Hey guys, I played in the event and managed to squeak into 29th place with Kiki-pod (they paid out to 32). Overall the event felt diverse, but I played a lot of BGx and affinity. I played against the following:
Affinity - W
Melira Pod - D
Junk Midrange - W
Melira Pod - W
Affinity - L
BG Rock - W
Scapeshift - L
Junk Midrange - W
5-2-1
Also, that 3rd place list is actually Melira Pod [EDIT: Angel Pod] and not 4c pod (I don't see any red or blue). I had a blast, though I definitely got some free wins from people who didn't quite understand what my deck was capable of doing.
Karn ditched mirrioden in the lore. He was like, i need to see whats changed in the world. See ya koth and elspeth. Then they were like "really?!" And an oblivator showed up and koth told elapeth to peice and made a huge bomb blow up after the thing took a chunk out of elspetha body.
Yep. Karns being a butt right now, lore wise.
Am not a really story crack so I could be wrong but isn't he also looking if the Phyrexians have infected other planes too?
this shows that modern is by far the most diverse format aroud.
Very glad of this top 16 (and it comes from a player whom 4 decks didn't show up )
- L
Are we talking about the same format? I'm thinking about the format with a complete absence of chunks of Magic, like fast combo, prison, creatureless decks, quality cantrips, and other takes on how to play,
10 different deck out of 16? It's not enough?
Creatureless combo: scapeshift and storm aren't enough (ok they aren't in this event but shift just won the last GP IIRC)?
Fast combo: have you ever turn 3ed by storm? or 4ed by twin?
Obviously the absence of prison decks is abysmal, said PrisonStylePlayer...
Seriously have you seen a legacy top 8 or have played standard last season?
If your pet deck isn't well positioned don't play sanctioned events.
- L
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
He will tell you, no, Scapeshift has Snaps/STE and Storm has Electromancer so they are not creatureless. Yeah, and even Ad Nauseam has SSG, and SSG is a creature (never mind the fact that 95% of the time we don't hardcast it). LOLOLOLOLOL
Are we talking about the same format? I'm thinking about the format with a complete absence of chunks of Magic, like fast combo, prison, creatureless decks, quality cantrips, and other takes on how to play,
When the absent pieces are the most miserable decks to play against, I think it is ok.
this shows that modern is by far the most diverse format aroud.
Very glad of this top 16 (and it comes from a player whom 4 decks didn't show up )
- L
Are we talking about the same format? I'm thinking about the format with a complete absence of chunks of Magic, like fast combo, prison, creatureless decks, quality cantrips, and other takes on how to play,
10 different deck out of 16? It's not enough?
Creatureless combo: scapeshift and storm aren't enough (ok they aren't in this event but shift just won the last GP IIRC)?
Fast combo: have you ever turn 3ed by storm? or 4ed by twin?
Obviously the absence of prison decks is abysmal, said PrisonStylePlayer...
Seriously have you seen a legacy top 8 or have played standard last season?
If your pet deck isn't well positioned don't play sanctioned events.
- L
There were 10 different Legacy decks in the Top 16 yesterday, if we're being generous with distinctions. There were 10 different Modern decks in the Top 16 yesterday, again, if we're being generous with distinctions. When I say generous, I mean that I'm willing to differentiate between Jund and Junk in Modern, RUG and BUG Delver in Legacy, etc. Of those 32 decks across both formats, there were countless overlappings of Stoneforge Mystics, Delvers, Birthing Pods, Splinter Twins, Tarmogoyfs, etc.
I'm fine with you calling Modern diverse, but let's not pretend that it's a bastion of archetypal variety.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
I'm going to wait for a few more events to shake out before I call modern diverse, legacy singular top 8s may be very narrow sometimes but over many opens the field is extremely diverse.
Fast combo - Storm
Prison - Blue Moon
Creatureless - Storm, Ad Nauseum, 8 Rack, Scapeshift
Cantrips - Well... you're right there but it's not keeping any archetypes out of the format really.
You've only named 1 relevant deck in that list.
- 8 Rack has never placed in a major tournament.
- Ad Nauseam hasn't Top 8'd a major tournament since 2012.
