Speaking of GGT, I honestly think that Dredge is nok okay to have in the format, and that something should be done about it. It´s almost impossible to interact with, so it´s all about throwing game 1 and praying to see your sideboard hate in game 2 and 3. The only other way around that is to give up interacting and just try to win faster. That is not a good type of deck to have in any format in my opinion. I honestly hope that the new hug card pushes it over the edge so that something important to the deck gets banned. I hate it so much. You can't even use removal on Neonate efficiently, and almost all counterspells miss a turn 1 Neonate or Looting, even if you are on the play. And once they get going, all hope of interacting profitably is gone.
Edit: To elaborate, every time I meet Dredge with a fair deck, it makes me think that maybe I should be playing Ad Nauseam or Infect instead. If we want fair, interactive deck to thrive or at least have a good spot in the format, this is not a good sign.
Now that Ancestral Vision is modern legal I doubt that unbanning Twin would be healthy for the format. Sure it would possibly slow down the format, but the deck would have a positive matchup against linear decks and post-SB with AV/Blood Moon would be able to outgrind everything not named Tron, making it look pretty dominant, at least on paper. It'd also make Nahiri unplayable shifting the blue decks back to Jeskai/Grixis/UR Twin and I don't think wotc wants this.
If you are that adamant on proving that Twin would be able to help out the format I suggest you firstly test it in the current metagame with the AV SB plan to verify if it hasn't gotten too dominant. From the decks which have popped up since the banning of Twin I'd say dredge is a favoured matchup, and Bant Eldrazi/Death's Shadow should be pretty even, those 2 look quite play/draw dependant.
I have argued a number of times in the previous thread that Twin would accomplish the goal of fixing many of the things everyone is complaining about in Modern right now.
-snip-
*WHEW!* Now that I have that in the new thread, time to lay low, since it seems very few people want to actually talk about Twin in the way that it affected the format (there are some, but it often devolves into personal attacks and accomplishes nothing). I suppose people are equally free to think that banning Become Immense or unbanning Preordain will fix all our problems too.
I actually agree with you, though you seem to have missed the crux of my argument- Splinter Twin was fundamentally a healthy Police Deck for Modern, but Wizards is most likely to be unwilling to unban it any time soon. I think everyone is in agreement that there are some cards on the Banned list that don't really deserve to be there, but Wizards will not remove them because they percieve them cards as more powerful or effective in the format than they are. Remember, these are the people who though Bitterblossom would make Faeries dominate the format. That's the big problem. I think that they've been getting better about understanding what's fair in Modern, but the people running the format seem to be on a different page than the people playing the format.
While i agree with most of the comments about Dredge, i don't think it needss a ban given the volume of cards that shut down graveyard shenanigans. The deck encourages you to play more interactivity, but not in the traditional bolt/path/abrupt decay fashion.
I would love to see a ban on phyrexian mana. Dismember is a flavorless card when it is used in ever deck, and mutagenic growth leads to silly t2/t3 wins for infect. It would also give more decks game against affinity with no vault skirge.
For context, i play Merfolk, Elves, and Mono-U Tron.
2 card insta-win combos are problematic.
They printed 2 hate cards (Combust and Rending Volley) just for this deck over the years...
UR tempo or midrange, or control decks are supposed to grind out their opponents, not to win on turn 4.
This seems rather odd. UR has always had a strong combo thread running through it, and a hybrid tempo/combo deck seems right up its color identity alley. Considering that just about every deck was able to run some method of interacting with the Twin combo your post makes very little sense. Also, they've printed way more than 2 hate cards for Twin. Torpor Orb, Hallowed Moonlight, Blind Obedience, Celestial Purge, Linvala, Keeper of Silence, Spellskite, Abrupt Decay... There's a lot of them out there. Hive Mind is part of a two card kill combo, and somehow that's still legal. Every piece of targeted creature removal was a hate card, if it could kill a toughness 4 or greater critters.
It forced decks to be able to interact with it, and was able to win the turn it resolved. How else are you going to deal with aggro decks that kill on turn 3? Your options boil down to preventing them from playing the game with Prison control or forcing them to play a longer game by threatening a win if they don't keep up interaction. Answers aren't enough in this card pool, because Answers are weaker than the Threats. Frankly, banning Twin was one of the dumbest ideas Wizards has ever had for Modern- even with Ancestral Vision unbanned.
I have argued a number of times in the previous thread that Twin would accomplish the goal of fixing many of the things everyone is complaining about in Modern right now. No, it does not fix all the fundamental problems Modern faces, but it would at least bring back a balanced format in which interactivity can thrive and where doing the fastest and most degenerate thing possible isn't the best strategy.
Indeed, we have argued a couple of times over this by now. Like you just said: unbanning Splinter Twin is not the solution. If anything, it'd be just a band aid. Why do we have to welcome a former best deck back into the format (which is contrary to WotC's goal) instead of trying to fundamentally improve the format?
I have quoted this article a number of times, but I will simply repeat the highlight points from the article posted in November 2015, a month and a half before Twin was banned:
"Given all these linear options, why are most Modern events like Pittsburgh or Charlotte and not like Porto Alegre or Dallas? Thank URx Twin and BGx Midrange. That’s not “URx Twin or BGx Midrange”. It’s “and” because healthy metagames need both decks."
"Linear decks can’t deal with these different policing angles and typically crumble over long tournaments."
"goldfish decks bully their way to the finals. That’s not going to happen at a tournament where both Twin and Jund show up in force"
"At Pittsburgh, we saw both decks which is why the event was so healthy and such a return to old-school Modern"
"Pittsburgh should have been a faith-restoring event for all Modern players, and I am optimistic that we can keep seeing these forces in more events to come."
Is this yet another case when you keep repeating Sheridan's words whitout acknowledging that he has changed his mind or has been proven otherwise? I remember Sheridan himself calling you out here regarding the Diversity Ban Criteria: "Wizards prioritizes major event Top 8s first, MTGO prevalence second, and other measures of metagame diversity third.", since his Investigating April 4 Banlist Update Consequences article reviewed his A Last Word on the Splinter Twin banning article point of view regarding the criteria.
Going back to your post here, I'll quote Sheridan's own metagame updates to show you that Modern doesn't need Twin to be healthy, diverse and fun:
April: "We’re just under a month into this new Modern and the format has never looked healthier. "
May: "it’s been a treat experiencing Modern’s unparalleled diversity firsthand", "it’s been impossible to ignore just how fun Modern has become".
Twin served as a critical role in working with Jund to help balance the format. Without it, fast linear decks have become the king archetype (and 75% of Tier 1 decklists), while the only successful police deck left (Jund) remains by the largest single deck (and currently BGx midrange holds a larger meta share than Twin had when it was banned...).
