Hypothesis comes before experimentation, not theory. Theory is what happens when a hypothesis has been proven. And the tests by which a hypothesis must pass to become a theory are set up in such a way as to attempt to prove the hypothesis wrong. Stating an opinion and then justifying it with supporting hand-picked supporting arguments and data does not a theory make.
...by your standard a claim that skullclamp is safe to unban and a claim that sfm is safe to unban merit the same response in discussions.
EDIT: Yeah, pretty much. While one might get more agreement from the community, both are just opinions. One just might be more popular.
@LeoTzu, you may be correct, it is a high bar to set. The way I see it, if someone wants to have their opinion taken seriously, it might serve that they do more work than select specific examples to support their opinion. Anybody can state an opinion and then spin some small sample size or selective evidence to support it. Without doing any sort of real work to check our opinions for validity before spouting our opinions is only going to serve as a call for those who would have agreed with the opinion in the first place to do so, to have those who would disagree to do state their disagreements (often with just as valid arguments: i.e. - not), and convince those who are unable or unwilling to question what the truth actually is to pick a side. In other words, they don't bring us closer to truth, they just make for endless arguments loaded with bias and an unwillingness to work together to try and actually find what is true.
Hypothesis comes before experimentation, not theory. Theory is what happens when a hypothesis has been proven. And the tests by which a hypothesis must pass to become a theory are set up in such a way as to attempt to prove the hypothesis wrong. Stating an opinion and then justifying it with supporting hand-picked supporting arguments and data does not a theory make.
...by your standard a claim that skullclamp is safe to unban and a claim that sfm is safe to unban merit the same response in discussions.
EDIT: Yeah, pretty much. While one might get more agreement from the community, both are just opinions. One just might be more popular.
hypothesis is contained in the set of the theoretical, which is just the expression of abtract rational thinking. the distinction is irrelevant to my point though. you didnt explicitly claim that my example statements are the same, just implicity with your casual disdain for anything that isnt backed with testing.
you are right that people would be better served with testing, but that doesnt exclude the fact that claims dont necessarily need to be backed by it. we have seen extensive cases been made over the years for stoneforges 'safe'-ness, some being more fleshed out than others. to go further with extensive testing isnt worth the effort of hundreds of man hours to only end up with results that are suspect because they arent comprehensive enough; anything less would be discarded even faster. especially considering there has never been a case where wizards, the ultimate arbiters of such decisions, has ever acknowledged using third party research.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Ah, another B&R update, another round of twin's jaded exes.
Yeah, it's almost like there is no justifiable defense for it to remain banned, in addition to WOTC being oddly silent about the topic despite a categorical failure on all parts with regards to the original ban. Can't imagine why anyone would still be upset about that 3 years later.
Personal thoughts aside, Stoneforge is the more insulting card to remain banned. If someone on the B&R committee genuinely thinks this card is too good for Modern, then I greatly fear for the competency of the people making these decisions. If there's NOT some greater, ulterior motive to keep it banned, then their ability to understand even basic, surface level elements of the Modern format come worryingly into question.
I do, however, wish people would stop speaking with such certainty about banlist decisions. The reality is that all of us have opinions about the banlist, most of them based on intuition over any sort of conclusive evidence. I think that’s okay as long as we’re all willing to admit that our intuitions are subject to being wrong. My thoughts were certainly wrong about Jace, the Mind Sculptor when all the unbanning talk was happening.
Modern Nexus thought, with testing, Jace was too good.
I'm sorry, but the bar for quality testing and data is FAR higher than is reasonable to ask of any one group or team.
WIZARDS DOESN'T TEST IN MODERN.
That is stated fact. Given that, why is it at all reasonable when they hide data, to expect 5 friends to grind out 400 matches x 5 of the top decks, to get a reasonable data set?
The whole line of thought is insulting.
I've brought data to this thread, and it's been dismissed.
I've made accurate predictions and some inaccurate ones.
Over the year I have played literally hundreds of matches against the 'diversity' of Modern, but because I don't have a team testing, I'm not going to assume my results mean anything.
But because I've not followed the scientific method, and published a paper on how SFM would get laughed out of the room by every single good deck in the format I get to be dismissed?
yeah this would be an odd time in the year to make any changes outside of format breaking nonsense. all we can do now is eagerly await the announcement of the pro-tour formats which will hopefully happen next week. for all we know there wont even be a modern pro-tour at the beginning of the year.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
Creeping Chill already broke the format. Does anyone really think SFM would power a deck up the charts the way Creeping Chill put Dredge over the top?