- Blue Moon has Top 8'd two events ever (Pro Tour BotG, Bazaar of Moxen).
- Storm has Top 8'd one event this year(Pro Tour BotG) and prior to that had not Top 8'd a major event since 2012 (Grand Prix Lyon).
None of these decks has ever won a major event of any kind. I understand the desire to defend Modern, but it's as disingenuous to offer these decks as legitimate contenders as it is for Legacy players to say Pox and Landstill are important meta staples. That said, I'm still pleasantly surprised with the Top 8 from this past weekend, and I think having these consistent competitive events will do a lot to help diversify Modern (who would've guessed U/W Tron to be a Top 8 player week 1?).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
We're talking to a guy who claims that there is a "complete absence" (his words, not mine) of those decks.
At its most literal interpretation, no, there is not a complete lack of those archetypes. However, a smattering of finishes, or in some cases none at all, is not indicative of a meta that includes those decks. For example, you could argue that Prison-Control is a viable archetype in Standard because people have tried Sphere of Safety decks, but no one would take it seriously. When people start throwing out Ad Nauseam and 8-Rack as examples of Modern's diversity, it just sounds desperate. There's a solid 4-5 decks that consistently Top 8 events, and there's a handful of others that manage to scrape into the Top 8 from time to time. It's better than it has been in the past. Hopefully these SCG events go a long way to developing the format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
Oh right, I forgot to mention that that guy thinks Legacy is great because you can play prison decks in it (by some definition of "play"), and Modern sucks because you can't play fast combo (of course, for consistency, use the same definition of "play" earlier). Put it another way: that guy thinks that prison in Legacy is more viable than, say, Storm in Modern. Yeah, tell me that with a straight face.
When people start throwing out Ad Nauseam and 8-Rack as examples of Modern's diversity, it just sounds desperate.
Ohohoho, tell me about it. There are Legacy players like our dear friend that throw out Stax or Tezzeret or Werewolf Stompy as examples of Legacy's diversity.
Fast combo - Storm
Prison - Blue Moon
Creatureless - Storm, Ad Nauseum, 8 Rack, Scapeshift
Cantrips - Well... you're right there but it's not keeping any archetypes out of the format really.
You've only named 1 relevant deck in that list.
- 8 Rack has never placed in a major tournament.
It has done better recently than Legacy decks like Stax and MUD.
- Ad Nauseam hasn't Top 8'd a major tournament since 2012.
But it got 9th at the Pro Tour.
- Blue Moon has Top 8'd two events ever (Pro Tour BotG, Bazaar of Moxen).
Your point being? It is still an active force in the metagame.
- Storm has Top 8'd one event this year(Pro Tour BotG) and prior to that had not Top 8'd a major event since 2012 (Grand Prix Lyon).
It is a tier 1 deck that has met that has met the criteria to be put in Proven. It is a stronger deck than many other format mainstays. If it does not count, then you can only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks.
Oh right, I forgot to mention that that guy thinks Legacy is great because you can play prison decks in it (by some definition of "play"), and Modern sucks because you can't play fast combo (of course, for consistency, use the same definition of "play" earlier). Put it another way: that guy thinks that prison in Legacy is more viable than, say, Storm in Modern. Yeah, tell me that with a straight face.
You're right. I don't keep up with MTGO events. I specifically said major events. I felt like I was making that pretty clear. And no, I do not consider online results to be indicative in any way of the actual meta. Take a look at Pro Tour's, Grand Prix's, and the Bazaar of Moxen for further proof of that. As for Prison in Legacy, it's certainly put up better results than Storm in Modern over the past year, winning the Bazaar of Moxen, a couple SCG Opens, and Top 8'ing several more times (G/r Lands, Jund Depths, and 4c Loam, specifically), but it's not really a worthwhile comparison.
A much better way to compare the diversity between the formats is to give SCG's Modern events 6 months, and compare the variety of Top 8 - 16 finishes in those events to the Sunday Legacy Opens. Up to this point, Legacy development has heavily outpaced Modern based on the sheer volume of competitive events that we have each year. By having an equal number of events with comparable player pools, I believe we'll begin see a more realistic picture of the Modern meta. However, at present, archetypal variety is not a keystone of the Modern experience. It's getting better, but it's still a long ways from where it could be.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
It is a tier 1 deck that has met that has met the criteria to be put in Proven. It is a stronger deck than many other format mainstays. If it does not count, then you can only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks.