Additionally, Twin's ban was supposed to open the flood gates for all the blue decks being "suppressed" and "pushed out" (their exact words from the announcement). But instead, the ban has produced the opposite results and has done nothing but hurt blue decks. The ban has been a complete failure by its own goals stated in the ban announcement. Even with the help of the "apology unbans" Ancestral Vision and Sword of the Meek (which were to specifically help blue reactive decks), those decks are both worse off and less prevalent than before the ban. It was the wrong decision for the wrong reasons and produced the wrong results.
Here the first paragraph just goes directly against your next paragraph. As a quick aside: Maybe, like bill used to say, WotC is opposed to the idea of "police decks", or at least that status doesn't help the deck's ban case if it becomes too good. Either way, to address your points:
From the January Article: "Decks that are this strong can hurt diversity by pushing the decks that it defeats out of competition." By saying the fast linear decks are better now, you are acknowledging Twin defeated those. This is obvious and we agree, but that's the important part. Would have Infect won a GP with Twin around? Would have Suicide Zoo been able to emerge from Tier 3 with Twin around? And I'm probably missing more decks. The ban accomplished what they wanted: decks that Twin was defeating out of competition are now able to enjoy competitive success [GP Top8 level of success).
BGx Midrange is safe for next year, despite holding more metagame share than Twin. This illustrates that you don't understand (or refuse to acknowledge) established ban criteria. After all these months, you keep looking at the wrong numbers. If not mine, at least remember Sheridan's words: "Wizards prioritizes major event Top 8s first, MTGO prevalence second, and other measures of metagame diversity third."
From the January Article: "They [Decks that are this strong] can also reduce diversity by supplanting similar decks." Twin wasnt suppressing Control. Twin wasn't pushing out Control. You keep saying this over and over and I find it misleading at best. Yeah, Control decks faired well Twin. We know it, none ever argued that. We even agree! Twin was just the best deck (and by definition, the best Ux deck) and that's the whole point. Why even try Jeskai or Temur when Twin is just the better then against the whole metagame, even if it loses to those decks? While Twin was around, there was just no good reason to play those decks at the competitive level if you wanted to have success.
Preordain will do nothing to help this. Jace, The Mind Sculptor will do nothing to help this. Neither of these address the problems blue actually faces: poor answers and poor win conditions. Twin was "the best" blue deck because it solves those problems by giving a win condition that can actually survive using only mediocre, temporary, and conditional answers. It was a necessary force in the format and it NEVER held an oppressive share of the meta. It helped keep the format stable with its partner in crime, Jund, and was consistently praised for its ability to shut down the linear degeneracy that we are facing today. The deck was not broken, it was not invulnerable, and it was nearly as powerful as people make it out to be. If it was actually as powerful as legend says, then it would have risen to 20%+ of the meta like every other diversity ban Modern has ever had. It was a very good deck, possibly the best deck, but not by much (and certainly had fluctuations). Removing it has done nothing but hurt the format and help contribute to one of the most complained about years Modern has ever had.
We agree that Jace is not the solution. Preordain may help a bit, but we'll need to test it first. Twin was the best deck, indeed. As for the oppressive metashare, we have already determined it isn't the most important number. As for reasons, the asumptiong that "deck is good" translates to "is played more" asumes the players have perfect information, that all players are spikes, that there are no card availabity issues, that we have enough money to change decks on a whim, that playstyles are not a factor and many others. Reality is not like this though, so there will always be under- and overplayed decks (which translates to over- and underperforming decks), regardless of the fact that previous banned cards (BBE, DRS, Pod) didn't have much difference between metashare and competitive success. Hell, Eldrazi decks had +70% Top8s during the Eldrazi Winter, but the Eldrazi metashare was just +40%. Does that mean the deck wasn't broken? Let's hope #UnbanEye doesn't become a thing.
Wizards cannot fix all the problems Modern faces without a major overhaul, dozens of new cards, or dozens of bannings. An overhaul could hurt many players heavily invested in the format. New cards will be extremely unlikely to help blue reactive decks, as per Mark Rosewater's own comments. And nobody wants lots of new bannings (not even me!). Infect is not the problem. Death's Shadow is not the problem. Eldrazi is not the problem. The problem is there is nothing in Modern to sway people away from playing the fastest and most degenerate powerful deck they can. There is virtually no drawback, no consequence, no downside. Why try to have all the answers to all the variety of opponents when you can simply kill them turn 3? Or create such an overwhelming game state that you might as well have won turn 3? Unbanning Twin rolls back the clock back to when people referred to Modern as "healthy." And I haven't heard that word used to describe what we've been playing for nearly a year. If Modern continues down the path its on, Twin WILL come back. It's just a matter of how much Wizards actually cares about the health of the format and how quickly they will admit their mistake.
Agree, nobody wants bans. Keep in mind Standard cards have greatly influenced modern since Khans Block at least. I believe new cards are the solution, but it will take some time. We can't expect them to warp Standard to try and "fix" Modern.
*WHEW!* Now that I have that in the new thread, time to lay low, since it seems very few people want to actually talk about Twin in the way that it affected the format (there are some, but it often devolves into personal attacks and accomplishes nothing). I suppose people are equally free to think that banning Become Immense or unbanning Preordain will fix all our problems too.
Well yeah, everyone's entitled to their opinion. However, early numbers suggest Infect doesn't violate the Turn 4 rule, so Become Immense should be fine. Still waiting for Sheridan's numbers on the issue.
Indeed, we have argued a couple of times over this by now. Like you just said: unbanning Splinter Twin is not the solution. If anything, it'd be just a band aid. Why do we have to welcome a former best deck back into the format (which is contrary to WotC's goal) instead of trying to fundamentally improve the format?
With Bant Eldrazi on the rise and Jund getting better by the day, it may not be the best. Even if it is, it will be by a smaller margin than previously (which was already a small margin).
Is this yet another case when you keep repeating Sheridan's words whitout acknowledging that he has changed his mind or has been proven otherwise? I remember Sheridan himself calling you out here regarding the Diversity Ban Criteria: "Wizards prioritizes major event Top 8s first, MTGO prevalence second, and other measures of metagame diversity third.", since his Investigating April 4 Banlist Update Consequences article reviewed his A Last Word on the Splinter Twin banning article point of view regarding the criteria.
The words and article are specifically chosen to reflect the view of Splinter Twin in the time everyone claims it was so oppressive and overpowered. It was to illustrate that at supposedly the worst time that the deck was a a complete dominant force, there was nothing but praise for it because of how it helped the format. Early articles after the ban like Last Word expand on this a bit, but with a very defeatist attitude; trying to find justification in strange actions that do not fit previous patterns. It is only months and months later, after people revise history and evoke their hindsight biases that we say it was the right thing. As far as "healthy" comments, it was posted shortly after a massive Tier 1 deck was banned and two cards which were supposed to help blue unbanned. It caused chaos in the format, which allowed for many other decks to shine (which is no better than the artificial shake ups before Pro Tours of past). Now that the format has settled, the true picture is there: play a fast degenerate deck or hope that playing Jund has enough answers. Anything else isn't worth bringing to a large event.
