MTG Salvation

Quote from cfusionpm »

Quote from tronix »

if modern has anything, it has diversity in spades. wizards is clearly pushing that aspect to be a defining feature and selling point of the format, even if it might come with some downsides.

Lopsided, high variance gameplay is more desirable for them, and they are on record saying this (usually when they are banning cantrips and card draw).

We already know Modern has identical variance as other formats per pro and SCG records. Or we know the best players overcome whatever variance there is, so it shouldn't affect gameplay. Either way, please stop repeating this myth unless you have new evidence to argue it.

EDIT: If you are arguing that Magic as a while is variable, I mostly agree. As long as we agree on format variance and its impact on games/matches.

Been doing some tinkering with GP data around Byes and tiebreakers. Really interesting data there and I'm still unpacking it. While I keep analyzing, I thought I'd share the GP T8 metagame and compare it to the GP T8 metagame including all the decks that missed on breakers alone. So if the cutoff was 12-3 and 4 players missed because their 12-3 record had worse breakers than the 12-3s who made it, they would be included in the adjusted T8 Tiebreaker metagame. In the interest of space and a reasonable N, only the decks with 3+ results are shown. Here are the results:

2018 GP T8 metagame
1. Gx Tron: 8 (12.5%)
2. KCI: 7 (10.9%)
3. Jeskai Control: 5 (7.8%)
4. Burn: 4 (6.3%)
5. Humans: 4 (6.3%)
6. Bogles: 3 (4.7%)
7. Affinity: 3 (4.7%)
8. Abzan: 3 (4.7%)
9. RG Eldrazi: 3 (4.7%)
10. UW Control: 3 (4.7%)

2018 GP T8 Tiebreaker metagame
1. Gx Tron: 12 (13.8%)
2. KCI: 8 (9.2%)
3. UW Control: 6 (6.9%)
4. Jeskai Control: 5 (5.7%)
5. Affinity: 5 (5.7%)
6. Burn: 4 (4.6%)
7. Mardu Pyromancer: 4 (4.6%)
8. Humans: 4 (4.6%)
9. Bogles: 3 (3.4%)
10. Abzan: 3 (3.4%)
11. RG Eldrazi: 3 (3.4%)

Interestingly, only a few decks shift positions. Tron and KCI remain the undisputed champs. Burn, Affinity, Humans, Abzan, and Bogles all shuffle positions. Meanwhile, UW Control and Mardu Pyromancer make huge jumps from virtual T8 absences to 3rd and 7th respectively. Fascinatingly, the only deck that is different in the two datasets is Mardu Pyromancer. Everything else is the same.

This gives some sense of the accuracy and limitations of "true" T8s vs. the T8 picture when we extend to breakers. On the one hand, The T8 Tiebreaker and the "True" T8 sets have exactly the same decks (minus Mardu). The top decks don't even change positions, and many of the middle decks just shuffle around. In that regard, the data would be mostly accurate in describing the top-tier metagame. But the "true" T8 misses the legitimate power of UW Control and Mardu Pyromancer, two decks that are missing by breakers on completely insignificant margins. This is critical for players who are trying to measure deck performance, as it shows that GP T8s are probably underestimating the actual strength of these decks.

Mardu in particular needs more credit. Cody Graveville got 9th at GP Toronto with the deck. Leszek Luty got 11th at GP Prague. Both players missed T8 just on breakers. Also, both players got there with ZERO BYES. Add Gerry T's PT Final appearance with Mardu and I really think this deck needs more credit as a significant tiered player, as well as the hands-down best Thoughtseize deck we have.

Of course, MTGO data could muddle this entire picture. But with the paper GP data we have, it's an interesting picture.

Re: Fetches getting banned
This is not going to happen, Wizards has given no indication it will happen, and this suggestion has always been one of my favorite indicators that the format is healthy. Anytime people start suggesting these kinds of fundamental reshaping bans (e.g. ban fetches, ban all fast mana, ban all strong removal, etc.), I know that the format probably has no real issues and we are just struggling to find something meaningful to discuss.

