that is contrary to the the decisions made a complaint? What if they banned a card that the majority thought was stupid, like Birds of Paradise- so now the dogma turns towards against the decisions? Since it is popular to have that opinion is it now a discussion, rather than a complaint?
...and stating over and over "it is so great that they banned Green Sun's Zenith" is adding something to the conversation? What would the replies be? "This", "I agree", "you are so right"
Now, as a person that is unhappy with the banlist, I get pretty irritated when SK takes a swipe at the format in every thread he posts in. He and I share a very general position, and every time he does that I groan beacause it it hurts our point of view. I have no problem with keeping all discussions about the banlist in one or two threads, and stamping out posts that are an attempt to steer the conversation that direction (intentionally or not) in threads where it is not appropriate. That is reasonable and prudent. However, making threads where in any dissenting or unpopular opinion is not allowed, is not only ignorant, it is pointless.
These forums are for "open discussion", and excluding the opinions that are not shared by the majority is not open...it is very much closed.
I am intensely disappointed by the suggestion, and that people who's opinion I respect have made it, but I would never take away their right to say it.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Discussion implies complacency. Complaining doesn't. It is that simple.
As a Metal-head- I do not like glam or hair bands (good example- BTW), but I could see seperate threads that are "Discuss Metal music" and "Complain about Metal Music"
I could discuss the awesomeness that is Black/Speed/death Metal in the discussion thread..and complain about hair/glam bands in the other (Skid Row- Worst evar)
It is not to promote everyone agreeing. I am not trying to quiet anyone here. In fact I want to make the conversation more streamlined, is all.
Discussion would still have difference of opinion, ergo argument. But instead of focusing on what isn't there, the argument would be revolved around what is.
Complaint means I do not like the state of the format and I want x, y , and z back.
I can assure you, I have opinions that would be considered to fit into both categories. I am not saying to not have differences of opinion. I am saying that people should be able to discuss without being told that we need X, Y, and Z.
There is a part of me that is complacent and patient enough to see how this format shapes up. That part doesn't need to be reminded of old extended or cards that are on the ban list. It is the part of me that is saying, "Okay, this is what we have. What does it look like? What are other problems?"
Then there is the other part of me that says, "Damn, if only Bitterblossom/Ancestral Vision were legal"
Each of those parts can be satisfied in either discussion. I am not trying to quiet anyone, in fact I am trying to create a place where people can voice either side.
@ Everyone- Worm is in my clan and does in fact play every day. I can vouch for that
nvr said that though. I can build a control deck with the sole intent of being zoo and have like 5% on it. All I said was that it was format warping. Kinda like DD was in extedned, although that didn't make several other decks unplayable. it just put a few extra cards in peoples main decks.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
The problem is, complaining is part of discussing something. If you take a discussion, and take appart the complains, you don't have a discution anymore, but a converstion in wich the differents points of view converge.
I think it would be more reasonable to have a thread to discuss about what cards should be banned among the ones that are still legal, and another one to discuss what cards should be unbanned, among the cards that aren's legal. But wait! There's already a thread to discuss what cards should be banned! So that might be the reason why people come here to discuss what cards should be unbanned (wich I think is completely reasonable).
Example: the current discussion about threads within a thread: We are discussing and disagreeing and even arguing the pros and cons of having separate threads while not complaining about the fact that we can have this discussion.
A separate thread to complain about other threads may be warranted though.
Use this very discussion about threads as an analogy to what I am talking about. see what I did there?
This idea seems to work in the other Forums. Look at Standard.
I feel like I am next leveling existentialism
The Enigma
This essentially sums up zoo. It does not have stompy's traditional weakness to heavy board control because it is not stompy. It is all of the best aggressive cards, with a bit of countersliver, a sligh mana curve, with midrange powered creatures at reduced cost.(goyf, KotR)
It is legion which also makes it the enigma.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
And the fact that Zoo is trying to Mana Leak/Negate/Spell Pierce stuff should be a joke to "control" decks...(in quotes because I can admit that most control decks in the format are aggro/control, save Teachings and Gifts variants).
Aether Vial decks, like Death and Taxes, happen to be very good against the Aggro Control decks that can have a good matchup against Zoo. But my MD Wrath/Spot Removal/random defenders are still going to but me time against both...
Just one example. Rock/paper/scissors is the goal right?
But labeling zoo the enigma in the format seems proper. Most stopy decks fold over hard to Weissman or board control decks. Zoo Isn't strong against them, but as their worst match up it is definitely around 50/50 unless you devote your deck to them.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
I can concede the point. Zoo is a great basis for an enigma because it can run everything that is efficient. I also don't think it has more than 50% against the field, and that it is actually worse or better depending on the MU. It has weakness though, tempo. If the tempo is disrupted, it loses on a harder slope incrementally than I do.
Also, we never got to see the impact of flusterstorm or misstep, which I think could serve as modern solutions to the (lack of )force of will problem.