There's already been a discussion of the "Proven/Established" vs. "T1/T2" thing either in this thread or another. I won't delve into it here, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, and the criteria are subjective at best. And you're right, because I do only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks. Give it 6 months at SCG Opens and we'll see a diversified meta. Having consistent, 200+ player competitive tournaments is the best thing that could happen to the Modern format - well, that and getting Wizards to stop micromanaging it, but I digress.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
It is a tier 1 deck that has met that has met the criteria to be put in Proven. It is a stronger deck than many other format mainstays. If it does not count, then you can only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks.
There's already been a discussion of the "Proven/Established" vs. "T1/T2" thing either in this thread or another. I won't delve into it here, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, and the criteria are subjective at best. And you're right, because I do only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks. Give it 6 months at SCG Opens and we'll see a diversified meta. Having consistent, 200+ player competitive tournaments is the best thing that could happen to the Modern format - well, that and getting Wizards to stop micromanaging it, but I digress.
If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.
If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.
Are we still talking about 8-rack, the deck that has never even sniffed a Top 8 finish? Or Storm, a deck that saw one Top 8 in 2014 (Pro Tour BoTG), and one Top 16 in 2013 (Grand Prix Portland)? Is that consistency? I know that for whatever reason people in the Modern forums like to tout MTGO events, as if those are remotely indicative of the actual meta. This isn't a Legacy vs. Modern issue. This is a matter of transparency. If you want to claim decks like Ad Nauseam, 8-rack, Amulet Combo, etc. are legitimate decks, then you're not taking an honest accounting of tournament results. At the same time, we've had so few Modern tournaments in comparison to other formats that it may just be that those decks haven't had as many opportunities to shine.
I'm fine with the level of diversity in Modern right now, because it hasn't had an equal opportunity to develop with other formats. It's finally going to get a fair shake. That's exciting to me. Like I said in an earlier post, it's fair at this point to call Modern diverse, at least in terms of decks, but not in terms of winning strategies. It's still incredibly top heavy, and there's little incentive to not play one of the Top 5-6 decks. I believe that will change rapidly as the SCG season progresses, and we will see some real development take place that goes beyond finding the best way to shove Birthing Pods, 'Goyfs, or Snapcasters into a deck.
Full disclosure: all of my Modern decks contain a Birthing Pod, 'Goyf, or Snapcaster.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
[quote from="Valanarch »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/565616-scg-weekly-modern-discussions?comment=71"]It is a tier 1 deck that has met that has met the criteria to be put in Proven. It is a stronger deck than many other format mainstays. If it does not count, then you can only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks.
There's already been a discussion of the "Proven/Established" vs. "T1/T2" thing either in this thread or another. I won't delve into it here, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, and the criteria are subjective at best. And you're right, because I do only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks. Give it 6 months at SCG Opens and we'll see a diversified meta. Having consistent, 200+ player competitive tournaments is the best thing that could happen to the Modern format - well, that and getting Wizards to stop micromanaging it, but I digress.
If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.[/quote
It's a massive hypocrisy only used to support the argument at the given time. It's why I didn't get into the debate the last time I called tron Tier 1 (entirely irrelevant to the conversation, which was about how modern only had BG and UR decks). Well then I guess it was relevant because apparently people are of the opinion that if a deck isn't tier 1 (read: the big 4-5) it isn't a real deck. To me, any deck that has the potential of performing well enough over a long tournament and winning it is a real deck. I'd never take Gerry's Elemental combo deck to a modern event because there's a heavy amount of variance and some horrid match ups. Could you still spike the day and win it? Sure. Is it still worth the risk if you're a respectable pilot with it and other decks? Probably not.
So the way I see it is:
The clear best performing decks:
-Pod decks (of the Melira and Angel variety)
-Twin decks (of the RUG and U/R variety)
-Affinity decks
-"Jund" decks (BG and Jund, junk if you like)
These are the top four decks that are undisputedly tier 1.