Re: "Annoying decks" in Modern
This kind of topic is both an indicator that the format is fine and one of those subjective, largely meaningless discussion points that does little to help us understand the format. On the former count, it suggests to me that the author probably lacked for topics and just picked a grab-bag of various Modern decks that the internet buzzes about (plus some arbitrary inclusions like MERFOLK that further delegitimize the argument) and complained about them. Why? Because there's nothing real or better to complain about. On the latter count, this author is falling into the classic high school op-ed trap. "It's just my opinion" is not a shield from criticism. It does not elevate the article or the opinion above the empirical requirements of such statements. This is also a problem that various Twitch and Twitter streamers/personalities have, but that's a separate topic. Such pieces do not advance our understanding of Modern or our discussion of Modern policy. It doesn't help us contextualize the metagame or grasp how decks work. It's just some dude's/dudette's opinion on their personal theories with minimal effort made to a) justify those positions and b) explain to us why we should care and agree.

Re: Preordain and GSZ
I think we're all sold on SFM so I don't feel this needs to be justified anymore. Wake us up when someone is actively arguing against SFM. Preordain and GSZ are more interesting issues. I'd be curious to see more discussion in particular around GSZ, which was banned for a very specific reason. How do people think that initial GSZ ban rationale holds up today, and how do we think GSZ would impact diversity? Same goes for Preordain of course, but I think that's a less likely unban in that Wizards has yet to unban these kinds of generic tools and instead unbans flashier, more predictable pieces of technology. They have also never unbanned anything that could slot into a T4 rule violator/combo deck. Thoughts on this?

Quote from gkourou »

1) If one of the main reasons Splinter Twin got banned is the double PT FRF top 8, which merely came from a perfect limited record, then it should have never been banned. I would much rather prefer them sharing stats from MODO and showing it's dominance(if there was one).
This feels as disgusting as it did back then.

I agree that it's problematic, but I also acknowledge it's where Wizards comes from which is why I encourage us to keep looking at GP/PT T8s as the primary predictor of B&R decisions. MTGO is clearly the secondary predictor (and may even be the primary), but our knowledge of the true MTGO metagame is never going to align with Wizards' so it's tough to generate predictions based on that. Hopefully Wizards moves past this T8-centric notion of Modern. Until they do, however, we'll just keep acknowledging T8s as such an important barometer of format health in Wizards' eyes, and an important indicator of pending bans.

2) Saying UW Control is not a Tier 1 deck, because it had a great Day 2 presence, a great T32 presence, but a poor T8 presence(even if one was into the top 8, on tiebreakers alone), is really off. I heard holydiva and Hoogland saying this exact same thing, both for #GPSP and #GPPrague. It's just wrong.
UW is a great deck, and instead of us talking at how bad it's T8 conversion rates was, we should be talking about how great it's Day 2 to T32 conversion rate was.

I totally agree with this. I enjoy Hoogland and h0ly as streamers and content creators. I watch their channels when they are up and I have the time. But both of them fall into a similar trap of deliberately leaning towards some strong, polarizing, controversial opinions in public. I don't know the extent to which these views are to generate views, create a certain persona, or just express personal beliefs. I do know that a Twitch soundbite does not qualify as real analysis. I also know that both users, particularly Hoogland, do not react well to challenges in their channels. This can lead to an echo chamber effect among their followers, which gets compounded when those users parrot the soundbite on Reddit and other platforms.