Maybe its just me but now that people know about the
advantages of diffrnt modern decks we can build a diverse and powerful.Meta?
sorry bout typos written from my phone.
Legacy Goblins has Ringleader, Piledriver, Warchief, Lackey, Gempalm Inincerator, Wasteland and Port that make it so good. You can't really argue that letting 2 of these into the format would create a dominant deck, especially when Zoo (one of it's worst MUs) is the best deck in the format
Whining = OMG THIS SUX BLA BLA BLA
Stating oppinion = OMG THIS SUX; here's why, and here's what they could do to fix it.
I like to think I do a significant amount more of the latter. Please don't think I came here just to troll, I was a HUGE proponent of Modern, until WoTC went on a ban spree. If anything else, I'm more upset with the way WoTC's been going about things (thier logic, and reasoning) than I am about the actual format.
You also have to understand that a forum isn't just a bunch of people talking about how much they agree with each other. It's a place for people to voice their oppinions, debate, and hopefully give WoTC a view of what the players really think is going on. Sorry, you don't like my oppinion, but quite frankly, go stick it up your ass if you think I'm wrong, or am detracting from the forum for stating my oppinion.
Please also note, it wouldn't take a lot for WoTC to please me. I'd have been thrilled if they unbanned even one card 2 days ago.
Moderator Action: While the forum is a place to voice opinions, it is not a place to verbally attack other users. Flame Infraction Issued. t_c
Please read the Forum Rules
Some cards like Skullclamp and Hypergenesis (with eldrazi) are simply too broken to ever be allowed in the format. Though I would be in favor for a larger card pool, most cards from the commander decks are probably too strong, and they all have freaking sol ring in them. If WoTC thought combo was too good without them, imagine with.
This is a double post, but I don't want to merge it due to having modded the previous post. He should have used the edit button. t_c
If people were voicing over and over, "Wizards is really doing a great job in the ban list, and I support each of their decisions", it is okay, but voicing "Wizards is potentially harming the format because of their approach to each ban and their frequency" is not? That seems like a double standard. I have stopped trying to convince people like bocephus of the logic of my position, so the only time I continue my attempt to provide an alternate viewpoint is when an new point has been brought up, or a new person comments and references my position. At that point I make an attempt to answer them.
If a new person came in to one of these threads (where I contain my posts on this subject) and said "Wizards is really doing a great job in the ban list, and I support each of their decisions", I would not feel moved to comment. Nothing new is added, and there is no reference to a post of mine or the position I support. If, on the other hand, people were to post " "Wizards is really doing a great job in the ban list, and anyone who can't see that just wants blue to be dominant like it is in every other format and should shut up and learn to play real magic", then I feel that my position is being referenced, and in this case maligned. I will feel compelled to respond, and when I do I am a long-winded old man, so my posts are ginormous.
Well said.
I could get behind that segregation. It is a complicated issue, and unbans will inevtably effect bans, so the converation might merge at times, but I would comply with that.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
it is pretty hard to attack zoos tempo though. their threats are as cheap or cheaper than our answers. This is part of why chrome mox was so important in control because it allowed remand to be a turn 1 spell. I don't know the proper place for a general how to beat zoo thread(without losing to everything else) so I am going to get a bit further on topic.
and say that somethings should have been removed from the list. golgari grave troll at the very least since it has 0 purpose to be on there with dread return on the list.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
I agree with you in this regard. People are taking constructive criticism as just complaining and trying to make this thread one sided. I don't deny that I have complained about this format. My complaints are justified in the sense that, it is my point of view and it involves the ban list which this discussion is about. If we are all in agreement that the ban list is just perfect and that everything about this format is just great (which in my opinion is delusional) then what is there to discuss? I wont disagree that some cards belong in the ban list. I just feel some don't and bringing them back would balance things more and give more diversity to decks. My opinion is just ban all the extremely broken combos or cards and leave the rest and see how the meta plays out over a longer period of time and then ban some more if necessary. Ban wild nactl??? what's up with that? The same people defending not banning goyf are in agreement that nactl should go with their argument that goyf is just a vanilla fatty.....so is nactl lol. I can understand dark depths, hypergen and other cards of this sort being banned though some of the bannings are ridiculous. Modern will become standard with larger card pool excluding a lot of the fun cards that make the game interesting (the ban list). This is going to happen because any card printed in future sets will all be designed with standard format in mind and a lot of the cards needed in modern to balance the format without taking away the power level significantly will never be reprinted because it will ruin the standard format. Wizards will always promote standard no matter what. They are a business and a rotating format keeps people buying cards from new sets. I think the solution to this is just reprinting certain cards that are desperately needed in modern and then just banning them in standard. that solves the problem though wizards wont do that. They will just keep nerfing the format until it is an eternal format that is as bland as standard. This is why I will likely not come back to this format unless things change. I just dont want to play anything similar to standard....I tried it and found that it mostly consisted of dimwits turning creatures sideways and complaining about everything. I'm not trying to insult any of u playing standard....unfortunately where I live most people who only play standard are very annoying and don't know jack squat about magic and are one dimensional having no skill....don't ask me why. Look I'm not just complaining. I've made suggestions on how the format could keep its power level and not disrupt standard. To me this is constructive criticism. If I just said modern sucks and standard sucks and that's that and gave no reasoning behind my opinion then yes it would be senseless.