The next set of consistent performers of various lengths of time:
-UW/x Midrange (UWR control/Kiki Control/UWR geist, whatever fashion)
-G/R Tron
-Scapeshift
-Storm
Some would argue UW/x might be the fifth top tier deck, others might argue scapeshift. Tron has been. All of the decks have the potential to be depending on how the meta shakes out for a bit, whether its paper or online and what the current banned or unbanned trends happen to be. Truth be told, I'm unsure whether I really wanted to put storm here or not. Storm has done decently well at the pro tour and does well when better players pilot it, but has a lower play percentage because it is typically only better players piloting it (its only presence is somewhat due to its price point and somewhat due to it being a fast, event-spiking deck good for short round events). However, I placed it here for the point I'm making later on.
Then we have the next set of decks that are clearly capable of winning a tournament but frankly, are too metagame dependant to really always trust:
-Zoo (whatever variety you like, the deck is still slightly confused at the moment)
-Living End
-Ad Nauseum
-G/W Hatebears
-Blue moon
-Boggles
-Merfolk
-Tokens
-U/R Delver
-Burn
-Faeries (I think this goes here, I dont think the deck knows where it goes yet)
All of these decks are decks you should expect that you have the potential to see at any given event, you might lose to them and they might spike the event if the metagame is correct or they hit the right match ups. They've had some level of success at large tournaments over the course of multiple days but haven't necessarily won them. You can't ignore them but you have to question whether or not it's a good weekend to be playing that deck.
Then we have everything else (be it Matyr, reanimator, devotion decks, etc). Most of these decks are not things you'd really want to take to a GP so you can mostly be unconcerned with them in their current form. You never know when one of them could show up and perform well and a tournament like a PTQ or these SCG tournaments might be won by a reanimator or devotion player but they really aren't worth the testing time.
So basically at the end of the day, calling they 8 top decks tier 1 or tier 1 and tier 1.5 is basically a crappy argument and pertains slightly to certain meta trends. I personally believe that any of those top 8 decks can be taken to any tournament and if played proficiently could have success. GPs and the Pro Tour have confirmed this. Clearly, there aren't enough of those events for all of these decks to win them but if there were, we could easily see each top deck win at least once and definitely secure someone a top 8 qualification in either event. Therefore those are the 8 decks I believe make up the real modern metagame so that if I turn on SCG coverage of 7ish rounds I expect that I will likely see 75% of those decks on camera at least once. Any tournament I go to, I expect all of those decks are in the room somewhere. They are the decks you absolutely must recognize when sitting down across from an opponent. That's not to mention the numerous variations some of them have that I didn't list (UWR twin, Kiki-pod, U/W tron, etc).
The other 11 decks are decks I should expect that I might see and should see pop up on camera or across me every few events. Most of those decks, interestingly enough, seem to be pretty specific in the way they're built (less variations available) and should be recognized quite quickly even if they aren't played against.
To me, that's a pretty solid look at the format, one that shouldn't be hard to make interesting on camera and that should yield a reasonable variety of results when SCG events happen more often. I'm not going to do it but I'm pretty sure if I did the same thing for legacy, the results would be quite similar. The only difference with legacy is that some of the fringe decks are extremely playable at any event if you're a good enough pilot with it since a) surprise is not to be undervalued and b) there are some extremely powerful cards and interactions in legacy that fringe decks still get access to.
It is a tier 1 deck that has met that has met the criteria to be put in Proven. It is a stronger deck than many other format mainstays. If it does not count, then you can only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks.
There's already been a discussion of the "Proven/Established" vs. "T1/T2" thing either in this thread or another. I won't delve into it here, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, and the criteria are subjective at best. And you're right, because I do only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks. Give it 6 months at SCG Opens and we'll see a diversified meta. Having consistent, 200+ player competitive tournaments is the best thing that could happen to the Modern format - well, that and getting Wizards to stop micromanaging it, but I digress.