If we really want to assess true deck performance instead of generating memes, soundbites, and views, we need to go beyond the T8. The best way to do this is through T32 analysis coupled with standings and #s of Byes. This gives us the most accurate sense of true deck performance over the event. For instance, at GP Prague, there are only three players in the entire T16 who have 1 or 0 byes. These players are Haram (5th - Bant Spirits - 1 Bye), Seegelken (10th - UW Control - 1 Bye), and the super impressive Leszek (11th - Mardu - 0 Byes). Rather than talking about how a 0 Bye player got 39 points with Mardu at a 2k player GP, missing T8 on breakers alone, we see people talking about how Thoughtseize and midrange decks are bad. Same with the UW Control narrative. This kind of surface level analysis is lazy and does not describe true deck performance. It's unfortunate that Hoogland and h0ly, along with other Modern personalities, don't use their platforms to intentionally push back against this superficial, clippable analysis, which means players and posters have to do it themselves. Hopefully we can rise about that in this thread.

Quote from idSurge »

At this point, there is no meaningful reason SFM is banned.

Quote from Thenarus »

Quote from idSurge »

At this point, there is no meaningful reason SFM is banned.

From a player's standpoint, I wholeheartedly agree with you here. From a business standpoint, unbanning SFM in the slower part of the year wastes some hype value. It will probably be unbanned closer to a reprinting to drive sales of whatever set includes it (bonus points if that same set includes Batterskull or any decent Swords). Would make sense for that to coincide with the anniversary of the last unbanning right after the Pro Tour as well, for the same reasons Wizards gave before.

Yeah, I think at this point we all basically acknowledge that SFM's release is just around the corner and will likely coincide with the next big SFM reprinting. A February 2019 unban would be the likeliest, as I assume Wizards will maintain their promise to avoid pre-PT unbans/bans in fulfillment of Forsythe's commitment to no more shakeup B&R changes.

Honestly, I don't even think this is such a bad thing. If Wizards makes decisions to enhance Modern popularity and interest, I'm totally fine with that. Wizards needs to make money and I'm glad they are including Modern in their monetization methods. That bodes well for our format and assures we'll have more investment in years to come.

Quote from Arkmer »

Karlov is also just shifting the purpose of the argument; I don't think cf is trying to instigate a Twin debate at all, these are just the numbers many of us have looked into in the past. He's using Twin's stats to show how important top 8s actually are, a point KTK clearly picked up on and addressed.

I do have to say, I think there's plenty of merit to KTK's position about Blue control being a good deck right now; the top 32 numbers certainly are convincing with that kind of meta share, but cf has a point as far as another aspect of the state of Modern. WotC uses top 8s to make big decisions for the format. Both points feel very correct, both points definitely seem to oppose each other.

As I've said a few times now, T8s are very important for B&R decisions. They are much less important when we are assessing deck performance. The last few pages about UW have been primarily about its performance, hence why I want us to stop overemphasizing this meaningless technical detail that UW didn't T8 this event.

Quote from cfusionpm »

Quote from ktkenshinx »

Quote from cfusionpm »

Do top 8s matter? Or not? It seems to be nothing more than a way to frame a tournament. If we don't like the T8, ignore it. If it looks great, it's important.

T8s appear to matter most for bans and unbans, as they are frequently cited in updates. But they should not matter as much for performance assessments, which is what I was responding to.

This feels like the opposite of what we have heard in the past, where truly awful Day 2s and disgusting T32s were "saved" and praised for their super diverse Top 8s. I agree that it's more complex than that, but let's not pretend that UW being the absolute dominant force of the tournament, while putting 0 copies into the Top 8 isn't a bit disjointed.

Again, stop emphasizing this silly narrative about UW not making T8. Is it literally and technically true? Sure. Is it meaningful for discussions of the deck's power? Absolutely not. The 10th place pilot solely missed on breakers and did so with a single Bye. That's an outstanding performance. The deck had excellent Day 2 to T16 and T32 conversion on top of that. If we are trying to have a meaningful and critical discussion of UW's performance, then we need to stop repeating this meaningless fact about the deck missing T8 on an arbitrary technicality.

I GUARANTEE that if UW had one copy in the T8, we'd see players complaining that it "only" had 1 copy. And if it had 6 copies, we'd see the same group complaining that this was a random GP anomaly (literally a line I saw multiple times after Madrid). The veiled and overt blue skepticism needs to stop.