Chill was just the final straw but to answer your question, no, in no way shape or form is SFM going to empower a deck like a literally free (within the context of the deck) 6-24 point life swing.
You could provide numbers, if you tested extensively. This is important for us to recognize because we can often understand a person's motives when we observe their methods. If someone wanted to know truth about whether something is safe to unban, they would take the steps to find that truth. If they wanted to just assume that their conjecture is reliable enough, that their opinion is valid without testing it for validity, they would feel safe in just finding supporting evidence rather than assembling some sort of test for it, to check their bias'.
@Melkor, Is that the same case for every card that came off the ban list, or are we being selective with our samples to justify the argument?
So, if all we have from people being upset is opinions and conjecture, then the work put into that opinion justifies no more than a response of, "Noted."
GGT is the only rare I didn't mention that has been unbanned since Masters sets started, and that was never a card with the price and demand to sell $10 packs. Every other card to be unbanned since those high end sets started was common or uncommon. I don't need to cherry pick when the majority of the available data points back me up.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
Neither side (unban SFM or don't unban SFM) has any evidence whatsoever. Nothing worth paying attention to, at any rate. There is nothing that anybody can point to when making either case.
I personally feel SFM should stay banned. But I can't back that up with any stats. I can only state my personal, subjective conclusion, based on my personal, subjective premises, and people can take it or leave it.
- Modern is a very open format where many decks and strategies can spike at any given time
- Metagame percentages are either due to a deck being broken or being "the flavor of the month"
- Magic players tend to gravitate toward the shiny new thing
- SFM being unbanned would be a shiny new thing
- Many people will want to try it out
- Many people trying it out will lead to a large metagame percentage at first
- If successful, that percentage will sustain and/or increase
- I believe Abzan goodstuff would be the best deck for SFM
- Jund goodstuff is currently bottom tier 1 or high tier 2
- Abzan goodstuff featuring SFM would run the best discard, kill spells, planeswalkers (other than Jace and Teferi), creatures (other than Snap), and Lingering Souls
- I believe Abzan goodstuff feat. SFM would be the grindiest deck in the format
My conclusion: A deck that grindy with that much potential for initial and sustained metagame percentage is unnecessary and the unban shouldn't happen.
You can attack any of those premises - they aren't solid facts or anything - but I believe they're all at the very least reasonable.
why would a grindy deck doing well be unnecessary? i cant say i agree with all of your premises, but even your conclusion seems like a favorable outcome (to me anyways). the format could do worse than having more reactive/interactive decks rise to the top instead of...whatever the hell is going on now.
to me there are only two cases where SFM making abzan good might not be preferable. 1)its good enough to where it simply dominates (unlikely) or 2)it becomes the defacto best bgx deck, meaning bg rock and jund disappear (also unlikely).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: UWGSnow-Bant Control BURGrixis Death's Shadow GWBCoCo Elves WCDeath and Taxes (sold)
why would a grindy deck doing well be unnecessary? i cant say i agree with all of your premises, but even your conclusion seems like a favorable outcome (to me anyways). the format could do worse than having more reactive/interactive decks rise to the top instead of...whatever the hell is going on now.
to me there are only two cases where SFM making abzan good might not be preferable. 1)its good enough to where it simply dominates (unlikely) or 2)it becomes the defacto best bgx deck, meaning bg rock and jund disappear (also unlikely).
Sorry, I probably undersold that a bit too much. I mean that I believe it has a high possibility of becoming too large a meta percentage requiring another ban.
Neither side (unban SFM or don't unban SFM) has any evidence whatsoever. Nothing worth paying attention to, at any rate. There is nothing that anybody can point to when making either case.
I personally feel SFM should stay banned. But I can't back that up with any stats. I can only state my personal, subjective conclusion, based on my personal, subjective premises, and people can take it or leave it.