I've seen a lot of definitions for what makes a deck Tier 1 vs. Tier 2 (or Proven vs. Established), and I can say with confidence that ours are by FAR the least subjective of the lot. The only other site that I respect in this regard is The Source in regards to Legacy, but even there, the exact calculations of their criteria are unclear. I think they just use an above-average cutoff? Not sure, but we are extremely clear about what makes a deck Proven vs. Established, and how those cutoffs are calculated. It's basically applying fairly standard social science calculations to magic metagames. Of course, those are secretly arbitrary themselves, but as far as MTG metagame calculations go, that puts us way ahead of the pack in terms of how we categorize decks.
That said, there is one piece of the criteria that IS arbitrary: the number of criteria needed to qualify. It's currently at 2+ but it could just as easily be 3, 4, or 5+. If there is anywhere I want to see our criteria tighten up, it is in this area. Personally, I would love to see the criteria set to 3+ instead of 2+, because I think it gives a more accurate metagame picture.
If we did a 3+ cutoff, here is what it would look like:
Affinity (1,2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (1,2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (1,2,3,4,5)
BG Rock (1,4,5)
Jund (1,2,4,5)
Scapeshift (1,2,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (1,2,3,4)
RUG Twin (2,3,5)
That kicks Merfolk, RG Tron, Kiki Pod, and Bogles off the list, and I think it makes a lot more sense. Of course, we could also go to 4+. If we did 4+, this is what it would be:
Affinity (1,2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (1,2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (1,2,3,4,5)
Jund (1,2,4,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (1,2,3,4)
And if we went really strict, here is the 5+ list:
Affinity (1,2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (1,2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (1,2,3,4,5)
If we use the 3+ cutoff as a breakdown of T1 modern decks, the format looks fairly diverse. Heck, even the 4+ cutoff isn't that bad.
That 3+ cutoff looks pretty good, storm and Scapeshift are the only real decks I can see sniffing around the tier 1 mark as of right now.
The problem with using MTGO data (from a lack of consistent modern tournaments) is that it seems that between the format (of 4 rounds), budget concerns (who really wants to shell out for their deck again) and a variety of other factors (ease of play on the client being an old prominent one) you don't get a clear view of meta at the top level.
Until enough of these events fire, I'm fine with using MTGO data, but if these become like the Open series I would argue we should use that data far more predominantly. As a regular source browser, I like the extremely cut throat and up to date established/decks to beat forums.
I think the source, does an above average cutoff or a cutoff when there is a significant jump around the average.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Affinity - W
Melira Pod - D
Junk Midrange - W
Melira Pod - W
Affinity - L
BG Rock - W
Scapeshift - L
Junk Midrange - W
5-2-1
Also, that 3rd place list is actually Melira Pod [EDIT: Angel Pod] and not 4c pod (I don't see any red or blue). I had a blast, though I definitely got some free wins from people who didn't quite understand what my deck was capable of doing.
Very glad of this top 16 (and it comes from a player whom 4 decks didn't show up )
- L
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
Ah, sorry, didn't see that, edited my post.
Am not a really story crack so I could be wrong but isn't he also looking if the Phyrexians have infected other planes too?
10 different deck out of 16? It's not enough?
Creatureless combo: scapeshift and storm aren't enough (ok they aren't in this event but shift just won the last GP IIRC)?
Fast combo: have you ever turn 3ed by storm? or 4ed by twin?
Obviously the absence of prison decks is abysmal, said PrisonStylePlayer...
Seriously have you seen a legacy top 8 or have played standard last season?
If your pet deck isn't well positioned don't play sanctioned events.
- L
"The problem isn't when Scissors says Rock is overpowered, it's when Paper says it is."
-Mark Rosewater
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
When the absent pieces are the most miserable decks to play against, I think it is ok.
There were 10 different Legacy decks in the Top 16 yesterday, if we're being generous with distinctions. There were 10 different Modern decks in the Top 16 yesterday, again, if we're being generous with distinctions. When I say generous, I mean that I'm willing to differentiate between Jund and Junk in Modern, RUG and BUG Delver in Legacy, etc. Of those 32 decks across both formats, there were countless overlappings of Stoneforge Mystics, Delvers, Birthing Pods, Splinter Twins, Tarmogoyfs, etc.
I'm fine with you calling Modern diverse, but let's not pretend that it's a bastion of archetypal variety.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckdatabase/deckshow.php?&t[C1]=1&start_date=07/19/2014&end_date=07/20/2014&start=1&finish=32&event_ID=19&city=Baltimore&state=MD&start_num=0
Lord I can't wait for rotation so maybe I can play standard again. Goddamn Pack Rats everywhere.