Quote from tronix »

i mean id argue that UW control had a statistically improbable performance. both in its day 2 presence, and its 8 copies in just the 9-32 range; which is 3 times more than other deck in the set. all while zero in the top 8.

Again, there is simply no good reason to frame a lliteral lack of T8 copies as a performance strike against the deck or even a negative finish. Tigo in 10th missed on breakers alone with only one Bye. That's spectacular. If we're trying to meaningfullly assess performance based on metrics that matter, this needs to effectively be treated as a T8 placement. I assume we're trying to assess the deck's actual performance, not just get a surface level capture. If so, treat that finish as actually better than some of the "true" T8 finishes off the backs of triple Byes.

Re: UW Control at the GP
I haven't seen a lot of the ridiculous "failed to convert" argument here, but I did see it on Reddit and it was mentioned on Hoogland's channel last night. I want to get ahead of this uncritical line before it starts. Importantly, although there are no UW Control decks in the T8, the 10th place pilot missed T8 on breakers alone. Moreover, he did this with only one Bye. It's still technically true that he didn't T8. But that is clearly a loaded observation that is secretly, or not so secretly, trying to imply something about UW Control's viability. Don't buy it and don't parrot it around. UW Control had a very strong GP and SCG peeformance, on the backs of repeated strong MTGO performances and a previous strong GP finish. It's the real deal.

Quote from goblinundertaker »

sure you can play alot of decks and the format is diverse(tm) but it takes more than diversity to make a format good. magic is a game and if the game play is enjoyable to a majority of players ( i may not be in the majority)shouldn't that be reason for concern. also when did i mention having success with a deck im not sure what you are getting at. its not about interactive or non interactive, its about the average game being worth the time and money of a modern tournament. games coming down solely to sideboard cards, fast mana creating non games, burning inquiry being played in a tier 1 deck, are these not legitimate? people complain about bad game play because there are legitimate complaints. first popularity does not mean something is "good" or the 'best' . second modern has been the most popular format for years now (since 2012 i believe) just on the virtue of it being a semi affordable non rotating format. with standard being pretty bad over the last 2 years and legacy being prohibitively expensive, modern is going to be the most popular by default.

If those complaints were describing actual Modern problems on a significant scale, that would be cause for concern. Thankfully, this is not the case. We see this both anecdotally and more scientifically. Anecdotally, I can say that as a regular MTGO player I see even polarized matchups decided by far more than just who draws their SB cards. This often boils down to small decisions that we forget because we're fixated on typical Modern memes like "T3 Karn kappa" or "GG mulled to 4 no Leyline F6." Decisions like when to mulligan and when to keep, what to hit with your one removal spell, what outs to play into, etc. make a huge difference. We also see this all the time at high-level games. Twitch chat tends to remember memes like T3 Karn into scoop phase, but then doesn't remember tight matchups like Spirits vs. Humans that might seem like aggro slugfests on paper but boil down to tight decisions over many turns.

Scientifically, we have strong reason to suggest this is not true because the top Modern players do as good in Modern as in Legacy, have the same MWP ceiling as in Legacy, and perform consistently in Modern across multiple events. If Modern was just a SB lottery high variance mess, we would see the best Modern players doing worse in Modern than low-variance formats like Standard, and we would see their Modern performance ceiling fall relative to their ceiling in other formats. We do not see this. So unless we think that top Modern players are just luckier than other Modern players, it seems much more likely that there is much more to stable Modern success than just random Burning Inquiry draws.

We've seen these Modern complaints for years, especially since Twin got banned. These complaints were absolutely true in 2016, which is why Wizards acted so decisively in the early 2017 B&R update. They have not been true since then.

Quote from Galerion »

I swear guys I think I will cry when the two black Commands are revealed.

Either because they are beyond terrible or because Wizards finally gave them some good cards for a change. I really hope it's the latter...