Perfect solution.
Please wait at least 2 days between doubleposts, thanks.
Kors
No, you don't want that. With 8 Moxes and Skullclamp, Affinity would be able to act like a Combo deck. I tossed it together the other day, and I am able to ramp up to 9 mana on turn three, with a full hand, and a lethal board, and that's without actually "playing"; I sacked everything to Skullclamp + Ravager, and if I had actually planned it out, I could have easily won with Disciple triggers. On top of that, I can run Ethersworn Canonist, Tidehollow Sculler, and Pithing Needle, to hose any other Combo, and any attempt to disrupt me.
Misstep might work in Modern, because there is an even spread of threat density, and there is no Daze and FoW to back it up. It would act more like removal than anything else.
- To my youngest sister when she was 6.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
Honestly DEs are really hard to judge. I bet I could get a 3-1 finish with a standard deck If Played enough of them and didn't play against a bad match up one event.
I am doing a new type of statistical analysis to check strength of each deck vs one another based off of DEs. I will post that when finished. I might way till later because I don't have enough data yet to even assume extra numbers.
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
The dailies are not at a place of statistical significance yet either. There are so many decks with such little observations that you would only be able to have an analysis on the more played decks, which would be Storm variants and Zoo.
@thread- If you think what I am suggesting for separate threads is being a "thought police" you are sadly mistaken. I am the last person who would suggest such an idea. It is too totalitarian. The problem, is that this thread, more than any other here, always degenerates into flaming. Plus the opinions expressed here creep into other threads, which is annoying for people who would normally like to discuss without screaming at a wall or having to hear "well that deck would be good if they unbanned x" at every ****ing corner.
The fact is that you can complain about the state of the ban list without always bringing up cards that are banned or how they got there. Those are valid complaints that derail the discussion.
Really, I am just trying to tone down the flames. I don't think everyone has to agree, but arguing the same points over and over is also detrimental to a real discussion. I don't know how many of you pay attention to this thread, but I constantly see the same opinions over and over again anyway, which is the very thing you are protesting by making a separate thread (How ironic).
I think the discussion should be divided into Ban List Discussion/Cards that need banned & Cards that need to be unbanned or The Ban Policy, because, again, although related, these are separate discussions.
Stated that way, I agree. I am not sure if I am guilty of this, but if I am I will try to tone it down. What I will say is that in 3 months, if a card is banned that I feel is done for the same reasons as PF, I am likely to use the same argument. That said, unless addressed directly or indirectly, I have nothing new to add at this point.
I agree with this as well, and I think it can said of both sides. Pein and Bocephus are just as guilty of this as SK or honestabe (or myself if you feel I am as well), and I think that both sides feel the need to get the last word in, so when they do it perpetuates the other.
The problem lies in how this "regulation" can be implemented and maintained. I think we are narrowing it down to what should be added, and what should be removed, and that is a good place to start.
Reprint Opt for Modern!!
FREE DIG THOROUGH TIME!
PLAY MORE ROUGE DECKS!
I don't think chrome mox would really work in affinity. They didn't run it in extended, and for good reason. A lot of people forget that you have to pitch a colored card to it or it doesn't do anything. Also for a deck that often runs out of gas so easily taking a -2 hit on card advantage for a faster rampant growth really isn't ideal.
@ thread in general
People has a strange ideology when it comes to that card. For decks without thirst for knowledge it is probably wrong to take the -2 card advantage. Not to mention the fact that you only have a 23% chance of getting it out on turn one anyways. The best and mostly only use for chrome mox is to play 3-5 mana spells early enough that they actually matter in the game.
Another funny argument is it will just make zoo or RDW faster. This is not true by any stretch of the imagination. Decks that have tight curves cant use it to any effect. Hooray turn 1 tarmogoyf yes now it can easily just die to a lightning bolt so I two for 1ed myself.
And then there is the argument "well it will make storm better."
What are they going to pitch to it a ritual? A cantrip effect? A grapeshot?
The only combo deck that I see using that card is possible Ad Nasuem, which is pretty weak. It is slower, weaker to hate, and requires 2 cards neither of which you can really search for.
/rant
Albert Einstein
Thomas Jefferson
Who says they pitch anything? What if it just ends up becoming a 0 mana storm increase?
Legacy: UB(R/G) Storm UB(R/G)
Vintage: UBG Gush Storm UBG