what made me laught was "modern is a format players seem to greatly enjoy."
while it is true modern is better than last year for example, it has a lot of problems that should be solved and this line basically ways wotc doesn't care at all about modern
By far the top three decks are the "midrange" deck of the format (really just a more resilient aggro/synergy deck that has pushed the traditional midrange decks mostly out of the format), the go big decks that pray on the smaller midrange deck, and a burn deck that prays on the go big deck praying on the midrange deck. The rest are just other ignore you and hope to goldfish decks except abzan, jund, and grixis control which combine for 10% of the meta. You have a single blue based reactive deck listed and it has the smallest share.
The format could certainly be worse, but again if this is fine then modern just isn't the format for me or for a ton of Magics player base.
Obviously you're wrong, because Modern is thriving. Huge attendance. If its not for you, pick another format.
This is ridiculous, it's like saying drug rehabilitation programs work because 95% of people who are arrested for possession charges choose to go to that instead of jail. Legacy is dying due to the reserved list, and standard is as big of a mess as It has been in years. If modern being the default best format is good enough for you then I'm happy for you but I know a format can be highly played and still not perfect. Again, it's not even the decision I disagree with, it's their stubborn insistence that everything is fine that I see as the problem.
Also, the idea that blue is hard to use and that is why no one plays it is so incredibly stupid. Blue reactive strategies are not played because they don't have good enough answers to keep up with all the linear decks running around.
Standard is screwed up right now because people think Wizards is going to ban something, so they're not investing much time. This is why they need to be superbly cautious about banning cards in standard. Banmania in standard is far more of an impact than modern.
Why's everyone playing the same 3 decks? Because there's no incentive to test if there's no stability, just play what we know is good and evolve it.
There're plenty of powerful cards in standard. We've already seen release the gremlins mauling the vehicles decks and more than likely we'll see some plansewalker hosers in Amonkhet that rein Gideon in a bit.
I am fine with the current measured approach to the modern bans. I do think Stoneforge will eventually see the light of day, and probably before Jace or Preordain, because as I've discussed white is much worse than blue in modern, and blue is already bad.
White has nothing going for it except a pile of sideboard cards, path, and Thalia -- and the latter goes in a very specific type of deck that has issues in modern (both because spell based combos are not great and there's so much removal for her).
Note: It is very telling that in a recent article on modern, one of the best white cards listed is Lingering souls
I feel standard is the place of greatest concern for wizards, so chances are we won't see many changes to the modern format due to how nuanced it is in comparison. Modern isn't having a warring triad issue.
The only "real" complaint I see right now is that blue is "dead". And that isnt an issue WotC is going to prioritize. Especially with the stigma that color has. And considering most metrics look good for Modern, there is no need to rock the boat. If DSx become some sort of unbeatable Goliath, then we might see a ban in April. But I think the deck is perfectly controllable.
Honestly, the only complaing I hear about blue is on MTG Salvation. I play a lot, locally, and online. No one is complaining.
Standard is screwed up right now because people think Wizards is going to ban something, so they're not investing much time. This is why they need to be superbly cautious about banning cards in standard. Banmania in standard is far more of an impact than modern.
Why's everyone playing the same 3 decks? Because there's no incentive to test if there's no stability, just play what we know is good and evolve it.
There're plenty of powerful cards in standard. We've already seen release the gremlins mauling the vehicles decks and more than likely we'll see some plansewalker hosers in Amonkhet that rein Gideon in a bit.
I am fine with the current measured approach to the modern bans. I do think Stoneforge will eventually see the light of day, and probably before Jace or Preordain, because as I've discussed white is much worse than blue in modern, and blue is already bad.
White has nothing going for it except a pile of sideboard cards, path, and Thalia -- and the latter goes in a very specific type of deck that has issues in modern (both because spell based combos are not great and there's so much removal for her).
Note: It is very telling that in a recent article on modern, one of the best white cards listed is Lingering souls
i don't think white is worse than u.. they are on the same level imho since splashing an island to play serum vision isn't exactly playing blue or splashing for path is playing white
even if not played, white has a lot of different competitive strategies at least
This is ridiculous, it's like saying drug rehabilitation programs work because 95% of people who are arrested for possession charges choose to go to that instead of jail. Legacy is dying due to the reserved list, and standard is as big of a mess as It has been in years. If modern being the default best format is good enough for you then I'm happy for you but I know a format can be highly played and still not perfect. Again, it's not even the decision I disagree with, it's their stubborn insistence that everything is fine that I see as the problem.