Silumgar's command
Choose two,

- Mill 5
- Mill 5
- Mill 5
- Mill 5

Watch the UB command be:
-6cmc
-sorcery speed
-one of the modes is Glimpse the Unthinkable
-it has a boardwipe mode, but it's just Consume the Meek

Other than that, I do like what Radiant Purge is trying to do. White's looking like it's assuming the role of multicolor hoser these days what with this card and Gatecrash's Renounce the Guilds. Maybe one day they'll be relevant sideboard tools...

http://www.starcitygames.com/article/30305_Reformatting-Modern.html



On the premium side though.

Also I think it's kind of crazy that people are worrying about AV somehow breaking the format, but what we have now is somehow okay.

I want to report a "finish" for 8Rack in a Modern tournament from yesterday because every little bit of public play this deck gets will (hopefully) help it get out of the "developing competitive" section, which is a nice way of saying "Tier 2.5++". And before I get on with it, I want to say this will be a really short "report", mentioning only the list, the match results and some overall things. I neither have the time to get into detail nor want to half-ass it with sentences like "drew X and Y, he had some stuff but couldn't do f(Z) and my Racks eventually got the job done bla bla bla". Sadly, this is what most people do (don't make me have to pull out quotes).

The setting: Modern Monday in my LGS (which is the second biggest and by far the most popular one in the entire city). 2 brackets of 64 players, playing a total of 17 different decks (not counting variations). 5 rounds of action for everybody plus additional 3 rounds for the 16 people who have the highest score in their brackets (basically the two top eights of each pod get to for a third pod and play 3 rounds). My finish - 2nd place. Went undefeated until the last match and with pretty good tiebreakers.

The list:




I have also included a visual spoiler for the decklist.

The games:

Game 1 against Storm - 2:1. They can't handle graveyard hate too well, especially not when paired with targeted discard.

Game 2 against Junk(Abzan) - 2:0. He had quite literally 0 cards that could deal with Mogis.

Game 3 against Junk(Again) - 2:1. He drew better than the last guy and I drew worse than the previous game.

Game 4 against Burn - 2:0. Simply raced him. Still, was close, I won game 2 on 1 life.

Game 5 against Merfolk - 2:0. It's just not a good deck if continuously disrupted.

---

Game 6 against Twin - 2:0. Didn't allow a combo to happen game 1 and intentionally allowed him to combo in game 2. Few things are as precious as the look on their faces when you let the triggers happen and they make "infinite" Deceivers, go to attacks, extend the hand and then notice you tap BR for a Rakdos Charm.

Game 7 against my own Esper deck I gave to a friend - 2:1. "No more shall the righteous cower before evil". Some people will understand why I wasn't able to win game 2.

Game 8 against Junk(yet again) - 1:2. Rhino+Batterskull+Nature's Claim+Celestial Purge. I just couldn't win after the first game.

Overall, the

Notes on the deck:

• Dropping bridge allows me to play Blightning instead of Wrench Mind. You'd be surprised how relevant the damage is. I still play a couple of Wrenches because I've dropped Raven's Crime to two. I really want to be playing whatever lands I manage to draw and it serves only as a late-game lock. The increased hand-shredding capability plays extremely well into the Waste Not.
• A lot of you are going to grin and Mogis. He is, in fact, amazing. Nothing short of Utter End or Celestial Purge gets can kill him and people who aren't prepare to deal with it suffer the consequences.
• Mind Shatter is essential, especially since my concious decision to play my lands and not pitch everything after the 3rd one to Crime.
• The maindeck Anger of the Gods is a must-have at this point. I've been testing this list for a month now and even though I didn't want to play it, I just had to.
• I know everybody is grinning at the taplands, too. Until you play them you have no idea how helpful they are. This is the draw fixing you've been looking for.
• Incredibly potent sideboard.
• Once you accept you are a control deck and play like it, this list works like a charm.