- Modern is a very open format where many decks and strategies can spike at any given time
- Metagame percentages are either due to a deck being broken or being "the flavor of the month"
- Magic players tend to gravitate toward the shiny new thing
- SFM being unbanned would be a shiny new thing
- Many people will want to try it out
- Many people trying it out will lead to a large metagame percentage at first
- If successful, that percentage will sustain and/or increase
- I believe Abzan goodstuff would be the best deck for SFM
- Jund goodstuff is currently bottom tier 1 or high tier 2
- Abzan goodstuff featuring SFM would run the best discard, kill spells, planeswalkers (other than Jace and Teferi), creatures (other than Snap), and Lingering Souls
- I believe Abzan goodstuff feat. SFM would be the grindiest deck in the format
My conclusion: A deck that grindy with that much potential for initial and sustained metagame percentage is unnecessary and the unban shouldn't happen.
You can attack any of those premises - they aren't solid facts or anything - but I believe they're all at the very least reasonable.
Nobody had any proof of any of the other cards (Ancestral Vision, Sword of the Meek, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Bloodbraid Elf) were all right to unban either. I thought and thought for days, thinking how someone could possibly believe that Sword of the Meek should stay banned. Then I saw Wizard's rationale that "it would help Lantern Control too much." That's when I knew it would happen, lol. Some things have to be taken on faith. Unless someone has many, many man-hours to test stuff in Modern that is banned, it will remain like this. But it can happen. People right now play a format called "Pre-Modern" and spend hours doing that. So I'm sure there will be someone somewhere that analyzes current banned cards in Modern. Do you honestly think that Stoneforge Mystic will push Midrange any more than Creeping Chill pushed Dredge? I'm sorry. I just can't buy that.
And I'm not sure where you see these Jund or Junk players. I am SO jealous when I see people talk about Jund/Junk players, especially if they are talking at Comp REL. I would die to play against those decks and I play, well...Cragganwick Cremator. That's how bad Midrange has become. Don't take me as being biased toward Midrange. I absolutely freaking hate Midrange. (sounds like Pascal Maynard, right?) But I can also understand its importance in the metagame. (Similarly, when my meta became devoid of Tron, Jeskai play doubled. I am definitely on the "hater side" of Tron, but I learned the importance that very day.)
You're more likely to see 5 Humans and 5 Dredge decks at a 15 round GP with no Byes than to see Jund or Junk once in 15 rounds.
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)
No changes is not surprising, but I wish they would write articles discussing the health of each of the formats like they used to do.
Also, whatever happened to unbans in legacy? I am sure there are plenty more that could happen, but they never seem to do these anymore either. Mind Twist, Mind's Desire, Frantic Search, and Earthcraft can all easily be unbanned. The last unban for legacy was Black Vise...and that was 3 years ago!
I didn't mean that as in "Jund is too strong to release a card that fits its same strategy." I just meant that Abzan featuring SFM would be picked up by a large number of players.
I firmly believe that when it comes to Modern, prevalence and powerlevel are close to synonymous. If a deck is picked up by a large number, it's going to place. The more it places the more it gets picked up. A card as popular and powerful as SFM has a strong possibility of creating that cycle.
Oh, it definitely will place. Players want to try new toys...or I should say that even good players like to try new toys. But placing isn't the end of the world. Sure, SfM may spike a bit more, but that is irrelevant. Overall, the power level of Stoneforge Mystic is okay for Modern. It certainly won't place as often as decks that got banned have. That's what we need to look at.
I mean, decks with Jace, the Mind Sculptor placed, as well as Bloodbraid Elf. When Andrew Wolbers won the GP with Ponza, nobody cried for the banning of Bloodbraid Elf. It is in fact a GOOD thing when a card that is unbanned has at least a little bit of results with it.
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)
Hypothesis comes before experimentation, not theory. Theory is what happens when a hypothesis has been proven. And the tests by which a hypothesis must pass to become a theory are set up in such a way as to attempt to prove the hypothesis wrong. Stating an opinion and then justifying it with supporting hand-picked supporting arguments and data does not a theory make.
...by your standard a claim that skullclamp is safe to unban and a claim that sfm is safe to unban merit the same response in discussions.
EDIT: Yeah, pretty much. While one might get more agreement from the community, both are just opinions. One just might be more popular.
@LeoTzu, you may be correct, it is a high bar to set. The way I see it, if someone wants to have their opinion taken seriously, it might serve that they do more work than select specific examples to support their opinion. Anybody can state an opinion and then spin some small sample size or selective evidence to support it. Without doing any sort of real work to check our opinions for validity before spouting our opinions is only going to serve as a call for those who would have agreed with the opinion in the first place to do so, to have those who would disagree to do state their disagreements (often with just as valid arguments: i.e. - not), and convince those who are unable or unwilling to question what the truth actually is to pick a side. In other words, they don't bring us closer to truth, they just make for endless arguments loaded with bias and an unwillingness to work together to try and actually find what is true.
