I understand YOU prefer the bigger picture, but the majority of regular Modern players do not. I hear it all the time at my LGS. People talk about tiers as though decks outside of Tier 1 should lose to Tier 1. I hear people walking up and asking to build "this list" which ends up being a tier 1 list net decked from the most recent event(s).
People here on MTGS live in a bubble, and we rarely realize that what we think differs greatly from general Modern players (or magic players in general).
So, regardless of how YOU think tiers should be looked at (which I may agree with you on that), the fact of the matter is, for most people, they will look at tiers as a strict indicator of what is good and what is bad. If its not tiered, its some random rogue brew with no viability (until some pro decides to take it to a top 8 finish).
I think what people should take from this discussion, that I somewhat started and I apologize for it, specially to Ktkenshinx since he got some undeserved bash, is that we should take any tiering with a grain of salt. Each meta has its own perks specially due to the nature of the players in that reason, the cost to transition to a deck to another, etc.. This means that we can't fight tooth and nail for this issues.
So, should I punch the next person that tells me blue is not viable because there are no tier 1 decks that are blue? Because what you say, and what really is, are two different things.
I agree with a lot of your points. Im willing to cut 1 deprive for a leak. And I may look into removing the split of snare and pierce. I do find both useful in different situations, though. If I were to end the split, it would be in favor of another snare.
Things I probably won't budge on are on Denial. I just find 4 very much necessary. I have rarely found drawing it or having it in hand a bad thing. Combo and spell heavy decks become so much easier to deal with with 4 denials.
Traverse has also been a clunky card in my opinion. I tried a list you had posted, many, many pages back. And after putting in many games, I just didnt enjoy it. It forced me to fetch in ways I didnt always find ideal (in the early game). Of course, the long-game appeal is big, but Im not too sure about making room for it. This may boil down to play style. Or I can be wrong.
I will look for a way to bring 1x Snap back into the fold. Not sure what I will cut in its place. I agree Simic is meh, but I just love the card. I win battles with it. I save creatures from board wipes with it. I put in extra trample damage with it. I find it indispensable.
Ive put in about 85 rated matches with the current list Im running, and about 48 matches on paper. I keep tuning it as I go along. Ill take your suggestions into consideration!
I agree with a lot of your points. Im willing to cut 1 deprive for a leak. And I may look into removing the split of snare and pierce. I do find both useful in different situations, though. If I were to end the split, it would be in favor of another snare.
Things I probably won't budge on are on Denial. I just find 4 very much necessary. I have rarely found drawing it or having it in hand a bad thing. Combo and spell heavy decks become so much easier to deal with with 4 denials.
Traverse has also been a clunky card in my opinion. I tried a list you had posted, many, many pages back. And after putting in many games, I just didnt enjoy it. It forced me to fetch in ways I didnt always find ideal (in the early game). Of course, the long-game appeal is big, but Im not too sure about making room for it. This may boil down to play style. Or I can be wrong.
I will look for a way to bring 1x Snap back into the fold. Not sure what I will cut in its place. I agree Simic is meh, but I just love the card. I win battles with it. I save creatures from board wipes with it. I put in extra trample damage with it. I find it indispensable.
Ive put in about 85 rated matches with the current list Im running, and about 48 matches on paper. I keep tuning it as I go along. Ill take your suggestions into consideration!
I'm trying out your list on MTGO, still getting the hang of it compared to a more traditional one with snaps and such. I'm gonna bring it through a league next week though.
Great! Yea, it takes practice, and it does force you to sometimes be greedy on fetching. But Ive managed to get the hang of it.
Im not claiming it is the best list, but I have had a good amount of success with it so far (65%+ online and on paper).
But I want to say that Im only 70% sold on removing Snap from the 75. I used to run 1 before. But like I said, I am not a fan of having 1-of cards in a deck with a unique ability (unless we are playing combo).