Modern actually had 8 different decks in the top 8, which is sweet.
Prison - Blue Moon
Creatureless - Storm, Ad Nauseum, 8 Rack, Scapeshift
Cantrips - Well... you're right there but it's not keeping any archetypes out of the format really.
Modern:
UWUW TronUW
Legacy:
WDeath N TaxesW
CEldrazi C
If you couldn't tell I hate greedy blue decks.
Vintage
WWhite Trash
You've only named 1 relevant deck in that list.
- 8 Rack has never placed in a major tournament.
- Ad Nauseam hasn't Top 8'd a major tournament since 2012.
- Blue Moon has Top 8'd two events ever (Pro Tour BotG, Bazaar of Moxen).
- Storm has Top 8'd one event this year(Pro Tour BotG) and prior to that had not Top 8'd a major event since 2012 (Grand Prix Lyon).
None of these decks has ever won a major event of any kind. I understand the desire to defend Modern, but it's as disingenuous to offer these decks as legitimate contenders as it is for Legacy players to say Pox and Landstill are important meta staples. That said, I'm still pleasantly surprised with the Top 8 from this past weekend, and I think having these consistent competitive events will do a lot to help diversify Modern (who would've guessed U/W Tron to be a Top 8 player week 1?).
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
At its most literal interpretation, no, there is not a complete lack of those archetypes. However, a smattering of finishes, or in some cases none at all, is not indicative of a meta that includes those decks. For example, you could argue that Prison-Control is a viable archetype in Standard because people have tried Sphere of Safety decks, but no one would take it seriously. When people start throwing out Ad Nauseam and 8-Rack as examples of Modern's diversity, it just sounds desperate. There's a solid 4-5 decks that consistently Top 8 events, and there's a handful of others that manage to scrape into the Top 8 from time to time. It's better than it has been in the past. Hopefully these SCG events go a long way to developing the format.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
And if you think decks like Storm only have "a smattering of finishes", you obviously don't keep up with MTGO results. Here, let me help you: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n3z_ASbs0dxCTN5b69pPqZZVfg7nznc4inTJtIdfcdk/pubhtml
Ohohoho, tell me about it. There are Legacy players like our dear friend that throw out Stax or Tezzeret or Werewolf Stompy as examples of Legacy's diversity.
| Ad Nauseam
| Infect
Big Johnny.
It has done better recently than Legacy decks like Stax and MUD.
But it got 9th at the Pro Tour.
Your point being? It is still an active force in the metagame.
It is a tier 1 deck that has met that has met the criteria to be put in Proven. It is a stronger deck than many other format mainstays. If it does not count, then you can only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
You're right. I don't keep up with MTGO events. I specifically said major events. I felt like I was making that pretty clear. And no, I do not consider online results to be indicative in any way of the actual meta. Take a look at Pro Tour's, Grand Prix's, and the Bazaar of Moxen for further proof of that. As for Prison in Legacy, it's certainly put up better results than Storm in Modern over the past year, winning the Bazaar of Moxen, a couple SCG Opens, and Top 8'ing several more times (G/r Lands, Jund Depths, and 4c Loam, specifically), but it's not really a worthwhile comparison.
A much better way to compare the diversity between the formats is to give SCG's Modern events 6 months, and compare the variety of Top 8 - 16 finishes in those events to the Sunday Legacy Opens. Up to this point, Legacy development has heavily outpaced Modern based on the sheer volume of competitive events that we have each year. By having an equal number of events with comparable player pools, I believe we'll begin see a more realistic picture of the Modern meta. However, at present, archetypal variety is not a keystone of the Modern experience. It's getting better, but it's still a long ways from where it could be.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
There's already been a discussion of the "Proven/Established" vs. "T1/T2" thing either in this thread or another. I won't delve into it here, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, and the criteria are subjective at best. And you're right, because I do only count 5-6 decks in Modern as actual decks. Give it 6 months at SCG Opens and we'll see a diversified meta. Having consistent, 200+ player competitive tournaments is the best thing that could happen to the Modern format - well, that and getting Wizards to stop micromanaging it, but I digress.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Are we still talking about 8-rack, the deck that has never even sniffed a Top 8 finish? Or Storm, a deck that saw one Top 8 in 2014 (Pro Tour BoTG), and one Top 16 in 2013 (Grand Prix Portland)? Is that consistency? I know that for whatever reason people in the Modern forums like to tout MTGO events, as if those are remotely indicative of the actual meta. This isn't a Legacy vs. Modern issue. This is a matter of transparency. If you want to claim decks like Ad Nauseam, 8-rack, Amulet Combo, etc. are legitimate decks, then you're not taking an honest accounting of tournament results. At the same time, we've had so few Modern tournaments in comparison to other formats that it may just be that those decks haven't had as many opportunities to shine.