Also, the idea that blue is hard to use and that is why no one plays it is so incredibly stupid. Blue reactive strategies are not played because they don't have good enough answers to keep up with all the linear decks running around.
I think it is exactly why blue decks don't get played enough. And there are viable blue strategies out there that thrive on linear decks. Just an FYI.
As for you not finding a home in any sanctioned format. Im not sure what to tell you. WotC can't please everyone. Maybe casual is what you need until competitive seems more attractive to you, again.
Again, the numbers are not on your side. Once we see huge dips in Modern attendance, come back to me and rub it in my face. Please.
At this point I would be surprised if anything is unbanned in modern this year. Wotc is pretty clear about not caring about color balance (in deed, not in word). Even archetype balance is pretty lackluster. But looking at the mtggoldfish meta page, there are a host of decks hovering around 4-9% meta share. The format is undeniably popular, they will sell a ton of mm17 product, and nothing is even close to meeting their stated and implied ban criteria.
What I think will happen is a January unban of Jace and sfm, followed by a spring masters (probably not modern masters, maybe another eternal masters) product headlined by those two cards. They will have had close to a year to plan it out, and it will sell a ton of product.
i don't think white is worse than u.. they are on the same level imho since splashing an island to play serum vision isn't exactly playing blue or splashing for path is playing white
even if not played, white has a lot of different competitive strategies at least
Haven't you heard ? If it's not tier 1 it's trash.
Guys please opinions on japanese cards. Lost a 3/3 creature against Japan celestial colonade. This guy played all creatures and spells in english cards, but some cards in his manabase was japanese. I dont registrated this really ( my brain say its all fine and all english to me lets attack his empty board)...and i am sure it is a Kind of legal cheating. It is not ok, but i know legal. I Hate such people. I never forget colonade normally, but with this Tricks it can happen one time in 3 years and such people take advantage of this
If I am a customer spending premium amount of dollars, I expect a premium service. Jund falls into the category of a premium deck costing more dollars than a majority of the rest of the format. I'm not getting the desired performance ratio per dollars spent out of the Jund deck because WOTC decided to make the format more diverse.
i don't think white is worse than u.. they are on the same level imho since splashing an island to play serum vision isn't exactly playing blue or splashing for path is playing white
even if not played, white has a lot of different competitive strategies at least
Haven't you heard ? If it's not tier 1 it's trash.
Yes, one of the Mods here stated that yesterday, in effect. There are currently 25 decks listed on this website as Tier 1/2. The definition of Tier 2 is "Established decks with tournament results". I would think the "good" decks extend at least into Tier 2.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
FREE MODERN. Break the Standard link.
I play Magic: the Gathering, not Magic: the Commandering.
Well I guess I'm glad I didn't hedge against the Jace unban by picking up a playset. My SFM hedge is looking pretty silly right now. Preordain "hedge" didn't pay either.
I'm surprised one of those 3 were not unbanned.
I guess ? Ad naus ? and ? gifts storm ? being decks makes WotC feel that Preordain is risky?
I guess ? Abzan ? and ? Bant Eldazi ? being decks makes WotC feel that Stoneforge Mystic is risky?
I guess ? Grixis control ? and ? UW control ? being decks makes Wotc feel that Jace, the mind sculptor is risky?
I'm working under the presumption that WotC wants to reduce the size of the ban list by looking for cards that will be a positive influence on the format. Maybe I'm just looking at this backwards and WotC has a decided bias towards 'no action' unless prompted otherwise.
What do you guys think, does this announcement signal a bias towards 'no action'? Something else? WotC can't possibly be unaware that Uxx is underrepresented, right? Or do they have stats that indicate it is not?
Really seems obvious to me that one of those should have been released.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
i don't think white is worse than u.. they are on the same level imho since splashing an island to play serum vision isn't exactly playing blue or splashing for path is playing white
even if not played, white has a lot of different competitive strategies at least
Haven't you heard ? If it's not tier 1 it's trash.
there are a lot of powerfull decks in tier 2 and tier 3 man
the one thing i personally hate the most is people saying exactly this. "play tier or don't play at all"
tier 3 decks were able to win gps, that's very far from being trash
What do you guys think, does this announcement signal a bias towards 'no action'? Something else? WotC can't possibly be unaware that Uxx is underrepresented, right? Or do they have stats that indicate it is not?
Yes, absolutely. I doubt they will do anything unless the format gets actively worse. I'm not sure they care about color imbalance, regardless of what they say.