I am always a proponent for additional evidence and testing. That said, this actually does not seem to align with the unbanning process as we best understand it. I wrote a post on this a while ago after Stoddard did an AMA. GK actually has quoted this post recently and I am continually impressed with his ability to find these old posts when I seem to lose all of them. Maybe he can cite it again. In summary, Stoddard gave some insight into the unbanning process back in 2016. BatHickey asked how R&D concluded that AV and Sword were safe to unban. Here was Stoddard's reply:
Well, we weren't 100% sure. If we were, they would've come off a long time ago. The rest of the format gets stronger over time, and more and more cards can become okay to take off. We looked at the format, and saw how much control decks were struggled. We played some games on Magic Online with lists that we thought were good representations of those decks, just to make sure they weren't obviously over the line. In the end, we used our intuition, and decided to make a calculated risk. If you aren't doing anything that scares you a bit, you probably aren't taking enough risks.
He might have included other quotes about this topic, and I don't remember my original interpretation of the quote. From what I see here, however, some takeaways:
1. Unbans do not need to be 100% safe.
2. Unban testing involves some MTGO games with unrefined lists.
3. Unban assessment involves a general evaluation of what is doing well/struggling in the format.
4. Unbans involve intuition.
5. Unbans are "calculated risks."
Based on that, the bar is a lot lower than people make it out to be. SFM, a popular unban candidate, almost certainly meets this bar just from a cursory examination of online opinion. Even Twin could meet this test. Overall, we need to remember this standard of evidence when making arguments. It's not as high as many make it out to be.
1. Unbans do not need to be 100% safe.
2. Unban testing involves some MTGO games with unrefined lists.
3. Unban assessment involves a general evaluation of what is doing well/struggling in the format.
4. Unbans involve intuition.
5. Unbans are "calculated risks."
Based on that, the bar is a lot lower than people make it out to be. SFM, a popular unban candidate, almost certainly meets this bar just from a cursory examination of online opinion. Even Twin could meet this test. Overall, we need to remember this standard of evidence when making arguments. It's not as high as many make it out to be.
Thank you. This is how I see it 100%. I even agree with Twin, even if it's not necessarily a personal choice.
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)
Note though, that WotC's intuition might not match that of players. Their intuition might say they can't unban stoneforge mystic, not because of it being fine or not in the current format, but because they don't want to have to ban it again if they ever print some otherwise fine equipment cards that break it. Like, say, something with a huge CMC, but really low or free equip cost, or super strong ETB effect, that is powerful enough to justify that huge CMC. Currently living weapon is the biggest issue of that sort, and none of the cards involved seem strong enough to break SFM in the current format, but WoTC might see a card like that as a highly likely possible print they just haven't had work out in recent Stardard formats yet, and that it might be planned for printing as soon as they get the chance, and they don't want to unban stoneforge, have a bunch of people buy them, and then get upset when they have to ban it not long afterwards due to printing something that breaks it.
Twin might have similar problems if they are considering printing something similar to, but stronger than, Deceiver Exarch as a highly possible new card, such as a similar sort of thing with less toughness but that has hexproof, or a variant on involved themes with 2 power as a tempo critter that might push any possible twin decks over the edge due to making them even better when the combo doesn't go off but they win with tempo beats while slowing down opponents by threatening the combo.
Of course, this idea only applies if they really think they are going to print one of such types of cards 'soon', such as having one designed and somewhat tested somewhere in their design folders that is waiting for the right upcoming standard and/or limited that has space for it.
Twin might have similar problems if they are considering printing something similar to, but stronger than, Deceiver Exarch as a highly possible new card
Why is this remotely an issue when they can't even seem to go a Standard cycle without breaking Dredge multiple times? Clearly, breaking decks with new cards is not a concern whatsoever.
Twin might have similar problems if they are considering printing something similar to, but stronger than, Deceiver Exarch as a highly possible new card
Why is this remotely an issue when they can't even seem to go a Standard cycle without breaking Dredge multiple times? Clearly, breaking decks with new cards is not a concern whatsoever.
You know what, it's pointless. This thread is infuriating.
