2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on [Primer] RUG Scapeshift
    So I've been thinking about a return to the true scape (ie rug based), and i generally liked the btl variants of the deck. they were a bit clunky but also offered much more sideboard utility. New Teferi seems like a house in the board (eot btl/scape has a lot of appeal), and MH looks to add some fun stuff. I think 2 archmage's charms seem like a solid addition, and the green force seems solid, as well as the green storm spell. Even force of negation seems like it could play alongside teferi (although that might be asking too much) since you can play scape on their turn and protect it. One thing I was thinking more and more though, was playing 3 Karn, the great creator in the main. It gives you a pretty good plan b in game one, as well as giving you some solid game one toolbox options (tormod's crypt, explosives, grafdigger's cage, ensnaring bridge, and of course, mycosynth lattice and liquimetal coating to lock out the opponent). Thoughts on this? I haven't been able to test anything out yet (don't really want to buy mycosynth at it's current cost unless it's worth it), so this is all just theorycrafting at the moment. Thoughts?
    Posted in: Combo
  • posted a message on [Primer] Infect
    I'm also thinking infect will be back. A few questions (I haven't played the deck in a while and also haven't really played modern in a while):

    1) Why did the deck fall off recently? With the amount of linear decks I see in top 8's it seems like a good meta for us. What am I missing?

    2) I think 2-3 scale ups should take over from BI. That said, I think you can support 2 BI if you run 3-4 street wraith just to fuel the yard. I ran wraith right after the g probe banning and it felt ok, but I also think scale up is just a better option and leads to faster kills. Might even be worth a full playset

    3) How many waterlogged groves do we run and what lands do they replace? Do we need arbor dryad main anymore? How many decks with sac effects are we seeing? I feel like putting one in the side and replacing it with grove should be better. Without BI, cutting fetches seems reasonable as well. I would construct the manabase something along these lines:




    edit: sideboard option - flusterstorm side? Generally pierce is probably better overall, but against blue decks having a stormed counterspell seems like a good form of protection. And what about the green storm card? does it slow us down too much, or is it worth it vs storm and burn?

    edit x2: unearth seems like an attractive sideboard card for BUG or BG variants
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • posted a message on [Primer] Amulet Titan
    I haven't played modern in a while (sad ex-twin player that just hasn't found a deck that clicks with me) and thinking of picking this one up finally. That said, and having zero experience with piloting, is blast zone going to be included? I assume a 1-1 split with explosives if so. Also, has anyone tried out hydroid krasis, or is it too clunky?
    Posted in: Big Mana
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 26/11/2018)
    Quote from DaveJacinto »
    Quote from ThirdDegree »
    I don't think that false (potentially) image is fully to blame for the SFM spike. Look at it's price on mtgstocks and it spiked several times before banlist announcements. I do like that time in the graph where it stopped spiking, as if the community just gave up hope. Haha
    If I recall correctly, for the previous spike there was another fake image behind it.


    There were several spikes. I think one of them had a false image associated, but since it's been a commonly suggested 'safe' card to unban for a little over a year, I think people just assume that 'this will be the time' for it.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 26/11/2018)
    I don't think that false (potentially) image is fully to blame for the SFM spike. Look at it's price on mtgstocks and it spiked several times before banlist announcements. I do like that time in the graph where it stopped spiking, as if the community just gave up hope. Haha
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on [RNA] Ravnica Allegiance Previews: Modern Discussion
    I am excited to throw together (and also lose horribly) with RUG Vannifar and Temur Ascendancy/Furvor/Hammer of Purphoros or some such nonsense
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 26/11/2018)
    re: play vs draw

    I think one factor to look at in regards to modern vs other formats, is the number of decks designed to take advantage of being on the play, or more specifically, the formats ability (or inability)to 'catch up'. In Standard, being on the play is definitely a massive advantage to the aggro decks, but rarely are there more than 1 strong aggro deck in a standard format due to the limited card pool. In legacy, there are plenty of decks that try to jam a turn 1 win on the play, but because of force, they can get seriously punished and don't dominate (especially considering how prevalent blue decks are in the format). Modern is definitely unique in that the current format, reactive decks specifically have a hard time being on the draw and recovering from that tempo loss. As a result, you have a large number of decks that can take advantage of this. I'm not sure how this would weight any statistical results, or if it's meaningful, but I think it's worth noting if the format is to change, unless this proactivity is what people (ie WotC) wants modern's identity, then WotC can leverage this and maintain it going forward
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    Fair, I think that was the point I was making: there are decks that have objectively more decision variations, but to each their own. I enjoy those decisions, and lean towards blue, but everyone can play what they want. I think the problem lies in when the format leans too hard in one direction or another. Linear decks can often survive when the format is interactive heavy, however when too many people are on linear decks, the format just seems not fun, for me at least. I think we have been there in the past, but I don't think we are there right now, even if the format favors linear a little more than I like, I can still have fun/successful playing control, or breach, or what have you.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    In regards to the discussion from cfusion and refuted by others:

