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.
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.
I think you'll have a hard time with a deck that contains 60+ basic lands...
... yes, it's a knee-jerk response, but I'm not sure why you're more special than everyone else who "wants to play <insert favorite non-tiered archetype of choice here>". Plus, if you really want to play a certain type of deck, there's nothing stopping you. Heck, Seismic Swans(!) spiked a tournament this month.
It's true that blue is bad, but the format as a whole looks good, and full of diversity. Oh, well. I was very for the preordain/SFM unban, but after reading Todd Stevens article I had a feeling there'd be no unbans.
Blue is so bad that 27% of the decks on MTGGoldfish are running a basic Island.
I guess people just like to trot out horrible decks.
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.
Hey everyone! So I've been goldfishing with various stompy ideas, and after a couple of days of this, I feel like I've come 60 mb that seems pretty good. Feedback would be cool.
To address some choices from the get go
Dismember - We're an all in aggressive deck. If Dismember has no real targets, then it's two mb cards that could have been gas.
Aspect of the Hydra - We aren't playing Leatherback Goliath, and I feel not using a pump spell that revolves around having a full board gives us some versatility, instead of just getting blown out.
Treetop Village - We're playing a lot of 1 drops, and thinning the deck with fetches. I want my lands to come in untapped.
I don't see how a list that doesn't play a full complement of Avatars or Geists is optimal
Agreed. Geist is bar none the best creature in the deck. Avatar is the biggest "must answer" threat, especially with the additional +1/+/1 counter creatures here.
Pretty much what I was thinking. Lose 1 Liberator and 1 Groundbreaker, add 1 Geist and 1 Avatar. Even the remaining Groundbreakers still feel out of place as a whole, especially with 4 Rancors already.
(Basically, I had a lot of the same ideas as you did building an aggro fetch-and-revolt deck - the first five creatures in your list are also in mine - but decided to go more all-in on the refund-bears by playing Burning-Tree Emissary alongside their new cousins, and a few cards that pay off from that.)
I have the sense this concept will be better with Storm Entity and Priest of Urabrask... but that's a different deck already.
Hey everyone! So I've been goldfishing with various stompy ideas, and after a couple of days of this, I feel like I've come 60 mb that seems pretty good. Feedback would be cool.
To address some choices from the get go
Dismember - We're an all in aggressive deck. If Dismember has no real targets, then it's two mb cards that could have been gas.
Aspect of the Hydra - We aren't playing Leatherback Goliath, and I feel not using a pump spell that revolves around having a full board gives us some versatility, instead of just getting blown out.
Treetop Village - We're playing a lot of 1 drops, and thinning the deck with fetches. I want my lands to come in untapped.
@Rogomatic do you suggest to run the deck on white, instead of green??, do ir RGw??
Technically, you're only running G for Atarka's Command -- and you play all your cards by fetching once. I think it's possible to add a Sacred Foundry without making the mana (too) janky. You'll have to fetch twice to be able to play both G and W. With 8 fetches that is not unreasonable. In any case, it's probably better than going RW and losing Command.
Also, if you ever considered Act of Aggression, perhaps you should try Kari Zev's Expertise which seems like it's the better card.
Given that Death's Shadow will check against your life total once it's confiscated, it's highly unlikely that you will be able to get two shadows to trade. You might be able to kill one by reducing it to 0 toughness this way, though.
I'm thinking about running Vapor Snag, and it would basically assume the TI slots of my sideboard, except I rarely ever ran TI and always use the slots for other things.
Might as well run Unsummon. At least we can bounce our own creatures without life loss.
Also... how is Infect still considered T1? It has a comparable number of entries at mtgtop8 to Zoo, and Zoo is non-tiered right now... confusing.
What do people think Goblin Guides will settle at? I have a chance to pick a playset for $15 a pop right now and wonder whether they will go lower as MM gets opened.
I've been toying with the idea of a BG version that runs 4x Birds of Paradise instead of Hierarch to allow for a T2 Phyrexian Crusader. I know this eliminates some of the sequencing where you have a T3 win with an exalted trigger + two 4/4 pumps, but it also allows for a T3 win with Crusader. It also gives an outside chance for a backup plan where you finish with BoP + Rancor in ggrindier games. Thoughts?
Why play Birds instead? You could also play like 4 birds, 3 nobles. Add in 4 Wild Defiance as your other T2 play and kill on T3 with a pumped flying bird, a nexus or noble. Defiance acts as your pseudo Infector 13-16 for more consistency.
Life total is so low in modern, with WD and pump you can easily push through 15 damage. Noble attacking with Mook+Mutagenic = 13 damage out of nowhere for one mana, backed up by Vines/Blooming, possibly for lethal. You could also throw MD Spellskite in there for the good old WD pump trick. Make sure to have MD Dryad Arbor to be able to fetch for your finisher.
Now that I'm writing this I want to try it as well sounds like a lot of fun.
One of the reasons for playing BG is Phyrexian Crusader, which means you're playing 4 more creatures than the stock UG lists. Hence, less room for other spells. This way, playing 7 dorks appears prohibitive.
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.
There is no such thing as "deck strength in isolation". Cards and decks are only strong relative to other cards.
Ok, so maybe I went a little overboard
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.
I think you'll have a hard time with a deck that contains 60+ basic lands...
... yes, it's a knee-jerk response, but I'm not sure why you're more special than everyone else who "wants to play <insert favorite non-tiered archetype of choice here>". Plus, if you really want to play a certain type of deck, there's nothing stopping you. Heck, Seismic Swans(!) spiked a tournament this month.
Blue is so bad that 27% of the decks on MTGGoldfish are running a basic Island.
I guess people just like to trot out horrible decks.
Pretty much what I was thinking. Lose 1 Liberator and 1 Groundbreaker, add 1 Geist and 1 Avatar. Even the remaining Groundbreakers still feel out of place as a whole, especially with 4 Rancors already.
I have the sense this concept will be better with Storm Entity and Priest of Urabrask... but that's a different deck already.
I don't see how a list that doesn't play a full complement of Avatars or Geists is optimal
http://decks.tcgplayer.com/magic/modern/adam-kulp/goblins/1278590
Given that Death's Shadow will check against your life total once it's confiscated, it's highly unlikely that you will be able to get two shadows to trade. You might be able to kill one by reducing it to 0 toughness this way, though.
Might as well run Unsummon. At least we can bounce our own creatures without life loss.
Also... how is Infect still considered T1? It has a comparable number of entries at mtgtop8 to Zoo, and Zoo is non-tiered right now... confusing.
One of the reasons for playing BG is Phyrexian Crusader, which means you're playing 4 more creatures than the stock UG lists. Hence, less room for other spells. This way, playing 7 dorks appears prohibitive.