'what if a better bad blue creature is released!'
I'm ****in done. Do you folks HONESTLY play this format?
Hollow One
Tron
G Affinity
Any number of Divas Phoenix decks (and Kiln and Swiftspear and Thing...)
Humans
Dredge
Burn
Storm
KCI
Infect
I could go on and on, but all the above could simple have you dead on Turn 3, or close enough, and I'm supposed to worry if we get Pestermite v3 or some mythical equipment that doesn't exist?
Nah. I'm sick of the apologists for Wizards gross incompetence and clear ignorance of the format.
You don't want to have to respect Twin? It's just too unfun for your poor goldfish deck? Fine I guess. At least that is understandable, even if I have to play against a litany of lame decks, whatever.
SFM though? I wouldn't even play it. I'm done spending money on this garbage, but there is no meaningful presence of a fair grinding deck, and if SFM, like Jace, like AV is 'too good' while I sit across 2 or 3 turn 1 Hollow Ones?
Then people need to look at the top end of this format because that cards dead when it hits the table.
IT has started getting funny how some people take the B&R announcements so personally. I mean, every announcement we see people making grand statements about how Wizard's sucks and how they will stop play the format and how is it possible to keep playing this trash format, and here we are now, still playing and the same people discussing the same things with the same reactions.
I mean literally EVERY year, for the most part we get no changes. We never get a ton of bans/unbans a year. Maybe once or twice but that's that. If anything no changes should be expected by now.
People being infuriated because they think they "proved" that SFM needs to be unbanned is, at this point, borderline ridiculous. Is SFM going to be fine? Yeah, probably. Is Wizards under some form of obligation to unban it? Nop, no they are not.
So either play the format or don't. What every B&R is, is a change of rules basically. And we can't have rule changes too often because then it becomes impossible to play. Either accept the rules and play it or don't play. You can argue about health etc, but thinking you are entitled to unbans is, at the very least, weird.
I'm ****in done. Do you folks HONESTLY play this format?
Hollow One
Tron
G Affinity
Any number of Divas Phoenix decks (and Kiln and Swiftspear and Thing...)
Humans
Dredge
Burn
Storm
KCI
Infect
I could go on and on, but all the above could simple have you dead on Turn 3, or close enough, and I'm supposed to worry if we get Pestermite v3 or some mythical equipment that doesn't exist?
FNM is still good for chilling out at the lgs on fridays and sometimes also on sundays. The only one among those decks that I fear is KCI, because don't understand how their combo works.. thankfully no KCI player here. Hollow One is becoming a little easier with practice, I use 2 Ancient Grudge now, so it can still kill HO even if discarded at random. As for the other decks, just have to accept the fact that modern is a really fast format right now.
I could go on and on, but all the above could simple have you dead on Turn 3, or close enough, and I'm supposed to worry if we get Pestermite v3 or some mythical equipment that doesn't exist?
Nah. I'm sick of the apologists for Wizards gross incompetence and clear ignorance of the format.I could go on and on, but all the above could simple have you dead on Turn 3, or close enough, and I'm supposed to worry if we get Pestermite v3 or some mythical equipment that doesn't exist?
Nah. I'm sick of the apologists for Wizards gross incompetence and clear ignorance of the format.
Life goes on for modern players. Since no ban / unban of anything. WoTC probably thinks everything is currently fine. Maybe some things will change next year as cards from newer sets enter the format.
I firmly believe that when it comes to Modern, prevalence and powerlevel are close to synonymous. If a deck is picked up by a large number, it's going to place. The more it places the more it gets picked up. A card as popular and powerful as SFM has a strong possibility of creating that cycle.
It's not so cut and dry. We've already seen this in action when Jace and BBE got unbanned. Huge uptick of Jund and UWx for a week or two and then results proved they were average at best and could barely keep up with the best decks of the pre-unban meta. Bearing in mind that right now Jund is still above-average at best even with Assassin's Trophy and UWx was made relevant by Teferi+Jace+Field of Ruin and not Jace.
We used to be able to define the correlation of prevalence and power level with day 1-day 2-top X conversion rates. I don't think WOTC releases those numbers anymore.
I think 5C Humans is a decent example. We know the deck is very popular and is one of Modern's Tier 1 but it's day 2 to top 8 conversion rates haven't been that great when taking into account how much it's played.