On top of that, I very much doubt they spend much time talking about modern with the current state of standard. We already know they don't test much for the format, and the current crisis just encourages the lack of effort put into modern as a format. Which is fine, modern masters 2017 will keep the format thriving for another year.
i don't think white is worse than u.. they are on the same level imho since splashing an island to play serum vision isn't exactly playing blue or splashing for path is playing white
even if not played, white has a lot of different competitive strategies at least
Haven't you heard ? If it's not tier 1 it's trash.
there are a lot of powerfull decks in tier 2 and tier 3 man
the one thing i personally hate the most is people saying exactly this. "play tier or don't play at all"
tier 3 decks were able to win gps, that's very far from being trash
But Tier 3 decks are harder to win with and require more effort and practice, so supposedly they dont count.
I think Wizards can be aware that Blue is underrepresented in Modern and also think that JtMS does not need to be unbanned. Unbanning a card just to make a part of the community happy again seems like a lazy way to deal with the problem of Blue and, in fact, would indicate more lack of care for the format on the part of WotC than if they actually put time and effort into fixing the problem by printing new cards to help the color.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
FREE MODERN. Break the Standard link.
I play Magic: the Gathering, not Magic: the Commandering.
WOTC had decided that Counterspell is bad for the game long before Modern was a thing. Which is a good thing -- you know how Modern was widely considered a "bolt format" to the extent that most top decks are pidgeonholed into red? Counterspell Standard/Extended were like this, except ten times worse.
For the benefit of post year 2000 players, I do not agree with the bolded part. I played during Counterspell Standard and Extended and there were plenty of non-blue decks. It does matter which Standard you think back to however. If you're remembering Urza's block, blue decks were some of the strongest but it wasn't Counterspell's doing. It was because cards like Mind Over Matter and Tolarian Academy are broken beyond belief.
Think back to Onslaught standard for example. This format was much healthier and included Counterspell. There were many non-blue strategies that were dominant, many archetypes represented and gameplay varied from game to game very well.
My memory of Counterspell in Standard and Extended is that it was merely a fine answer to any kind of threat as a reactive control deck, which helps you exist because otherwise it's hard to deal with a multitude of card types. It isn't free either. You have to hold double blue up and if something resolves while your shields are down, you risk drawing into reactive countermagic instead of hard answers. Counterspell wasn't so strong that it was play it or bust.
The real reason Counterspell is not in Modern is because 8th edition was chosen as the starting point and WotC's current design philosophy for Standard makes Counterspell look like a piece of Power. The formats Counterspell was legal in were more powerful than the new-player friendly Standards of today so Counterspell merely became an answer card alongside the likes of Terror, Wrath of God and Smother.
Ok, so maybe I went a little overboard For full disclosure, I started playing competitively around the Odyssey/Onslaught standard, so I can't testify for the meta prior to that. But I beg to disagree about the opressiveness of Counterspell.
One thing you didn't mention is that the power level (even in Extended, IIRC) was completely different. The premier direct damage spell was Shock and the premier black discard spells were Duress and Cabal Therapy. Aggro and aggro-control strategies were thus severely less viable than they are in today's Modern. Also, there were no dual lands, so branching into 2 colors was somewhat challenging, and adding a third practically prohibitive.
The top decks were Tog, Astral Slide, and Wake -- notably, a counterspell deck and two decks that exploit mechanics to work around it. My recollection is that Tog was the deck to beat for a lot of the time that it was legal; perhaps I'm wrong in my assessment, but I'm pretty certain Counterspell was at least responsible for the fact there was close to zero combo in the format.
There is also a possibility that upcoming cards in Amonkhet could help improve the format in ways that aren't as risky as unbanning cards. Hopefully we see some more cards in the vein of fatal push.
If history is to be any guide, "eternal" formats are almost always color imbalanced; this has not stopped people from playing them or enjoying them. Hell, it's kinda cool to have a format with such a large card pool as modern and for blue to not be king of the colors; it's new, it's unique, it's different. If wizards is judging modern like they used to judge legacy, so long as people are playing different decks and enjoying themselves, it's fine even if a color or two are basically garbage. It's a sort of feature of older formats, where old powerful cards in one or two colors get to define the format.
To a certain degree, it kinda bothers me that people expect their play-style to be tier one in this format. Tier 2 includes almost every archetype (if not every archetype); that's pretty damn good, historically speaking. That kind of representation is extremely rare, and really lends to a "play what you want" diversity that people seem to want. Tier 1 is always going to disappoint someone.
But Tier 3 decks are harder to win with and require more effort and practice, so supposedly they dont count.
