2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Modern PT return
    Well that really makes unbans less likely. Part of the reason to modern to be discontinued from the pro tour was that newer cards have a hard time seeing wide play in the format (and so get little camera time during the promotional event). Any unbans would exasperate this, and it seems certain that his issue was discussed at length before the move was made.

    I love watching coverage, but hate how modern is treated when a PT format. Double edged sword we have here.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on State of Modern Thread: bans, format health, metagame, and more! (3/13 update)
    Quote from Wraithpk »
    Tron is just "casting a fatty" when they play Ulamog on turn 4, is that a fair play to you?
    That's all they're doing? Tron must be super fair to allow you even a chance to recover from it's optimal turn 4 play - most modern decks would just kill you on turn 4 if you aren't going to interact with their best play.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on State of Modern Thread: bans, format health, metagame, and more! (3/13 update)
    Super predictable after all the bans in the spring - I think in May I had already posted that I anticipated MTGO data to disappear entirely. Cutting it in half isn't quite the same, but I was on the right track. Note that WotC repeatedly stated that decks were not winning as much as their popularity would indicate during the ban-heavy spring. Yet the decks continued to become more and more popular despite their win rate being overestimated.

    WotC must realize that League data is very low value for predicting Tournament results since they are different event structures. Since League data is very visible, it gives the erroneous impression to the playerbase that the frequency of finishes they post there has a correlation with win rate. It creates a cycle of increased play ----> increased success ----> increased play that isn't really directly tied to the deck's ability to win tournaments. With the change limiting how many times the same cards can appear each day in lists, it sends a clear signal that the data should not be used as a primary source for analysis of the meta - a state of affairs which has always been true of leagues.

    Note that the League / Tournament difference I'm referring to is that Leagues are not paired like a Tournament where players are paired against identical records. Instead, leagues are paired 'as available'.

    The most important data for the metagame has always been, and will continue to be GP/Open/Classic data. Nothing about that has changed.

    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on How much luck is involved in Magic?
    To be clear, some are arguing here that "luck" is a supernatural force that causes altered outcomes? I'm having a hard time understanding what people are claiming that "luck" is. AFAIK, luck is just a subjective evaluation (positive/negative) of an outcome produced by a probability space.

    If luck is supernatural, what is the supernatural effect you are seeing? Isn't it statistically possible to draw consecutive no-landers? Sure, getting all 3 aggro players in a field of 97 non-aggro might be improbable... but it is possible. I doubt that has ever happened, so it's a pretty weak rhetorical device. And if it did happen, it would be fully expected given a large enough sample size of such events.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on How much luck is involved in Magic?
    I'm pretty sure the Pros found colourless eldrazi when no one else did. Sure, with colourless eldrazi in the meta other eldrazi builds were ended up being superior - but those were found by pros as well.

    I think it's a bit of a misunderstanding to claim that pros don't build decks in modern. That being said, it should really not be a surprise that a community of thousands or hundreds of thousands of members will create a higher volume of creative output (deck designs) than will a much smaller community of several hundred pros.

    But the colourless eldrazi example really stands out.

    Just like with professional chess, most of the pros were reasonably well-off before pursuing the 'career'. The expense (opportunity cost?) isn't the major consideration. Many players try to make it pro at chess as well, and I don't think its right for people to be called stupid for pursuing what they enjoy.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on How much luck is involved in Magic?
    The first mulligan gives you an equal number of card views due to the scry. The first mull is free from a card selection standpoint. I think Kenshin's example is spot on, but not a point I'm going to belabour further.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on How much luck is involved in Magic?
    The point is that keeping the hand can never win the game on the spot, but it can lose the game on the spot. The difference in the value of the outcomes makes the 75% chance of a positive outcome an undesirable gamble since your expected value is very low compared to taking a mull and seeing if you can get a playable hand. 75% sounds nice, but when you're gambling "stay alive or die", 75% seems kinda low.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on How much luck is involved in Magic?
    Just to be clear, are you arguing that it is a reasonable position to go all in on a 75% chance, and then get angry when you miss? Missing being essentially a loss makes going all-in there fairly loose. How are you going to go X-1 or X-2 when you take 75% chances with payoffs of being able to play the game at all, and costs of losing on the spot?
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on How much luck is involved in Magic?
    Luck plays a larger role in games between decks with closer matchups, and between players of closer skill.

    The outcome of a match is influenced by a few factors, the key ones being

    • Difference in play skill
    • Specific deck strengths and weaknesses
    • Desirability of probability-based outcomes
    I don't think it's clear that all games and matchups are influenced uniformly by these factors. What is clear is that skill is a relative measurement, and can be removed from the equation when it is equal.

    I'd like to suggest that players who believe that luck plays a strong role in their games frequently play matches with low skill separation and small deck/match-specific edges. This would give the appearance of a large role for luck to play, when it really the marginalization of the other factors at play
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on State of Modern Thread: bans, format health, metagame, and more! (3/13 update)
    Or that he was talking about any particular format. I get the impression he had standard in mind given all the attention he has paid standard in the last 6 months.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on State of Modern Thread: bans, format health, metagame, and more! (3/13 update)
    I was wondering if we were in bizarro world or something. Eldrazi tron doesn't rely on tron very much as it is - evidenced in how little effort the deck makes towards getting it online early.

    Tron is fine in the meta. Just another set of powerful decks in good company of a meta where no one is really trying to be fair. Thoughtseize ----> Gofy ----> Lily isn't exactly using the kid gloves. Eldrazi tron wasn't even 8% of the top64 at vegas.

    I would encourage people to focus on their own refining/brewing ventures to solve the meta "problems" instead of advocating bans.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/spikes/comments/6inuxi/modern_gp_vegas_top_64_metagame_xpost_rmodernmagic/
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Yeva, Nature's Herald. So much hate.
    Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir is probably the better card to play for that effect. Teferi sees fringe play occasionally in blue SBs for Uxx mirrors (and sometimes combo hate).
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Grand Grix Las Vegas Modern discussion
    Super on-board with Dredge not being categorically "worse" for the meta than other linear decks that attack from distinct angles (such as affinity, etc). I've never understood why the "but it strains the SB" argument is held as valid (by some) when applied to Dredge, but not Affinity.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on State of Modern Thread: bans, format health, metagame, and more! (3/13 update)
    Quote from ktkenshinx »
    Wizards SHOULD unban SFM instead. It incentivizes interactive decks, addresses color imbalance, and fights both linear decks and DS decks. I have minimal confidence that Wizards will do that, but it's the right thing to do.
    I wonder much weight WotC places in avoiding SFM in both Modern and Legacy as a factor in deciding if SFM should be unbanned. I think it's been a fairly obvious move for at least 6 months, yet WotC continues to refuse to do it.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on HOU (and the other less official ones lately. ) spoilers discussion for Modern
    I think Supreme Will won't make the cut. The tempo cost of this card is just too high - the upsides are not worth the extra mana/2mana over Censor. The effects are more powerful, but the added cost puts it outside the useful range - this will be very evident on the draw. 3 cmc counters are really bad in modern as evidenced by the zero that see play right now. Even a 3 cmc impulse is just not efficient enough imo.

    edit: these cards in back to back sets does give me the impression that WotC is testing the waters with modal soft counters so they can be useful still after they have passed their useful window in a game - I appreciate the effort at making useful soft counters.
    Posted in: Modern
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.