Playing a deck that was in Developing Competitive didn’t mean that your deck was “bad”. It just meant that it wasn’t a deck being represented significantly in the meta.
That is not how most Magic players interpret Tiers. Based even on how they discuss tier decks here. The problem is if a deck gets luky in one or two tournaments, then it shows-up in tiers and then everyone copies it. Which leaves other perfectly viable decks in the dust. And then people complain about diversity.
Power does dictate tiering rank to a large degree. Tiering rank does not dictate viability. DS was a thing way before it made waves in Modern. Someone simply decided to push it at a bigger event, and they beat the odds to top 8. The odds of making top 8 are so small, in general. The fact that tiering is strongly based on what made top 8-16, is problematic to me.
I still stand that a deck can make higher tiers simply by sheer volume. It does not mean it is the best deck.
If tiering could somehow take into consideration how prevalent a deck was in any tournament (as a negative factor), that would be interesting.
Then again, if Tiering is simply there to show you what showed-up in top16, and not make a statement on deck viability; it's fine as it is. But players take tiers too seriously to not take tiering criteria seriously.
Give it a shot on Xmage or wtv. I actually am liking curator a lot, now. Late game I have no issues casting him as a 4/4 flyer. Early game he cycles at instant speed, filling my gy for goyf or mandrills, and drawing me a card.
Narnam is still doing work. Opponents just dont want that card on the field. I usually lead with it, it eats removal, and I follow up with better creatures.
Yesterday, I opened with a narnam, it ate a bolt, and I followed up with two delvers who then flipped on turn 3. Was a good feeling to swing several times for 6 in the air. Makes a huge difference if that bolt hit my first delver.
There definitely are mechanics that WOTC does not tolerate a lot. Dredge is one, Storm is another. Just dont think its too much of an issue atm. But yes, if you feel like you get too many free wins, you should be worried about your deck.
Yea, I cant see what they would ban that would make sense. Grapeshot and empty the warrens, essentially (or attack the enablers, which wouldnt kill the deck completely). Which is WOTC saying we dont want Storm as much as we dont want Dredge. I dont think its that bad.
But who knows. Its Modern. Enjoy your decks while you have them, and never buy into a deck that is currently controversial. Oh, and try to buy into a deck that has a good amount of cards that are shared with other decks. Hardens you against future bans.
I dont think Storm in its current form is broken. Though I find it hard to see how decks without permission can deal with it properly. Storm is one of those ultra solitaire decks. Though I find it got a bit more interactive with the gifts package.
People here on MTGS live in a bubble, and we rarely realize that what we think differs greatly from general Modern players (or magic players in general).
So, regardless of how YOU think tiers should be looked at (which I may agree with you on that), the fact of the matter is, for most people, they will look at tiers as a strict indicator of what is good and what is bad. If its not tiered, its some random rogue brew with no viability (until some pro decides to take it to a top 8 finish).
So, should I punch the next person that tells me blue is not viable because there are no tier 1 decks that are blue? Because what you say, and what really is, are two different things.
I was shell-shocked at that fact.
I agree with a lot of your points. Im willing to cut 1 deprive for a leak. And I may look into removing the split of snare and pierce. I do find both useful in different situations, though. If I were to end the split, it would be in favor of another snare.
Things I probably won't budge on are on Denial. I just find 4 very much necessary. I have rarely found drawing it or having it in hand a bad thing. Combo and spell heavy decks become so much easier to deal with with 4 denials.
Traverse has also been a clunky card in my opinion. I tried a list you had posted, many, many pages back. And after putting in many games, I just didnt enjoy it. It forced me to fetch in ways I didnt always find ideal (in the early game). Of course, the long-game appeal is big, but Im not too sure about making room for it. This may boil down to play style. Or I can be wrong.
I will look for a way to bring 1x Snap back into the fold. Not sure what I will cut in its place. I agree Simic is meh, but I just love the card. I win battles with it. I save creatures from board wipes with it. I put in extra trample damage with it. I find it indispensable.