Here the first paragraph just goes directly against your next paragraph. As a quick aside: Maybe, like bill used to say, WotC is opposed to the idea of "police decks", or at least that status doesn't help the deck's ban case if it becomes too good. Either way, to address your points:
From the January Article: "Decks that are this strong can hurt diversity by pushing the decks that it defeats out of competition." By saying the fast linear decks are better now, you are acknowledging Twin defeated those. This is obvious and we agree, but that's the important part. Would have Infect won a GP with Twin around? Would have Suicide Zoo been able to emerge from Tier 3 with Twin around? And I'm probably missing more decks. The ban accomplished what they wanted: decks that Twin was defeating out of competition are now able to enjoy competitive success [GP Top8 level of success).
So you can twist my words to mean whatever you like, but Naya Zoo, Affinity, Merfolk, Elves, and Lantern Control all won GPs in 2015. The fact that the individual decklists are different now doesn't change the fact that there was still massive diversity at the top tables all year long in 2015. In addition, there was a massive representation of all archetypes, not just one. So besides Zooicide and Infect, what decks (which existed at the time) were being pushed out by Twin? Because the only ones you listed are the ones currently complained about to the point of people wanting them banned. What about all the other decks that used to see success and are now being suppressed by fast linear decks? What do we do about that?
BGx Midrange is safe for next year, despite holding more metagame share than Twin. This illustrates that you don't understand (or refuse to acknowledge) established ban criteria. After all these months, you keep looking at the wrong numbers. If not mine, at least remember Sheridan's words: "Wizards prioritizes major event Top 8s first, MTGO prevalence second, and other measures of metagame diversity third."
I fully understand, and am again illustrating a point. Every other diversity ban Modern has ever had included a metashare of nearly 20% or more. If a deck's power is truly so much more than everyone else, more people will inevitably play it. Twin did NOT have that aspect, and so having the decision made on GP/PT Top 8s alone is a weak decision made on too few variables and does not represent the format whatsoever. Nevermind the fact that more than half the Twin Top 8 positions were knocked out in the first round of T8 and only 2 of 7 actually won a GP, despite there being at least 1 copy in every GP. That doesn't sound dominant, that sounds accurate for a very good top tier deck.
From the January Article: "They [Decks that are this strong] can also reduce diversity by supplanting similar decks." Twin wasnt suppressing Control. Twin wasn't pushing out Control. You keep saying this over and over and I find it misleading at best. Yeah, Control decks faired well Twin. We know it, none ever argued that. We even agree! Twin was just the best deck (and by definition, the best Ux deck) and that's the whole point. Why even try Jeskai or Temur when Twin is just the better then against the whole metagame, even if it loses to those decks? While Twin was around, there was just no good reason to play those decks at the competitive level if you wanted to have success.
Let me give you an extremely clear example: Before the Twin ban, Grixis Control was 2.5% of the meta and Grixis Delver was 2.5% of the meta; they combined for 5% of the meta. Right now, Grixis Control is about 1% of the meta and Grixis Delver is 1.5% of the meta; they combine for about 2.5%. So for whatever other reasons you would like to attribute, those two decks have been cut nearly in half since the ban of Twin. All other decks have fallen or vanished. Jeskai Nahiri is the only deck which has grown, but that is due to a new printing, and not the removal of Twin (plus the fact that about 1/3 of previous Twin players migrated there), and it has been on a constant decline since its first breakout weekend. Without Nahiri, Jeskai Control would be back down below 1%. All blue reactive Tier 1 and Tier 2 decks used to account for about 13-14% of the meta and now account for about 6% (MN did not display Tier 3 data for 2015). So the conclusion can be drawn by asking a question: What similar decks that were being suppressed by Twin are thriving now as a result of Twin's removal? If you can't clearly answer that question, then the ban has not produced successful results. No deck meets this criteria, because the decks considered "suppressed" were just objectively weak decks overall. They have since gotten weaker because their biggest positive matchup (Twin and other interactive strategies) have essentially disappeared.
We agree that Jace is not the solution. Preordain may help a bit, but we'll need to test it first.
It might help proactive decks searching for specific cards (like Delver). But it is not a win con and it is not an answer. It will not help reactive decks all that much. It will do little other than replace Serum Visions, and then Serum Visions itself will just act as Preordain 5-8.
Twin was the best deck, indeed. As for the oppressive metashare, we have already determined it isn't the most important number. As for reasons, the asumptiong that "deck is good" translates to "is played more" asumes the players have perfect information, that all players are spikes, that there are no card availabity issues, that we have enough money to change decks on a whim, that playstyles are not a factor and many others. Reality is not like this though, so there will always be under- and overplayed decks (which translates to over- and underperforming decks), regardless of the fact that previous banned cards (BBE, DRS, Pod) didn't have much difference between metashare and competitive success. Hell, Eldrazi decks had +70% Top8s during the Eldrazi Winter, but the Eldrazi metashare was just +40%. Does that mean the deck wasn't broken? Let's hope #UnbanEye doesn't become a thing.
If a deck is powerful, people will play it. People like winning, and people really like free wins. Eldrazi was a free win. While it was "only" 40% of the paper meta, that still makes it the largest meta share of any diversity ban. If you expected it to be even higher, it was likely hindered by the realization that an incoming ban was obvious, and it was less inticing to buy into the deck post price spikes, knowing it would be banned. Twin has been around forever. Years and years. It was not a new deck, it was not a mystery, it was a known force since the beginning of Modern. It never achieved anywhere near the meta share numbers because its raw power is not nearly as high as every other banned deck. Plus, and I've made this argument before as well, many pros either do not like Modern or do not want to do extensive testing for it. So they pick a deck which handles a lot of the linear degeneracy well while rewarding skillful play in interactive matchups. It's no wonder pros liked the deck. Those circumstances do not make it "oppressive." With the removal of the PT, there is no reason to keep the deck banned.
Agree, nobody wants bans. Keep in mind Standard cards have greatly influenced modern since Khans Block at least. I believe new cards are the solution, but it will take some time. We can't expect them to warp Standard to try and "fix" Modern.
Considering Rosewater's own comments and the general trend of new cards making a splash in Modern, the path does not seem to favor blue reactive decks in either better answers or better win conditions. It's ironic that Nahiri made a splash, but Jeskai probably isn't even the best place for her (that would be Kiki Chord, a green-based toolbox deck). Adding that sets have been designed, printed and boxed years in advance, I do not expect anything extraordinary to come through Standard any time soon.
