Quote from genini2 »If we don't use results from people like Duke or Burkheart where do we draw the line. Do we have a list of players that we don't use results from if they succeed and if they scrub out should we count the result as double or something. The idea that in a tournament filled with the best players in the world we are going to ignore results because the player is good is just bonkers to me.
There are some critics that will never be satisfied with any level of results. Unless the data matches their experience and views, they will find reasons to ignore and undermine it. An excellent example of this was the recent GP. It immediately validated to many Modern critics all the problems they had with the format. Never mind that it was a single event over an otherwise super healthy stretch of the format. That one event was all they needed. But all the other evidence was easy to throw out. MTGO? "Incomplete picture, still linear." SCG? "Glorified FNM, not representative." Smaller regional and local events? "Not competitive enough, not representative." The PT? "Too few rounds, too influenced by draft." We do not see the same criticisms and skepticism for events that support the "Modern too linear/bad/unfun" narrative.
It's the same annoying dissonance we see when players say "I want high-skill decks to win in this format" and then say later "This deck takes too much skill to win with and isn't viable." Again, the issue is not the format. It's a vocal subset of critics who readily discount evidence against their views but eagerly support any cases that validate their views.
I think there are legitimate issues we can talk about with Modern. It's by no means a perfect format. But the way some of the critics talk, we would think it was back in September 2016 again. The lack of measured criticism of the current format shows that some people will just never be happy until they get a very specific wish fulfilled, whether that's a ban, an unban, a deck being viable, a deck no longer being viable, etc. Thankfully, as I am sure we will see next Monday, those highly specific criticisms don't matter because Wizards is clearly not on board with them. That was the case in October 2017 and we'll see if it's the case Monday.
1
At the beginning of each end step, if Spiny Starfish regenerated this turn, put a 0/1 blue Starfish creature token onto the battlefield for each time it regenerated this turn.
From this wording it's a lot clearer that you get a token at end of turn for each time it was regenerated. This does mean it has to actually use the regeneration to save it from destruction rather than just use the regeneration ability though.
1
2
Probably too slow for constructed play realistically, but if aggro becomes big it could certainly start seeing play.
1
He's not bad, but the problem is very often you will run into the situation of "Do I cast a hasty beater before combat or swing and hope to hit something."
1
1
1
Because meld doesn't specifically mention the cards must me in exile the meld ability will track it to the command zone and bring it to the battlefield when it forms Brisela
1
1
Once you get infinite mana (With wall, ghostly flicker, drake), you can draw your entire deck with Coiling Oracle. From there you can compulsive research with two walls to infinitely mill. The upside is it limits the number of actual dead draws in the deck (since your win con is also a draw spell), but the downside on MTGO is it can take awhile.
1