Ive put in about 85 rated matches with the current list Im running, and about 48 matches on paper. I keep tuning it as I go along. Ill take your suggestions into consideration!
I agree with a lot of your points. Im willing to cut 1 deprive for a leak. And I may look into removing the split of snare and pierce. I do find both useful in different situations, though. If I were to end the split, it would be in favor of another snare.
Things I probably won't budge on are on Denial. I just find 4 very much necessary. I have rarely found drawing it or having it in hand a bad thing. Combo and spell heavy decks become so much easier to deal with with 4 denials.
Traverse has also been a clunky card in my opinion. I tried a list you had posted, many, many pages back. And after putting in many games, I just didnt enjoy it. It forced me to fetch in ways I didnt always find ideal (in the early game). Of course, the long-game appeal is big, but Im not too sure about making room for it. This may boil down to play style. Or I can be wrong.
I will look for a way to bring 1x Snap back into the fold. Not sure what I will cut in its place. I agree Simic is meh, but I just love the card. I win battles with it. I save creatures from board wipes with it. I put in extra trample damage with it. I find it indispensable.
Ive put in about 85 rated matches with the current list Im running, and about 48 matches on paper. I keep tuning it as I go along. Ill take your suggestions into consideration!
Great! Yea, it takes practice, and it does force you to sometimes be greedy on fetching. But Ive managed to get the hang of it.
Im not claiming it is the best list, but I have had a good amount of success with it so far (65%+ online and on paper).
But I want to say that Im only 70% sold on removing Snap from the 75. I used to run 1 before. But like I said, I am not a fan of having 1-of cards in a deck with a unique ability (unless we are playing combo).
That is not how most Magic players interpret Tiers. Based even on how they discuss tier decks here. The problem is if a deck gets luky in one or two tournaments, then it shows-up in tiers and then everyone copies it. Which leaves other perfectly viable decks in the dust. And then people complain about diversity.
I still stand that a deck can make higher tiers simply by sheer volume. It does not mean it is the best deck.
If tiering could somehow take into consideration how prevalent a deck was in any tournament (as a negative factor), that would be interesting.
Then again, if Tiering is simply there to show you what showed-up in top16, and not make a statement on deck viability; it's fine as it is. But players take tiers too seriously to not take tiering criteria seriously.
I've been trying something fresh recently, and so far I have enjoyed it quite a bit.
1x Breeding Pool
1x Forest
2x Island
4x Misty Rainforest
4x Scalding Tarn
1x Spirebluff Canal
2x Steam Vents
1x Stomping Ground
1x Wooded Foothills
Instant (21)
3x Deprive
4x Lightning Bolt
2x Simic Charm
1x Spell Pierce
1x Spell Snare
4x Stubborn Denial
2x Tarfire
4x Thought Scour
4x Serum Visions
2x Sleight of Hand
Creature (16)
2x Curator of Mysteries
4x Delver of Secrets
4x Hooting Mandrills
2x Narnam Renegade
4x Tarmogoyf
3x Blood Moon
2x Destructive Revelry
2x Engineered Explosives
4x Huntmaster of the Fells
2x Pongify
2x Pyroclasm
Give it a shot on Xmage or wtv. I actually am liking curator a lot, now. Late game I have no issues casting him as a 4/4 flyer. Early game he cycles at instant speed, filling my gy for goyf or mandrills, and drawing me a card.
Narnam is still doing work. Opponents just dont want that card on the field. I usually lead with it, it eats removal, and I follow up with better creatures.
Yesterday, I opened with a narnam, it ate a bolt, and I followed up with two delvers who then flipped on turn 3. Was a good feeling to swing several times for 6 in the air. Makes a huge difference if that bolt hit my first delver.
But who knows. Its Modern. Enjoy your decks while you have them, and never buy into a deck that is currently controversial. Oh, and try to buy into a deck that has a good amount of cards that are shared with other decks. Hardens you against future bans.