BTW, I would like to express appreciation for engaging in conversation without being hostile. It's a nice welcome.
It's funny that Twin players think that banning a piece of their deck changed the meta.
Just look all the toys that entered Modern from Standard and boosted dredge, many aggro decks, UWR control and BGx...
On the one hand, I don't buy the argument that Twin would fix Modern. It's just a temporary fix for a larger problem. On the other hand, you're totally off-base in thinking Twin's unbanning wouldn't have a big impact on the format. Decks like Dredge and Death's Shadow Zoo would be significantly worse in a metagame with Twin. Its presence would have the short-term effect of reducing linear deck share, but the long-term effect would be to strangle reactive blue decks towards Twin strategies.
It's funny that Twin players think that banning a piece of their deck changed the meta.
Just look all the toys that entered Modern from Standard and boosted dredge, many aggro decks, UWR control and BGx...
On the one hand, I don't buy the argument that Twin would fix Modern. It's just a temporary fix for a larger problem. On the other hand, you're totally off-base in thinking Twin's unbanning wouldn't have a big impact on the format. Decks like Dredge and Death's Shadow Zoo would be significantly worse in a metagame with Twin. Its presence would have the short-term effect of reducing linear deck share, but the long-term effect would be to strangle reactive blue decks towards Twin strategies.
which is better than how blue is doing now. which would put it on par with bg/x again.
I agree completely. I don't think things will get better until Wizards and their customers get over their fear of Control. Yes, UB won Worlds a bunch of times in a row. But this has been what, 10 years now? Most Modern players don't even remember this time. They simply remember creatures like Siege Rhino with no spells that even come close, outside of Planeswalkers. Maybe Wizards should just do away with the Instant/Sorcery type altogether?
And before someone says it, no, I don't think Force of Will has a place in Modern. Even Pact of Negation is a bit overdone itself.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
They simply remember creatures like Siege Rhino with no spells that even come close, outside of Planeswalkers. Maybe Wizards should just do away with the Instant/Sorcery type altogether?
You are exaggerating here man: I'd argue cards like Collected Company, Become Immense and Kolaghan's Command are on par with Siege Rhino. Also, we should not forget Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time. I believe it is just a matter of time until they balance the whole thing out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:WU WU Control | WBG Abzan Company Frontier:UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
They simply remember creatures like Siege Rhino with no spells that even come close, outside of Planeswalkers. Maybe Wizards should just do away with the Instant/Sorcery type altogether?
You are exaggerating here man: I'd argue cards like Collected Company, Become Immense and Kolaghan's Command are on par with Siege Rhino. Also, we should not forget Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time. I believe it is just a matter of time until they balance the whole thing out.
I am exaggerating. For many years, I preferrred spells to creatures. Unfortunately for me, you cannot play a creatureless deck anymore. You cannot blank your opponents' removal. Those days are over. Nowadays, many creatures that matter have a come into play clause, cast clause, or cannot be countered (as if we don't get the point with counters costing 3 and up already). I would just say that for people who don't like to jam 10-30 creatures in their decks, things are a bit tougher.
Collected Company is a good spell; nearly too good for Standard and Standard players are ecstatic that this "2 creatures for 4 mana" spell is gone. Become Immense, outside of Infect, is pretty bad without his buddy. But yeah, I'm glad that there's a way for creatures in play to get better. Kologhan's Command was slightly above average in Standard, while Siege Rhino defined Standard. In Modern, Kologhan's Command has done more than Rhino, but that is partially because Rhino Pod got axed and Siege Rhino could only be cast a turn or two after dying to Infect or Suicide Zoo. Even Kologhan's Command is too slow right now. That's a tad bit sad. Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time were too good. Maybe that's what happens when spells are too good? They get banned in 2 formats.
But as for Standard, I don't play it, so I don't care too much. I just think that it may be a bit confusing to newer players whether their creature does nothing upon cast or onto the battlefield, only upon entering the battlefield, or upon casting and when exactly these triggers are put on the stack. Creatures make the game easier?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
]which is better than how blue is doing now. which would put it on par with bg/x again.
Again, which would just be a short-term fix for a long-term problem. I'd rather Wizards work to fix the long-term problem so Modern could improve over a multi-year timespan, rather than fix the short-term problem and have Modern be better for about 6 months. Something like Preordain drives at the long-term fix by improving a variety of blue-based strategies, the majority of which are interactive and non-linear. Twin just returns us to URx Twin or bust for blue mages.
I agree completely. I don't think things will get better until Wizards and their customers get over their fear of Control. Yes, UB won Worlds a bunch of times in a row. But this has been what, 10 years now? Most Modern players don't even remember this time. They simply remember creatures like Siege Rhino with no spells that even come close, outside of Planeswalkers. Maybe Wizards should just do away with the Instant/Sorcery type altogether?
And before someone says it, no, I don't think Force of Will has a place in Modern. Even Pact of Negation is a bit overdone itself.
I don't really see the point of comparison between Force of Will and Pact of Negation, at least in this context. Pact of Negation is a card that you lose the game if you cast it while not having 5 mana, so it's a counterspell that you can't cast until turn 5 (with mana ramp you can possibly cast it earlier but that really only leaves it available for Scapeshift) in a format where Cryptic Command, at 4 mana, is a bit slow. Therefore, Pact of Negation is really only playable in decks that don't plan to ever have to pay for it, meaning they win the turn they cast it. In other words, Pact of Negation is fundamentally only playable in unfair/combo strategies, whether it be to protect the combo (Griselbrand) or as part of the combo (Hive Mind). Heck, it's better in those strategies because you can cast it truly for free, whereas Force of Will does require that point of life and Blue card in hand.
Force of Will can be played outside of those decks, and historically sees more play in fair decks than unfair ones.
]which is better than how blue is doing now. which would put it on par with bg/x again.
Again, which would just be a short-term fix for a long-term problem. I'd rather Wizards work to fix the long-term problem so Modern could improve over a multi-year timespan, rather than fix the short-term problem and have Modern be better for about 6 months. Something like Preordain drives at the long-term fix by improving a variety of blue-based strategies, the majority of which are interactive and non-linear. Twin just returns us to URx Twin or bust for blue mages.
Preordain does not fix the problem. It is not an answer and it is not a win condition. Those are the things that are causing blue decks to struggle. Jund is succeeding in Linear City because it has fantastic general answers and fantastic threats/win conditions. Preordain does nothing to address this in blue. It MIGHT help you draw into your mediocre answers or mediocre threats, but that's it. It doesn't actually improve any of your cards, it just gives a small increase in the likelihood of drawing any particular card. That is not going to help blue as a color or blue interactive decks as an archetype. And with the direction Wizards is taking the game (likely to help compete with Hearthstone), value creatures are the way forward, not generalized answers.