The vast majority of Tier 3 decks "are harder to win with and require more effort and practice" because they are weak, poorly-positioned, or just bad. This means their matchup distribution even with a flawless pilot is just less favorable than the matchup distribution of a stronger, better-positioned, or outright better deck. There are definitely some Tier 3 and lower decks that are secretly better than their tiering indicates, but they are rare exceptions.
Wizards made two unbans to help an archetype directly, plus a ban to open up the archetype (among other objectives). A year later, the archetype is still bad. That's a problem.
One thing, that perhaps WotC has a better handle on, is that we still don't have a great metric for measuring, in isolation (edit: from popularity), a deck's strength.
If WotC has access to win rates on MTGO, is it possible that they have data that shows that blue is okay as far as winrate is concerned (either overall, or for skilled pilots), but underrepresented for other reasons (players' deck choice, deck hard to reach skill ceilling, etc)?
We all continue to admit that we lack data to separate out a deck's power from its popularity, but always leave that out of our collective and individual analyses. Maybe Uxx is actually fine, and the limits of our data just give a muted impression of how good the decks are?
One thing, that perhaps WotC has a better handle on, is that we still don't have a great metric for measuring, in isolation, a deck's strength.
There is no such thing as "deck strength in isolation". Cards and decks are only strong relative to other cards.
Sorry if I was unclear - I was meaning strength isolated from popularity (as the rest of my post goes on to explain). The data that is used to determine tiering combines a deck's abstract (yet contextual) strength and the number of players playing the deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern Decks
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
I think Wizards can be aware that Blue is underrepresented in Modern and also think that JtMS does not need to be unbanned. Unbanning a card just to make a part of the community happy again seems like a lazy way to deal with the problem of Blue and, in fact, would indicate more lack of care for the format on the part of WotC than if they actually put time and effort into fixing the problem by printing new cards to help the color.
The issue here is that they clearly don't see a problem to fix. They could've worded this announcement many ways but the way they went with shows no indication that they see any issues that need to be worked out or any balancing that needs to be done. Before this announcement I was under the assumption we would be getting jace and sfm sometime in the next year but now I'd be shocked if they unban anything in the next year.
At least they managed to save some face of stability in the format by not banning anything but that doesn't indicate a healthy meta. I can't help but look at this announcement as anything other than "well standard is screwed no matter what we do, so we may as well try to show some stability by not doing back to back bannings. Now since standard is already screwed, we really better not unban anything in modern that would cause a mass migration from our terrible standard to the less bad but still far from balanced modern."
I mean, honestly what else could they have done? Banning felidar guardian when vehicles is the best deck is dumb, but allowing a turn 4 I win combo keeps a lot of other combos and interactions out of the format. So you ban heart of Kiran, but then constrictor is everywhere. There really isn't a solution to their standard problem so they basically just had to keep going with what they have. Once that decision is made they pretty much can't unban anything in modern because it would make modern less solved than standard which they absolutely can't have.
And again, blue isn't played less because it is hard. Tier 3 decks can, and do win big tournaments. they do require more effort and practice to do well with because they are worse decks in general and punish mistakes much more than the tier 1 decks. A tier 3 deck winning a tournament doesn't prove anything. This whole "blue players are bad and should just learn to play their deck better" is one of the most illogical, selfish, disingenuous arguments I've seen on this site.
One thing, that perhaps WotC has a better handle on, is that we still don't have a great metric for measuring, in isolation, a deck's strength.
There is no such thing as "deck strength in isolation". Cards and decks are only strong relative to other cards.
Sorry if I was unclear - I was meaning strength isolated from popularity (as the rest of my post goes on to explain). The data that is used to determine tiering combines a deck's abstract (yet contextual) strength and the number of players playing the deck.
Still not sure how much sense this makes. Seismic Swans spiked a TCG States, and I'm pretty sure this makes it 100% in Comp Rel for the country. This doesn't make it a powerful deck, abstractly or otherwise.
The lack of blue reactive strategies isn't the worst thing in the world. As interesting as a Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Stoneforge Mystic, or another unban to help out Blue Control would've been, it was hardly necessary for the health of Modern. I'm glad WotC decided to keep their head on their shoulders and ban no cards out of any format.
while it is true modern is better than last year for example, it has a lot of problems that should be solved and this line basically ways wotc doesn't care at all about modern
URW PillowFort Stasis (costruction)
modern:
U Taking Turns combo
pauper:
UB Servitor Control
xenob8 : you know you are going to have a bad time when opponent starts with snow covered island
This is ridiculous, it's like saying drug rehabilitation programs work because 95% of people who are arrested for possession charges choose to go to that instead of jail. Legacy is dying due to the reserved list, and standard is as big of a mess as It has been in years. If modern being the default best format is good enough for you then I'm happy for you but I know a format can be highly played and still not perfect. Again, it's not even the decision I disagree with, it's their stubborn insistence that everything is fine that I see as the problem.