TBF I don't have any hard numbers but I'm sure the stats people around here will correct me if I'm wrong.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
EDIT: Yeah, pretty much. While one might get more agreement from the community, both are just opinions. One just might be more popular.
@LeoTzu, you may be correct, it is a high bar to set. The way I see it, if someone wants to have their opinion taken seriously, it might serve that they do more work than select specific examples to support their opinion. Anybody can state an opinion and then spin some small sample size or selective evidence to support it. Without doing any sort of real work to check our opinions for validity before spouting our opinions is only going to serve as a call for those who would have agreed with the opinion in the first place to do so, to have those who would disagree to do state their disagreements (often with just as valid arguments: i.e. - not), and convince those who are unable or unwilling to question what the truth actually is to pick a side. In other words, they don't bring us closer to truth, they just make for endless arguments loaded with bias and an unwillingness to work together to try and actually find what is true.
Lantern Control
(with videos)
Uc Tron
Netdecking explained
Netdecking explained, Part 2
On speculators and counterfeits
On Interaction
Every single competitive deck in existence is designed to limit the opponent's ability to interact in a meaningful way.
Record number of exclamation points on SCG homepage: 71 (6 January, 2018)
"I don't want to believe, I want to know."
-Carl Sagan
hypothesis is contained in the set of the theoretical, which is just the expression of abtract rational thinking. the distinction is irrelevant to my point though. you didnt explicitly claim that my example statements are the same, just implicity with your casual disdain for anything that isnt backed with testing.
you are right that people would be better served with testing, but that doesnt exclude the fact that claims dont necessarily need to be backed by it. we have seen extensive cases been made over the years for stoneforges 'safe'-ness, some being more fleshed out than others. to go further with extensive testing isnt worth the effort of hundreds of man hours to only end up with results that are suspect because they arent comprehensive enough; anything less would be discarded even faster. especially considering there has never been a case where wizards, the ultimate arbiters of such decisions, has ever acknowledged using third party research.
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Personal thoughts aside, Stoneforge is the more insulting card to remain banned. If someone on the B&R committee genuinely thinks this card is too good for Modern, then I greatly fear for the competency of the people making these decisions. If there's NOT some greater, ulterior motive to keep it banned, then their ability to understand even basic, surface level elements of the Modern format come worryingly into question.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Modern Nexus thought, with testing, Jace was too good.
I'm sorry, but the bar for quality testing and data is FAR higher than is reasonable to ask of any one group or team.
WIZARDS DOESN'T TEST IN MODERN.
That is stated fact. Given that, why is it at all reasonable when they hide data, to expect 5 friends to grind out 400 matches x 5 of the top decks, to get a reasonable data set?
The whole line of thought is insulting.
I've brought data to this thread, and it's been dismissed.
I've made accurate predictions and some inaccurate ones.
Over the year I have played literally hundreds of matches against the 'diversity' of Modern, but because I don't have a team testing, I'm not going to assume my results mean anything.
But because I've not followed the scientific method, and published a paper on how SFM would get laughed out of the room by every single good deck in the format I get to be dismissed?
'Noted'
Spirits
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)Chill was just the final straw but to answer your question, no, in no way shape or form is SFM going to empower a deck like a literally free (within the context of the deck) 6-24 point life swing.
Spirits
GGT is the only rare I didn't mention that has been unbanned since Masters sets started, and that was never a card with the price and demand to sell $10 packs. Every other card to be unbanned since those high end sets started was common or uncommon. I don't need to cherry pick when the majority of the available data points back me up.
I personally feel SFM should stay banned. But I can't back that up with any stats. I can only state my personal, subjective conclusion, based on my personal, subjective premises, and people can take it or leave it.
- Modern is a very open format where many decks and strategies can spike at any given time
- Metagame percentages are either due to a deck being broken or being "the flavor of the month"
- Magic players tend to gravitate toward the shiny new thing
- SFM being unbanned would be a shiny new thing
- Many people will want to try it out
- Many people trying it out will lead to a large metagame percentage at first
- If successful, that percentage will sustain and/or increase
- I believe Abzan goodstuff would be the best deck for SFM
- Jund goodstuff is currently bottom tier 1 or high tier 2
- Abzan goodstuff featuring SFM would run the best discard, kill spells, planeswalkers (other than Jace and Teferi), creatures (other than Snap), and Lingering Souls
- I believe Abzan goodstuff feat. SFM would be the grindiest deck in the format
My conclusion: A deck that grindy with that much potential for initial and sustained metagame percentage is unnecessary and the unban shouldn't happen.