To address many of the long term problems Modern faces, Wizards would likely need a massive overhaul of the entire format (as I said, by either introducing LOTS of cards, banning LOTS of cards, or scrapping it entirely and making a new format). I would rather do something now to definitely improve things than continue to let the format fall with no help on the horizon. Neither of these choices address long term goals, but one of them at least fixes the biggest complaints right now. If it actually becomes a problem (which it had not been for its entire lifespan in Modern), then it can be addressed in this post-PT Modern world. Everyone said that banning Twin would unleash Linear degeneracy on the format, and now that things have settled, that's exactly what happened. Putting it back would restore balance to the police force of BGx and URx decks keeping things healthy and diverse for both archetypes and deck lists, just like they did for the entire year of 2015.
]which is better than how blue is doing now. which would put it on par with bg/x again.
Again, which would just be a short-term fix for a long-term problem. I'd rather Wizards work to fix the long-term problem so Modern could improve over a multi-year timespan, rather than fix the short-term problem and have Modern be better for about 6 months. Something like Preordain drives at the long-term fix by improving a variety of blue-based strategies, the majority of which are interactive and non-linear. Twin just returns us to URx Twin or bust for blue mages.
Preordain does not fix the problem. It is not an answer and it is not a win condition. Those are the things that are causing blue decks to struggle. Jund is succeeding in Linear City because it has fantastic general answers and fantastic threats/win conditions. Preordain does nothing to address this in blue. It MIGHT help you draw into your mediocre answers or mediocre threats, but that's it. It doesn't actually improve any of your cards, it just gives a small increase in the likelihood of drawing any particular card. That is not going to help blue as a color or blue interactive decks as an archetype. And with the direction Wizards is taking the game (likely to help compete with Hearthstone), value creatures are the way forward, not generalized answers.
To address many of the long term problems Modern faces, Wizards would likely need a massive overhaul of the entire format (as I said, by either introducing LOTS of cards, banning LOTS of cards, or scrapping it entirely and making a new format). I would rather do something now to definitely improve things than continue to let the format fall with no help on the horizon. Neither of these choices address long term goals, but one of them at least fixes the biggest complaints right now. If it actually becomes a problem (which it had not been for its entire lifespan in Modern), then it can be addressed in this post-PT Modern world. Everyone said that banning Twin would unleash Linear degeneracy on the format, and now that things have settled, that's exactly what happened. Putting it back would restore balance to the police force of BGx and URx decks keeping things healthy and diverse for both archetypes and deck lists, just like they did for the entire year of 2015.
Lots of people enjoy the format as is, they can play the decks they want to play and have a reasonable chance of being successful. If you're not winning with Ux Control, or whatever else, it's more an indication that your playing could use improvement, not the format.
]which is better than how blue is doing now. which would put it on par with bg/x again.
Again, which would just be a short-term fix for a long-term problem. I'd rather Wizards work to fix the long-term problem so Modern could improve over a multi-year timespan, rather than fix the short-term problem and have Modern be better for about 6 months. Something like Preordain drives at the long-term fix by improving a variety of blue-based strategies, the majority of which are interactive and non-linear. Twin just returns us to URx Twin or bust for blue mages.
Preordain does not fix the problem. It is not an answer and it is not a win condition. Those are the things that are causing blue decks to struggle. Jund is succeeding in Linear City because it has fantastic general answers and fantastic threats/win conditions. Preordain does nothing to address this in blue. It MIGHT help you draw into your mediocre answers or mediocre threats, but that's it. It doesn't actually improve any of your cards, it just gives a small increase in the likelihood of drawing any particular card. That is not going to help blue as a color or blue interactive decks as an archetype. And with the direction Wizards is taking the game (likely to help compete with Hearthstone), value creatures are the way forward, not generalized answers.
To address many of the long term problems Modern faces, Wizards would likely need a massive overhaul of the entire format (as I said, by either introducing LOTS of cards, banning LOTS of cards, or scrapping it entirely and making a new format). I would rather do something now to definitely improve things than continue to let the format fall with no help on the horizon. Neither of these choices address long term goals, but one of them at least fixes the biggest complaints right now. If it actually becomes a problem (which it had not been for its entire lifespan in Modern), then it can be addressed in this post-PT Modern world. Everyone said that banning Twin would unleash Linear degeneracy on the format, and now that things have settled, that's exactly what happened. Putting it back would restore balance to the police force of BGx and URx decks keeping things healthy and diverse for both archetypes and deck lists, just like they did for the entire year of 2015.
Blue has fine answers and win conditions. See Jeskai sustaining Tier 1 status despite an extremely hostile metagame. I know you personally are on a crusade to get Twin back, but don't just dismiss alternate options because they don't fit your view of the format. Preordain, although not an answer/win itself, patently improves a reactive deck's ability to find those cards, especially in the early turns of the game. That is where Wizards should start, not with Twin, a card that just moves the format backwards.
It is too bad they won't just admit that banning pod forced them to ban twin, and banning twin forced them to ban eldrazi, and banning eldrazi is going to lead to yet more bannings. Modern was a midrange format until the banning cycle began, because aggro died on contact with pod. An unban of Eye of Ugin, Pod and Twin would make tier 1 Jund, Pod, Affinity, Eldrazi, burn and Twin. Two aggro, 1 aggro-combo, two midrange, 1 Combo-control.
Or the format can continue to shave off turns and focus on aggro-combo decks that kill on progressively faster turns.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pauper: UB Wight Phantasm RB Burn UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
I never really voice my opinion in this thread, because it generally gets lost in the noise, but why is it everyone says blue decks are terrible, blue is a bad color in modern? Looking solely at the color blue, it is used in:
Affinity
eldrazi
Infect
Merfolk
Dredge
Nahiri control
Scapeshift
Grixis Delver
Ad Nauseam
Id hardly call 9/19 decks in modern nexus tier 1/2 a bad color... You all should be clear... CONTROL isnt a great option, sans nahiri which is still putting in work.
Secondly, I know there are die hards out there, but the banning of pod DID help the meta become more diverse. I know treasure cruise was on everyones mind, but the siege rhino pod WAS killing off aggro in the whole format. Is there too much aggro now, sure, but lets not kid ourselves, aggro was not even worth mentioning during that time. I'd gladdly trade a single deck that wasnt a police man deck, it was a murderer of a playstyle. Twin wasnt a policeman deck either. It was the best deck you could play, so the gimmick decks werent worth playing. It didnt police those gimmicks fairly, it did it by comboing a better combo than you.
I'm all for a better control deck in modern (note: I said control, blue is doing fine supplementing aggro and tempo strats.) with all around better main board answer cards, but anything that helped control, helped twin continue to say no to control diversity, and aggro would be dead in a format with pod. The answer is helping out control strats, not unbanning either of those two decks... and pods doing fine right now with company and evolution... its a deck that is fair to play against, not one that blows you out turn by turn.