    I think what cf is saying (not to put words in anyone's mouth, so please correct me if I'm incorrect) is that, sure, every deck can be misplayed, and at high levels, every misplay is often very punishing. But with a deck like burn, your decisions are fairly norrow: attack and hit face. There's definitely more to it than that, but the variance in decisions is pretty narrow. Snap based control or midrange decks often evaluate their position in the moment, which leads to more decision variations, and thus feel more rewarding when you win (that is, more rewarding for us blue mages, everyone's tastes are different). When I played Scapeshift (BtL and RUG), you often won the same way, with a resolved scape, but how you got to that point always felt interesting. I'd say that type of deck (I'd consider Ad Naus, UR Storm, and the like) to fall in to that category, and is sort of a stop-gap between something like a control or rock deck, and something more linear like burn or zoo. Every deck has it's decision trees and points for misplays, but like cfusion, I've found blue to offer the more interesting and varied decisions, vs something more linear.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the July 2, 2018 announcement?
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    Quote from ThirdDegree »
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    Those twelve lands in humans do come at a cost - noncreature spells are way less reliable in that deck both as mainboard and sb options. That's why it doesn't run CoCo (+1 I don't need to see CoCo put a reflector mage into play with a thalia's lieutenant ever again). It can't run negate or ceremonious rejection or even lightning bolt. D&T can run into similar problems with Thalia making good spells bad, or CoCo not wanting to dilute make the namesake card less effective. In fact, deckbuilding restrictions from the manabase are why humans literally can't run all those spells people praise for being interactive. The deck would be far worse for it. Then MTGAids, like any good deckbuilder, worked within known parameters (until he was forced to change his name by WOTC...).


    You're saying that the cost of those lands is that the 5-color deck can't reliably cast spells? That's the cost of running a 5-color deck, not the cost of having rainbow lands. The lands mean that the deck can play any human printed, which is pretty often since they are a tribe that spans every set WotC prints. That said, as much as I hate cavern, I don't think it should get the ax. I more wish if they print cards to nullify the effectiveness of counter magic, that we would just get better countermagic.


    Non-creature spells, bro. Because the rainbow lands don't produce colored mana for non-creature spells...


    Yea, I know non-creature spells. That's my point. You're saying that the cost of cavern is that humans can't cast negate or something. If you play any 5-color deck, bad mana should be your trade off. It's not much of a trade to lose CoCo but gain every human printed...
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the July 2, 2018 announcement?
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »
    Those twelve lands in humans do come at a cost - noncreature spells are way less reliable in that deck both as mainboard and sb options. That's why it doesn't run CoCo (+1 I don't need to see CoCo put a reflector mage into play with a thalia's lieutenant ever again). It can't run negate or ceremonious rejection or even lightning bolt. D&T can run into similar problems with Thalia making good spells bad, or CoCo not wanting to dilute make the namesake card less effective. In fact, deckbuilding restrictions from the manabase are why humans literally can't run all those spells people praise for being interactive. The deck would be far worse for it. Then MTGAids, like any good deckbuilder, worked within known parameters (until he was forced to change his name by WOTC...).


    You're saying that the cost of those lands is that the 5-color deck can't reliably cast spells? That's the cost of running a 5-color deck, not the cost of having rainbow lands. The lands mean that the deck can play any human printed, which is pretty often since they are a tribe that spans every set WotC prints. That said, as much as I hate cavern, I don't think it should get the ax. I more wish if they print cards to nullify the effectiveness of counter magic, that we would just get better countermagic.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    I wasn't saying this is a possibility, I'm just saying I would love it. haha
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    The only blue combo decks that really want to use (abuse?) preordain would be storm, ad naus, and breach. That said, storm seems to always be the bottleneck for what WotC is afraid of. Between damping sphere and the new amulet in c19, I'm hopeful that they feel there is sufficient hate to start setting free cantrips.

    I would have loved for spoiler season to still be going on when they have the ban announcement, and for them to unban preordain, and that day they spoil a reprint in c19. Flair for the dramatic Smile
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    In response to the Friedman article:

    He compares stirrings to the other consistency tools in modern and concludes that it's far more powerful. As much as I generally don't like stirrings decks, I'd rather they unban consistency tools (ie preordain/ponder) rather than ban stirrings. If they ban it, it will crush my hopes of ever getting good blue cantrips
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    Question about how Alpine Moon works in regards to tron: The card says it loses abilities and type, but it doesn't mention name. If I name Urza's Tower, do mine and power plant still generate 2 mana since they are checking for card names?
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.