I'm fine with the level of diversity in Modern right now, because it hasn't had an equal opportunity to develop with other formats. It's finally going to get a fair shake. That's exciting to me. Like I said in an earlier post, it's fair at this point to call Modern diverse, at least in terms of decks, but not in terms of winning strategies. It's still incredibly top heavy, and there's little incentive to not play one of the Top 5-6 decks. I believe that will change rapidly as the SCG season progresses, and we will see some real development take place that goes beyond finding the best way to shove Birthing Pods, 'Goyfs, or Snapcasters into a deck.
Full disclosure: all of my Modern decks contain a Birthing Pod, 'Goyf, or Snapcaster.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
If a deck does well consistently online and in paper tournaments, how is it not tier 1? Also, Legacy isn't much better by your standards.[/quote
It's a massive hypocrisy only used to support the argument at the given time. It's why I didn't get into the debate the last time I called tron Tier 1 (entirely irrelevant to the conversation, which was about how modern only had BG and UR decks). Well then I guess it was relevant because apparently people are of the opinion that if a deck isn't tier 1 (read: the big 4-5) it isn't a real deck. To me, any deck that has the potential of performing well enough over a long tournament and winning it is a real deck. I'd never take Gerry's Elemental combo deck to a modern event because there's a heavy amount of variance and some horrid match ups. Could you still spike the day and win it? Sure. Is it still worth the risk if you're a respectable pilot with it and other decks? Probably not.
So the way I see it is:
The clear best performing decks:
-Pod decks (of the Melira and Angel variety)
-Twin decks (of the RUG and U/R variety)
-Affinity decks
-"Jund" decks (BG and Jund, junk if you like)
These are the top four decks that are undisputedly tier 1.
The next set of consistent performers of various lengths of time:
-UW/x Midrange (UWR control/Kiki Control/UWR geist, whatever fashion)
-G/R Tron
-Scapeshift
-Storm
Some would argue UW/x might be the fifth top tier deck, others might argue scapeshift. Tron has been. All of the decks have the potential to be depending on how the meta shakes out for a bit, whether its paper or online and what the current banned or unbanned trends happen to be. Truth be told, I'm unsure whether I really wanted to put storm here or not. Storm has done decently well at the pro tour and does well when better players pilot it, but has a lower play percentage because it is typically only better players piloting it (its only presence is somewhat due to its price point and somewhat due to it being a fast, event-spiking deck good for short round events). However, I placed it here for the point I'm making later on.
Then we have the next set of decks that are clearly capable of winning a tournament but frankly, are too metagame dependant to really always trust:
-Zoo (whatever variety you like, the deck is still slightly confused at the moment)
-Living End
-Ad Nauseum
-G/W Hatebears
-Blue moon
-Boggles
-Merfolk
-Tokens
-U/R Delver
-Burn
-Faeries (I think this goes here, I dont think the deck knows where it goes yet)
All of these decks are decks you should expect that you have the potential to see at any given event, you might lose to them and they might spike the event if the metagame is correct or they hit the right match ups. They've had some level of success at large tournaments over the course of multiple days but haven't necessarily won them. You can't ignore them but you have to question whether or not it's a good weekend to be playing that deck.
Then we have everything else (be it Matyr, reanimator, devotion decks, etc). Most of these decks are not things you'd really want to take to a GP so you can mostly be unconcerned with them in their current form. You never know when one of them could show up and perform well and a tournament like a PTQ or these SCG tournaments might be won by a reanimator or devotion player but they really aren't worth the testing time.