I never really voice my opinion in this thread, because it generally gets lost in the noise, but why is it everyone says blue decks are terrible, blue is a bad color in modern? Looking solely at the color blue, it is used in:
Affinity
eldrazi
Infect
Merfolk
Dredge
Nahiri control
Scapeshift
Grixis Delver
Ad Nauseam
Id hardly call 9/19 decks in modern nexus tier 1/2 a bad color... You all should be clear... CONTROL isnt a great option, sans nahiri which is still putting in work.
Secondly, I know there are die hards out there, but the banning of pod DID help the meta become more diverse. I know treasure cruise was on everyones mind, but the siege rhino pod WAS killing off aggro in the whole format. Is there too much aggro now, sure, but lets not kid ourselves, aggro was not even worth mentioning during that time. I'd gladdly trade a single deck that wasnt a police man deck, it was a murderer of a playstyle. Twin wasnt a policeman deck either. It was the best deck you could play, so the gimmick decks werent worth playing. It didnt police those gimmicks fairly, it did it by comboing a better combo than you.
I'm all for a better control deck in modern (note: I said control, blue is doing fine supplementing aggro and tempo strats.) with all around better main board answer cards, but anything that helped control, helped twin continue to say no to control diversity, and aggro would be dead in a format with pod. The answer is helping out control strats, not unbanning either of those two decks... and pods doing fine right now with company and evolution... its a deck that is fair to play against, not one that blows you out turn by turn.
I think the issue is talking past each other on definitions of "the meta," not disagreements of what actually was happening. Aggro was fine during pod and twin era, as evidence by affinity being a tier 1 deck at all times. Control was fine, midrange was fine, pure combo was actually worse since the combo decks were really midrange and control decks with a combo finish (the same as Nahiri control).
What became more diverse was the number of different deck lists you could run. There are now more tier 1 decks then back then, but the number of archetypes has become much less diverse in favor of aggro-combo decks. Some people prefer more deck diversity, others more archetype diversity. I come down on archetypes, and as I pointed out above aggro as an archetype would do just fine with Eldrazi and Affinity. The real losers would be the linear combo decks like storm and the more fragile and linear aggro decks like Suicide Zoo.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pauper: UB Wight Phantasm RB Burn UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Preordain/Ponder I believe are a package, if you unban one, the other must also come off. Which is something I don't believe Wizards would likely do given their preference for Serum Visions and their attempts to make it the iconic cantrip of the Modern format.
Midrange and Control need cornerstone cards for them to have more identity and efficiency against the hyper-combo and hyper-aggro decks of the format. That is the short story proposal I have for my choices of unbanning cards in the format. The only card I could see an argument for is Jace, the Mind Sculptor, and it's the card I feel the most pushed of my choices.
It is too bad they won't just admit that banning pod forced them to ban twin,
After I read this I was like, "ok, haven't thought of that but maybe there's something there, let's read on..."
and banning twin forced them to ban eldrazi
And then I read this and was like, "nope, don't need to read anymore."
There's no possible way Eldrazi was banned because of some precedent. It was the most format warping deck in any format in a very long time and the single most warping deck in Modern's history.
Preordain/Ponder I believe are a package, if you unban one, the other must also come off. Which is something I don't believe Wizards would likely do given their preference for Serum Visions and their attempts to make it the iconic cantrip of the Modern format.
Midrange and Control need cornerstone cards for them to have more identity and efficiency against the hyper-combo and hyper-aggro decks of the format. That is the short story proposal I have for my choices of unbanning cards in the format. The only card I could see an argument for is Jace, the Mind Sculptor, and it's the card I feel the most pushed of my choices.
I disagree that P/P are a package deal. I don't see why that would be the case. They are individual Magic cards. Why are they a package deal?
I don't think SFM is safe for Modern, but I do agree that BBE/SFM/Preordain all at the same time would balance some things out and potentially make SFM less of an issue. But that's quite a lot of risk all at once, something WOTC will almost assuredly never do.
I'll never be behind a JTMS unban, though. I have my playset, my feelings aren't swayed by the inevitable price increase. I just don't think the card fits this format.
I think you are misunderstanding me. If Twin and Pod were around, Eldrazi would not have been nearly as format warping. The preponderance of Eldrazi was caused as much by its timing as its power.
I would also appreciate it if you didn't dismiss me out of hand for not phrasing a single line of my argument perfectly, but you are of course free to do as you wish.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pauper: UB Wight Phantasm RB Burn UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy: R Burn CG-Post
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Edit: To elaborate, every time I meet Dredge with a fair deck, it makes me think that maybe I should be playing Ad Nauseam or Infect instead. If we want fair, interactive deck to thrive or at least have a good spot in the format, this is not a good sign.
Stay reasonable, be mindful of your expectations and don't feed the trolls.
Doomsdayin'
If you are that adamant on proving that Twin would be able to help out the format I suggest you firstly test it in the current metagame with the AV SB plan to verify if it hasn't gotten too dominant. From the decks which have popped up since the banning of Twin I'd say dredge is a favoured matchup, and Bant Eldrazi/Death's Shadow should be pretty even, those 2 look quite play/draw dependant.
I actually agree with you, though you seem to have missed the crux of my argument- Splinter Twin was fundamentally a healthy Police Deck for Modern, but Wizards is most likely to be unwilling to unban it any time soon. I think everyone is in agreement that there are some cards on the Banned list that don't really deserve to be there, but Wizards will not remove them because they percieve them cards as more powerful or effective in the format than they are. Remember, these are the people who though Bitterblossom would make Faeries dominate the format. That's the big problem. I think that they've been getting better about understanding what's fair in Modern, but the people running the format seem to be on a different page than the people playing the format.
I would love to see a ban on phyrexian mana. Dismember is a flavorless card when it is used in ever deck, and mutagenic growth leads to silly t2/t3 wins for infect. It would also give more decks game against affinity with no vault skirge.
For context, i play Merfolk, Elves, and Mono-U Tron.
This seems rather odd. UR has always had a strong combo thread running through it, and a hybrid tempo/combo deck seems right up its color identity alley. Considering that just about every deck was able to run some method of interacting with the Twin combo your post makes very little sense. Also, they've printed way more than 2 hate cards for Twin. Torpor Orb, Hallowed Moonlight, Blind Obedience, Celestial Purge, Linvala, Keeper of Silence, Spellskite, Abrupt Decay... There's a lot of them out there. Hive Mind is part of a two card kill combo, and somehow that's still legal. Every piece of targeted creature removal was a hate card, if it could kill a toughness 4 or greater critters.