You can attack any of those premises - they aren't solid facts or anything - but I believe they're all at the very least reasonable.
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
to me there are only two cases where SFM making abzan good might not be preferable. 1)its good enough to where it simply dominates (unlikely) or 2)it becomes the defacto best bgx deck, meaning bg rock and jund disappear (also unlikely).
UWGSnow-Bant Control
BURGrixis Death's Shadow
GWBCoCo Elves
WCDeath and Taxes(sold)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
Nobody had any proof of any of the other cards (Ancestral Vision, Sword of the Meek, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Bloodbraid Elf) were all right to unban either. I thought and thought for days, thinking how someone could possibly believe that Sword of the Meek should stay banned. Then I saw Wizard's rationale that "it would help Lantern Control too much." That's when I knew it would happen, lol. Some things have to be taken on faith. Unless someone has many, many man-hours to test stuff in Modern that is banned, it will remain like this. But it can happen. People right now play a format called "Pre-Modern" and spend hours doing that. So I'm sure there will be someone somewhere that analyzes current banned cards in Modern. Do you honestly think that Stoneforge Mystic will push Midrange any more than Creeping Chill pushed Dredge? I'm sorry. I just can't buy that.
And I'm not sure where you see these Jund or Junk players. I am SO jealous when I see people talk about Jund/Junk players, especially if they are talking at Comp REL. I would die to play against those decks and I play, well...Cragganwick Cremator. That's how bad Midrange has become. Don't take me as being biased toward Midrange. I absolutely freaking hate Midrange. (sounds like Pascal Maynard, right?) But I can also understand its importance in the metagame. (Similarly, when my meta became devoid of Tron, Jeskai play doubled. I am definitely on the "hater side" of Tron, but I learned the importance that very day.)
You're more likely to see 5 Humans and 5 Dredge decks at a 15 round GP with no Byes than to see Jund or Junk once in 15 rounds.
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)Also, whatever happened to unbans in legacy? I am sure there are plenty more that could happen, but they never seem to do these anymore either. Mind Twist, Mind's Desire, Frantic Search, and Earthcraft can all easily be unbanned. The last unban for legacy was Black Vise...and that was 3 years ago!
I firmly believe that when it comes to Modern, prevalence and powerlevel are close to synonymous. If a deck is picked up by a large number, it's going to place. The more it places the more it gets picked up. A card as popular and powerful as SFM has a strong possibility of creating that cycle.
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 mean, decks with Jace, the Mind Sculptor placed, as well as Bloodbraid Elf. When Andrew Wolbers won the GP with Ponza, nobody cried for the banning of Bloodbraid Elf. It is in fact a GOOD thing when a card that is unbanned has at least a little bit of results with it.
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)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 am always a proponent for additional evidence and testing. That said, this actually does not seem to align with the unbanning process as we best understand it. I wrote a post on this a while ago after Stoddard did an AMA. GK actually has quoted this post recently and I am continually impressed with his ability to find these old posts when I seem to lose all of them. Maybe he can cite it again. In summary, Stoddard gave some insight into the unbanning process back in 2016. BatHickey asked how R&D concluded that AV and Sword were safe to unban. Here was Stoddard's reply:
https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/4ww95b/ama_with_sam_stoddard_lead_developer_of_eldritch/d6api9f/?context=3
He might have included other quotes about this topic, and I don't remember my original interpretation of the quote. From what I see here, however, some takeaways:
1. Unbans do not need to be 100% safe.
2. Unban testing involves some MTGO games with unrefined lists.
3. Unban assessment involves a general evaluation of what is doing well/struggling in the format.
4. Unbans involve intuition.
5. Unbans are "calculated risks."
Based on that, the bar is a lot lower than people make it out to be. SFM, a popular unban candidate, almost certainly meets this bar just from a cursory examination of online opinion. Even Twin could meet this test. Overall, we need to remember this standard of evidence when making arguments. It's not as high as many make it out to be.
Thank you. This is how I see it 100%. I even agree with Twin, even if it's not necessarily a personal choice.