So basically at the end of the day, calling they 8 top decks tier 1 or tier 1 and tier 1.5 is basically a crappy argument and pertains slightly to certain meta trends. I personally believe that any of those top 8 decks can be taken to any tournament and if played proficiently could have success. GPs and the Pro Tour have confirmed this. Clearly, there aren't enough of those events for all of these decks to win them but if there were, we could easily see each top deck win at least once and definitely secure someone a top 8 qualification in either event. Therefore those are the 8 decks I believe make up the real modern metagame so that if I turn on SCG coverage of 7ish rounds I expect that I will likely see 75% of those decks on camera at least once. Any tournament I go to, I expect all of those decks are in the room somewhere. They are the decks you absolutely must recognize when sitting down across from an opponent. That's not to mention the numerous variations some of them have that I didn't list (UWR twin, Kiki-pod, U/W tron, etc).
The other 11 decks are decks I should expect that I might see and should see pop up on camera or across me every few events. Most of those decks, interestingly enough, seem to be pretty specific in the way they're built (less variations available) and should be recognized quite quickly even if they aren't played against.
To me, that's a pretty solid look at the format, one that shouldn't be hard to make interesting on camera and that should yield a reasonable variety of results when SCG events happen more often. I'm not going to do it but I'm pretty sure if I did the same thing for legacy, the results would be quite similar. The only difference with legacy is that some of the fringe decks are extremely playable at any event if you're a good enough pilot with it since a) surprise is not to be undervalued and b) there are some extremely powerful cards and interactions in legacy that fringe decks still get access to.
I've seen a lot of definitions for what makes a deck Tier 1 vs. Tier 2 (or Proven vs. Established), and I can say with confidence that ours are by FAR the least subjective of the lot. The only other site that I respect in this regard is The Source in regards to Legacy, but even there, the exact calculations of their criteria are unclear. I think they just use an above-average cutoff? Not sure, but we are extremely clear about what makes a deck Proven vs. Established, and how those cutoffs are calculated. It's basically applying fairly standard social science calculations to magic metagames. Of course, those are secretly arbitrary themselves, but as far as MTG metagame calculations go, that puts us way ahead of the pack in terms of how we categorize decks.
That said, there is one piece of the criteria that IS arbitrary: the number of criteria needed to qualify. It's currently at 2+ but it could just as easily be 3, 4, or 5+. If there is anywhere I want to see our criteria tighten up, it is in this area. Personally, I would love to see the criteria set to 3+ instead of 2+, because I think it gives a more accurate metagame picture.
If we did a 3+ cutoff, here is what it would look like:
Affinity (1,2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (1,2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (1,2,3,4,5)
BG Rock (1,4,5)
Jund (1,2,4,5)
Scapeshift (1,2,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (1,2,3,4)
RUG Twin (2,3,5)
That kicks Merfolk, RG Tron, Kiki Pod, and Bogles off the list, and I think it makes a lot more sense. Of course, we could also go to 4+. If we did 4+, this is what it would be:
Affinity (1,2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (1,2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (1,2,3,4,5)
Jund (1,2,4,5)
UWR Control (2,3,4,5)
Storm (1,2,3,4)
And if we went really strict, here is the 5+ list:
Affinity (1,2,3,4,5)
UR Twin (1,2,3,4,5)
Melira Pod (1,2,3,4,5)
If we use the 3+ cutoff as a breakdown of T1 modern decks, the format looks fairly diverse. Heck, even the 4+ cutoff isn't that bad.
The problem with using MTGO data (from a lack of consistent modern tournaments) is that it seems that between the format (of 4 rounds), budget concerns (who really wants to shell out for their deck again) and a variety of other factors (ease of play on the client being an old prominent one) you don't get a clear view of meta at the top level.
Until enough of these events fire, I'm fine with using MTGO data, but if these become like the Open series I would argue we should use that data far more predominantly. As a regular source browser, I like the extremely cut throat and up to date established/decks to beat forums.
I think the source, does an above average cutoff or a cutoff when there is a significant jump around the average.