It forced decks to be able to interact with it, and was able to win the turn it resolved. How else are you going to deal with aggro decks that kill on turn 3? Your options boil down to preventing them from playing the game with Prison control or forcing them to play a longer game by threatening a win if they don't keep up interaction. Answers aren't enough in this card pool, because Answers are weaker than the Threats. Frankly, banning Twin was one of the dumbest ideas Wizards has ever had for Modern- even with Ancestral Vision unbanned.
Is this yet another case when you keep repeating Sheridan's words whitout acknowledging that he has changed his mind or has been proven otherwise? I remember Sheridan himself calling you out here regarding the Diversity Ban Criteria: "Wizards prioritizes major event Top 8s first, MTGO prevalence second, and other measures of metagame diversity third.", since his Investigating April 4 Banlist Update Consequences article reviewed his A Last Word on the Splinter Twin banning article point of view regarding the criteria.
Going back to your post here, I'll quote Sheridan's own metagame updates to show you that Modern doesn't need Twin to be healthy, diverse and fun:
Agree, nobody wants bans. Keep in mind Standard cards have greatly influenced modern since Khans Block at least. I believe new cards are the solution, but it will take some time. We can't expect them to warp Standard to try and "fix" Modern.
Well yeah, everyone's entitled to their opinion. However, early numbers suggest Infect doesn't violate the Turn 4 rule, so Become Immense should be fine. Still waiting for Sheridan's numbers on the issue.
Frontier: UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
My H/W list
With Bant Eldrazi on the rise and Jund getting better by the day, it may not be the best. Even if it is, it will be by a smaller margin than previously (which was already a small margin).
The words and article are specifically chosen to reflect the view of Splinter Twin in the time everyone claims it was so oppressive and overpowered. It was to illustrate that at supposedly the worst time that the deck was a a complete dominant force, there was nothing but praise for it because of how it helped the format. Early articles after the ban like Last Word expand on this a bit, but with a very defeatist attitude; trying to find justification in strange actions that do not fit previous patterns. It is only months and months later, after people revise history and evoke their hindsight biases that we say it was the right thing. As far as "healthy" comments, it was posted shortly after a massive Tier 1 deck was banned and two cards which were supposed to help blue unbanned. It caused chaos in the format, which allowed for many other decks to shine (which is no better than the artificial shake ups before Pro Tours of past). Now that the format has settled, the true picture is there: play a fast degenerate deck or hope that playing Jund has enough answers. Anything else isn't worth bringing to a large event.
So you can twist my words to mean whatever you like, but Naya Zoo, Affinity, Merfolk, Elves, and Lantern Control all won GPs in 2015. The fact that the individual decklists are different now doesn't change the fact that there was still massive diversity at the top tables all year long in 2015. In addition, there was a massive representation of all archetypes, not just one. So besides Zooicide and Infect, what decks (which existed at the time) were being pushed out by Twin? Because the only ones you listed are the ones currently complained about to the point of people wanting them banned. What about all the other decks that used to see success and are now being suppressed by fast linear decks? What do we do about that?
I fully understand, and am again illustrating a point. Every other diversity ban Modern has ever had included a metashare of nearly 20% or more. If a deck's power is truly so much more than everyone else, more people will inevitably play it. Twin did NOT have that aspect, and so having the decision made on GP/PT Top 8s alone is a weak decision made on too few variables and does not represent the format whatsoever. Nevermind the fact that more than half the Twin Top 8 positions were knocked out in the first round of T8 and only 2 of 7 actually won a GP, despite there being at least 1 copy in every GP. That doesn't sound dominant, that sounds accurate for a very good top tier deck.
Let me give you an extremely clear example: Before the Twin ban, Grixis Control was 2.5% of the meta and Grixis Delver was 2.5% of the meta; they combined for 5% of the meta. Right now, Grixis Control is about 1% of the meta and Grixis Delver is 1.5% of the meta; they combine for about 2.5%. So for whatever other reasons you would like to attribute, those two decks have been cut nearly in half since the ban of Twin. All other decks have fallen or vanished. Jeskai Nahiri is the only deck which has grown, but that is due to a new printing, and not the removal of Twin (plus the fact that about 1/3 of previous Twin players migrated there), and it has been on a constant decline since its first breakout weekend. Without Nahiri, Jeskai Control would be back down below 1%. All blue reactive Tier 1 and Tier 2 decks used to account for about 13-14% of the meta and now account for about 6% (MN did not display Tier 3 data for 2015). So the conclusion can be drawn by asking a question: What similar decks that were being suppressed by Twin are thriving now as a result of Twin's removal? If you can't clearly answer that question, then the ban has not produced successful results. No deck meets this criteria, because the decks considered "suppressed" were just objectively weak decks overall. They have since gotten weaker because their biggest positive matchup (Twin and other interactive strategies) have essentially disappeared.
It might help proactive decks searching for specific cards (like Delver). But it is not a win con and it is not an answer. It will not help reactive decks all that much. It will do little other than replace Serum Visions, and then Serum Visions itself will just act as Preordain 5-8.
If a deck is powerful, people will play it. People like winning, and people really like free wins. Eldrazi was a free win. While it was "only" 40% of the paper meta, that still makes it the largest meta share of any diversity ban. If you expected it to be even higher, it was likely hindered by the realization that an incoming ban was obvious, and it was less inticing to buy into the deck post price spikes, knowing it would be banned. Twin has been around forever. Years and years. It was not a new deck, it was not a mystery, it was a known force since the beginning of Modern. It never achieved anywhere near the meta share numbers because its raw power is not nearly as high as every other banned deck. Plus, and I've made this argument before as well, many pros either do not like Modern or do not want to do extensive testing for it. So they pick a deck which handles a lot of the linear degeneracy well while rewarding skillful play in interactive matchups. It's no wonder pros liked the deck. Those circumstances do not make it "oppressive." With the removal of the PT, there is no reason to keep the deck banned.
Considering Rosewater's own comments and the general trend of new cards making a splash in Modern, the path does not seem to favor blue reactive decks in either better answers or better win conditions. It's ironic that Nahiri made a splash, but Jeskai probably isn't even the best place for her (that would be Kiki Chord, a green-based toolbox deck). Adding that sets have been designed, printed and boxed years in advance, I do not expect anything extraordinary to come through Standard any time soon.