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)Twin might have similar problems if they are considering printing something similar to, but stronger than, Deceiver Exarch as a highly possible new card, such as a similar sort of thing with less toughness but that has hexproof, or a variant on involved themes with 2 power as a tempo critter that might push any possible twin decks over the edge due to making them even better when the combo doesn't go off but they win with tempo beats while slowing down opponents by threatening the combo.
Of course, this idea only applies if they really think they are going to print one of such types of cards 'soon', such as having one designed and somewhat tested somewhere in their design folders that is waiting for the right upcoming standard and/or limited that has space for it.
Why is this remotely an issue when they can't even seem to go a Standard cycle without breaking Dredge multiple times? Clearly, breaking decks with new cards is not a concern whatsoever.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
You know what, it's pointless. This thread is infuriating.
'what if a better bad blue creature is released!'
I'm ****in done. Do you folks HONESTLY play this format?
Hollow One
Tron
G Affinity
Any number of Divas Phoenix decks (and Kiln and Swiftspear and Thing...)
Humans
Dredge
Burn
Storm
KCI
Infect
I could go on and on, but all the above could simple have you dead on Turn 3, or close enough, and I'm supposed to worry if we get Pestermite v3 or some mythical equipment that doesn't exist?
Nah. I'm sick of the apologists for Wizards gross incompetence and clear ignorance of the format.
You don't want to have to respect Twin? It's just too unfun for your poor goldfish deck? Fine I guess. At least that is understandable, even if I have to play against a litany of lame decks, whatever.
SFM though? I wouldn't even play it. I'm done spending money on this garbage, but there is no meaningful presence of a fair grinding deck, and if SFM, like Jace, like AV is 'too good' while I sit across 2 or 3 turn 1 Hollow Ones?
Then people need to look at the top end of this format because that cards dead when it hits the table.
Spirits
Dead to grave shenanigans.
I mean literally EVERY year, for the most part we get no changes. We never get a ton of bans/unbans a year. Maybe once or twice but that's that. If anything no changes should be expected by now.
People being infuriated because they think they "proved" that SFM needs to be unbanned is, at this point, borderline ridiculous. Is SFM going to be fine? Yeah, probably. Is Wizards under some form of obligation to unban it? Nop, no they are not.
So either play the format or don't. What every B&R is, is a change of rules basically. And we can't have rule changes too often because then it becomes impossible to play. Either accept the rules and play it or don't play. You can argue about health etc, but thinking you are entitled to unbans is, at the very least, weird.
UB Faeries (15-6-0)
UWR Control (10-5-1)/Kiki Control/Midrange/Harbinger
UBR Cruel Control (6-4-0)/Grixis Control/Delver/Blue Jund
UWB Control/Mentor
UW Miracles/Control (currently active, 14-2-0)
BW Eldrazi & Taxes
RW Burn (9-1-0)
I do (academic) research on video games and archaeology! You can check out my open access book here: https://www.sidestone.com/books/the-interactive-past
FNM is still good for chilling out at the lgs on fridays and sometimes also on sundays. The only one among those decks that I fear is KCI, because don't understand how their combo works.. thankfully no KCI player here. Hollow One is becoming a little easier with practice, I use 2 Ancient Grudge now, so it can still kill HO even if discarded at random. As for the other decks, just have to accept the fact that modern is a really fast format right now.
Life goes on for modern players. Since no ban / unban of anything. WoTC probably thinks everything is currently fine. Maybe some things will change next year as cards from newer sets enter the format.
Nexus MTG News // Nexus - Magic Art Gallery // MTG Dual Land Color Ratios Analyzer // MTG Card Drawing Odds Calculator
Want to play a UW control deck in modern, but don't have jace or snaps?
Please come visit us at the Emeria Titan control thread
It's not so cut and dry. We've already seen this in action when Jace and BBE got unbanned. Huge uptick of Jund and UWx for a week or two and then results proved they were average at best and could barely keep up with the best decks of the pre-unban meta. Bearing in mind that right now Jund is still above-average at best even with Assassin's Trophy and UWx was made relevant by Teferi+Jace+Field of Ruin and not Jace.
We used to be able to define the correlation of prevalence and power level with day 1-day 2-top X conversion rates. I don't think WOTC releases those numbers anymore.
I think 5C Humans is a decent example. We know the deck is very popular and is one of Modern's Tier 1 but it's day 2 to top 8 conversion rates haven't been that great when taking into account how much it's played.
TBF I don't have any hard numbers but I'm sure the stats people around here will correct me if I'm wrong.