Also, the idea that blue is hard to use and that is why no one plays it is so incredibly stupid. Blue reactive strategies are not played because they don't have good enough answers to keep up with all the linear decks running around.
Why's everyone playing the same 3 decks? Because there's no incentive to test if there's no stability, just play what we know is good and evolve it.
There're plenty of powerful cards in standard. We've already seen release the gremlins mauling the vehicles decks and more than likely we'll see some plansewalker hosers in Amonkhet that rein Gideon in a bit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am fine with the current measured approach to the modern bans. I do think Stoneforge will eventually see the light of day, and probably before Jace or Preordain, because as I've discussed white is much worse than blue in modern, and blue is already bad.
White has nothing going for it except a pile of sideboard cards, path, and Thalia -- and the latter goes in a very specific type of deck that has issues in modern (both because spell based combos are not great and there's so much removal for her).
Note: It is very telling that in a recent article on modern, one of the best white cards listed is Lingering souls
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
The only "real" complaint I see right now is that blue is "dead". And that isnt an issue WotC is going to prioritize. Especially with the stigma that color has. And considering most metrics look good for Modern, there is no need to rock the boat. If DSx become some sort of unbeatable Goliath, then we might see a ban in April. But I think the deck is perfectly controllable.
Honestly, the only complaing I hear about blue is on MTG Salvation. I play a lot, locally, and online. No one is complaining.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
i don't think white is worse than u.. they are on the same level imho since splashing an island to play serum vision isn't exactly playing blue or splashing for path is playing white
even if not played, white has a lot of different competitive strategies at least
URW PillowFort Stasis (costruction)
modern:
U Taking Turns combo
pauper:
UB Servitor Control
xenob8 : you know you are going to have a bad time when opponent starts with snow covered island
I think it is exactly why blue decks don't get played enough. And there are viable blue strategies out there that thrive on linear decks. Just an FYI.
As for you not finding a home in any sanctioned format. Im not sure what to tell you. WotC can't please everyone. Maybe casual is what you need until competitive seems more attractive to you, again.
Again, the numbers are not on your side. Once we see huge dips in Modern attendance, come back to me and rub it in my face. Please.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
What I think will happen is a January unban of Jace and sfm, followed by a spring masters (probably not modern masters, maybe another eternal masters) product headlined by those two cards. They will have had close to a year to plan it out, and it will sell a ton of product.
Haven't you heard ? If it's not tier 1 it's trash.
Yes, one of the Mods here stated that yesterday, in effect. There are currently 25 decks listed on this website as Tier 1/2. The definition of Tier 2 is "Established decks with tournament results". I would think the "good" decks extend at least into Tier 2.
I play Magic: the Gathering, not Magic: the Commandering.
I'm surprised one of those 3 were not unbanned.
I guess ? Ad naus ? and ? gifts storm ? being decks makes WotC feel that Preordain is risky?
I guess ? Abzan ? and ? Bant Eldazi ? being decks makes WotC feel that Stoneforge Mystic is risky?
I guess ? Grixis control ? and ? UW control ? being decks makes Wotc feel that Jace, the mind sculptor is risky?
I'm working under the presumption that WotC wants to reduce the size of the ban list by looking for cards that will be a positive influence on the format. Maybe I'm just looking at this backwards and WotC has a decided bias towards 'no action' unless prompted otherwise.
What do you guys think, does this announcement signal a bias towards 'no action'? Something else? WotC can't possibly be unaware that Uxx is underrepresented, right? Or do they have stats that indicate it is not?
Really seems obvious to me that one of those should have been released.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
there are a lot of powerfull decks in tier 2 and tier 3 man
the one thing i personally hate the most is people saying exactly this. "play tier or don't play at all"
tier 3 decks were able to win gps, that's very far from being trash
URW PillowFort Stasis (costruction)
modern:
U Taking Turns combo
pauper:
UB Servitor Control
xenob8 : you know you are going to have a bad time when opponent starts with snow covered island
Yes, absolutely. I doubt they will do anything unless the format gets actively worse. I'm not sure they care about color imbalance, regardless of what they say.