BTW, I would like to express appreciation for engaging in conversation without being hostile. It's a nice welcome.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
On the one hand, I don't buy the argument that Twin would fix Modern. It's just a temporary fix for a larger problem. On the other hand, you're totally off-base in thinking Twin's unbanning wouldn't have a big impact on the format. Decks like Dredge and Death's Shadow Zoo would be significantly worse in a metagame with Twin. Its presence would have the short-term effect of reducing linear deck share, but the long-term effect would be to strangle reactive blue decks towards Twin strategies.
decks playing:
none
And before someone says it, no, I don't think Force of Will has a place in Modern. Even Pact of Negation is a bit overdone itself.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Frontier: UBR Grixis Control | BRG Jund Delirium
Collected Company is a good spell; nearly too good for Standard and Standard players are ecstatic that this "2 creatures for 4 mana" spell is gone. Become Immense, outside of Infect, is pretty bad without his buddy. But yeah, I'm glad that there's a way for creatures in play to get better. Kologhan's Command was slightly above average in Standard, while Siege Rhino defined Standard. In Modern, Kologhan's Command has done more than Rhino, but that is partially because Rhino Pod got axed and Siege Rhino could only be cast a turn or two after dying to Infect or Suicide Zoo. Even Kologhan's Command is too slow right now. That's a tad bit sad. Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time were too good. Maybe that's what happens when spells are too good? They get banned in 2 formats.
But as for Standard, I don't play it, so I don't care too much. I just think that it may be a bit confusing to newer players whether their creature does nothing upon cast or onto the battlefield, only upon entering the battlefield, or upon casting and when exactly these triggers are put on the stack. Creatures make the game easier?
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Again, which would just be a short-term fix for a long-term problem. I'd rather Wizards work to fix the long-term problem so Modern could improve over a multi-year timespan, rather than fix the short-term problem and have Modern be better for about 6 months. Something like Preordain drives at the long-term fix by improving a variety of blue-based strategies, the majority of which are interactive and non-linear. Twin just returns us to URx Twin or bust for blue mages.
Force of Will can be played outside of those decks, and historically sees more play in fair decks than unfair ones.
Preordain does not fix the problem. It is not an answer and it is not a win condition. Those are the things that are causing blue decks to struggle. Jund is succeeding in Linear City because it has fantastic general answers and fantastic threats/win conditions. Preordain does nothing to address this in blue. It MIGHT help you draw into your mediocre answers or mediocre threats, but that's it. It doesn't actually improve any of your cards, it just gives a small increase in the likelihood of drawing any particular card. That is not going to help blue as a color or blue interactive decks as an archetype. And with the direction Wizards is taking the game (likely to help compete with Hearthstone), value creatures are the way forward, not generalized answers.
To address many of the long term problems Modern faces, Wizards would likely need a massive overhaul of the entire format (as I said, by either introducing LOTS of cards, banning LOTS of cards, or scrapping it entirely and making a new format). I would rather do something now to definitely improve things than continue to let the format fall with no help on the horizon. Neither of these choices address long term goals, but one of them at least fixes the biggest complaints right now. If it actually becomes a problem (which it had not been for its entire lifespan in Modern), then it can be addressed in this post-PT Modern world. Everyone said that banning Twin would unleash Linear degeneracy on the format, and now that things have settled, that's exactly what happened. Putting it back would restore balance to the police force of BGx and URx decks keeping things healthy and diverse for both archetypes and deck lists, just like they did for the entire year of 2015.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Lots of people enjoy the format as is, they can play the decks they want to play and have a reasonable chance of being successful. If you're not winning with Ux Control, or whatever else, it's more an indication that your playing could use improvement, not the format.
My H/W list
Blue has fine answers and win conditions. See Jeskai sustaining Tier 1 status despite an extremely hostile metagame. I know you personally are on a crusade to get Twin back, but don't just dismiss alternate options because they don't fit your view of the format. Preordain, although not an answer/win itself, patently improves a reactive deck's ability to find those cards, especially in the early turns of the game. That is where Wizards should start, not with Twin, a card that just moves the format backwards.
Or the format can continue to shave off turns and focus on aggro-combo decks that kill on progressively faster turns.
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post
Id hardly call 9/19 decks in modern nexus tier 1/2 a bad color... You all should be clear... CONTROL isnt a great option, sans nahiri which is still putting in work.
Secondly, I know there are die hards out there, but the banning of pod DID help the meta become more diverse. I know treasure cruise was on everyones mind, but the siege rhino pod WAS killing off aggro in the whole format. Is there too much aggro now, sure, but lets not kid ourselves, aggro was not even worth mentioning during that time. I'd gladdly trade a single deck that wasnt a police man deck, it was a murderer of a playstyle. Twin wasnt a policeman deck either. It was the best deck you could play, so the gimmick decks werent worth playing. It didnt police those gimmicks fairly, it did it by comboing a better combo than you.
I'm all for a better control deck in modern (note: I said control, blue is doing fine supplementing aggro and tempo strats.) with all around better main board answer cards, but anything that helped control, helped twin continue to say no to control diversity, and aggro would be dead in a format with pod. The answer is helping out control strats, not unbanning either of those two decks... and pods doing fine right now with company and evolution... its a deck that is fair to play against, not one that blows you out turn by turn.
I think the issue is talking past each other on definitions of "the meta," not disagreements of what actually was happening. Aggro was fine during pod and twin era, as evidence by affinity being a tier 1 deck at all times. Control was fine, midrange was fine, pure combo was actually worse since the combo decks were really midrange and control decks with a combo finish (the same as Nahiri control).
What became more diverse was the number of different deck lists you could run. There are now more tier 1 decks then back then, but the number of archetypes has become much less diverse in favor of aggro-combo decks. Some people prefer more deck diversity, others more archetype diversity. I come down on archetypes, and as I pointed out above aggro as an archetype would do just fine with Eldrazi and Affinity. The real losers would be the linear combo decks like storm and the more fragile and linear aggro decks like Suicide Zoo.
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post
Unban ;
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Bloodbraid Elf
Stoneforge Mystic
Ban (if anything);
Become Immense
Preordain/Ponder I believe are a package, if you unban one, the other must also come off. Which is something I don't believe Wizards would likely do given their preference for Serum Visions and their attempts to make it the iconic cantrip of the Modern format.
Midrange and Control need cornerstone cards for them to have more identity and efficiency against the hyper-combo and hyper-aggro decks of the format. That is the short story proposal I have for my choices of unbanning cards in the format. The only card I could see an argument for is Jace, the Mind Sculptor, and it's the card I feel the most pushed of my choices.
And then I read this and was like, "nope, don't need to read anymore."
There's no possible way Eldrazi was banned because of some precedent. It was the most format warping deck in any format in a very long time and the single most warping deck in Modern's history.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
I don't think SFM is safe for Modern, but I do agree that BBE/SFM/Preordain all at the same time would balance some things out and potentially make SFM less of an issue. But that's quite a lot of risk all at once, something WOTC will almost assuredly never do.
I'll never be behind a JTMS unban, though. I have my playset, my feelings aren't swayed by the inevitable price increase. I just don't think the card fits this format.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
I would also appreciate it if you didn't dismiss me out of hand for not phrasing a single line of my argument perfectly, but you are of course free to do as you wish.
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post