On top of that, I very much doubt they spend much time talking about modern with the current state of standard. We already know they don't test much for the format, and the current crisis just encourages the lack of effort put into modern as a format. Which is fine, modern masters 2017 will keep the format thriving for another year.
But Tier 3 decks are harder to win with and require more effort and practice, so supposedly they dont count.
RUG Temur Deprive Delver
BUG Sultai Deprive Delver
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I play Magic: the Gathering, not Magic: the Commandering.
Ok, so maybe I went a little overboard For full disclosure, I started playing competitively around the Odyssey/Onslaught standard, so I can't testify for the meta prior to that. But I beg to disagree about the opressiveness of Counterspell.
One thing you didn't mention is that the power level (even in Extended, IIRC) was completely different. The premier direct damage spell was Shock and the premier black discard spells were Duress and Cabal Therapy. Aggro and aggro-control strategies were thus severely less viable than they are in today's Modern. Also, there were no dual lands, so branching into 2 colors was somewhat challenging, and adding a third practically prohibitive.
The top decks were Tog, Astral Slide, and Wake -- notably, a counterspell deck and two decks that exploit mechanics to work around it. My recollection is that Tog was the deck to beat for a lot of the time that it was legal; perhaps I'm wrong in my assessment, but I'm pretty certain Counterspell was at least responsible for the fact there was close to zero combo in the format.
To a certain degree, it kinda bothers me that people expect their play-style to be tier one in this format. Tier 2 includes almost every archetype (if not every archetype); that's pretty damn good, historically speaking. That kind of representation is extremely rare, and really lends to a "play what you want" diversity that people seem to want. Tier 1 is always going to disappoint someone.
The vast majority of Tier 3 decks "are harder to win with and require more effort and practice" because they are weak, poorly-positioned, or just bad. This means their matchup distribution even with a flawless pilot is just less favorable than the matchup distribution of a stronger, better-positioned, or outright better deck. There are definitely some Tier 3 and lower decks that are secretly better than their tiering indicates, but they are rare exceptions.
Wizards made two unbans to help an archetype directly, plus a ban to open up the archetype (among other objectives). A year later, the archetype is still bad. That's a problem.
If WotC has access to win rates on MTGO, is it possible that they have data that shows that blue is okay as far as winrate is concerned (either overall, or for skilled pilots), but underrepresented for other reasons (players' deck choice, deck hard to reach skill ceilling, etc)?
We all continue to admit that we lack data to separate out a deck's power from its popularity, but always leave that out of our collective and individual analyses. Maybe Uxx is actually fine, and the limits of our data just give a muted impression of how good the decks are?
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
There is no such thing as "deck strength in isolation". Cards and decks are only strong relative to other cards.
KnightfallGWUR
Azorius Control UW
Burn RBG
The issue here is that they clearly don't see a problem to fix. They could've worded this announcement many ways but the way they went with shows no indication that they see any issues that need to be worked out or any balancing that needs to be done. Before this announcement I was under the assumption we would be getting jace and sfm sometime in the next year but now I'd be shocked if they unban anything in the next year.
At least they managed to save some face of stability in the format by not banning anything but that doesn't indicate a healthy meta. I can't help but look at this announcement as anything other than "well standard is screwed no matter what we do, so we may as well try to show some stability by not doing back to back bannings. Now since standard is already screwed, we really better not unban anything in modern that would cause a mass migration from our terrible standard to the less bad but still far from balanced modern."
I mean, honestly what else could they have done? Banning felidar guardian when vehicles is the best deck is dumb, but allowing a turn 4 I win combo keeps a lot of other combos and interactions out of the format. So you ban heart of Kiran, but then constrictor is everywhere. There really isn't a solution to their standard problem so they basically just had to keep going with what they have. Once that decision is made they pretty much can't unban anything in modern because it would make modern less solved than standard which they absolutely can't have.
And again, blue isn't played less because it is hard. Tier 3 decks can, and do win big tournaments. they do require more effort and practice to do well with because they are worse decks in general and punish mistakes much more than the tier 1 decks. A tier 3 deck winning a tournament doesn't prove anything. This whole "blue players are bad and should just learn to play their deck better" is one of the most illogical, selfish, disingenuous arguments I've seen on this site.
Still not sure how much sense this makes. Seismic Swans spiked a TCG States, and I'm pretty sure this makes it 100% in Comp Rel for the country. This doesn't make it a powerful deck, abstractly or otherwise.
UBRGrixis DelverUBR
WGElvesWG