Also let me address something really quickly:

Quote from Nihils »

A few points:

1) How often has the stock list been run at larger events? Whenever I see an 8rack in a tournament it deviates from the stock list just enough that the changes could be doing more harm than good. On top of that, do we have grinders who realistically use the deck IRL? Both a question about gaining press and about having legit good players perfecting their use of the deck. There is obviously a lot of play online, but the metrics that tend to matter more are IRL results. Big tournament results. [An anecdote: Death and Taxes in Legacy was a good deck, but it was never taken serious. Thomas E. picks up the deck and makes it his own, topping a few tournaments. The deck gets press and more players pick it up over time, giving it cred and helping to make it better.] 8rack doesn't have that (lately), either because the deck isn't good enough or because there isn't enough confidence in it to take the risk. I feel that the testing that ktk is doing is a step in that direction (in perfecting more than publicizing ofc). [Another anecdote: when I first picked up this deck all I wanted to do was change this and change that to make it more my own. That was a mistake. Each time I had to take a step back and ask the people who play it all the time what they do, play their list for a little bit, and see why they made the choices they did.] There are cards in the deck that seem bad, but work well. And even minor changes can hurt the integrity of the deck itself.

Yes, the reason is that there isn't confidence in it to take the risk. And that lack of confidence is well justified. When me and my team go to a PTQ, a Grand Prix or that sort of stuff, I would never take 8Rack. Gods, no! Not only can it easily be hated upon only the splashback of hate against other decks (such was the case when people were running Chalice in every sideboard, remember?) but good players won't get baited into mistakes normal people do, like playing lands when they don't absolutely need to, correctly evaluating the threats in your deck, etc. While it's a deck that can get to Day 2 (if there is one) on it's relatively rogue style, it's not something that can Top 8. At least not in it's current state anyway. Even the list I'm running (which I boldly claim to be the best one made yet, with hours and days put into testing and fleshing it out card by card) is miles away from being able to do that. I still look at it and see problem after problem. Not to even mention the mono-black lists, which while being being more consistent, just lacks so many necessary interactions that I don't know where to begin.


EDIT: I forgot to mention something - sadly, I don't have the standings picture/screenshot with my name and deck on it for proof, because I didn't think I would be needing it. I'll be going there again on Friday and hopefully the store owner saved it (he usually does) and I can get it. Point of the whole story - while 8Rack won't win you a GP, it can win you a booster box.

Hey all,

My LGS Owner knows I am a big fan of spoilers!
So he texts me these pictures. No explanation no Nothing just "Well there you go" lol

SO! I had to share.

EDIT AND UPDATE:
These are spoilers from the Ugin's Fate Pack. For everyone who keeps asking

Phenyx posted this on Page 6 of the Fourm Post thought I would be to the Front for more viewing

SO Credits to Phenyx for the Last Picture

Comment Hidden

Quote from TheIronCaptain »

When is Deathrite Shaman coming back?

Slightly before I quit Modern.

Quote from ktkenshinx »

Quote from calderstrake »

Quote from Idrareb »

Yeah the ban list is not the tool to fix the format at this point. At risk of getting a warning, the format needs NEW CARDS or reprints/functional reprints from the pre-modern era. And, call me a shameless Island-Lover if you will but the new tools, most of them at least need to be BLUE. Its the only color that never gets paired with BGx in the formats most successful decks. Sure theres the risk that the rock becomes bug. If powerful new tools get printed in red or white they have to be made in some way to work less optimally with BG than blue. For everyone happy that the format isn't blue dominated you have to understand that it still isn't actually BALANCED. Its golgari land over here.

Using the logic of the original Commander creating new archetypes and synergies in that format, the new Kahns block will hopefully do the same thing for Modern. Time will tell, and soon!

Nooo!! I was thinking we would get to a full 7 days without a single post in this thread! I guess it doesn't really count because you are posting an "all's well!" style post, but it still ruins our 5 day streak.

Let me break it properly then; I THINK STONEFORGE SHOULD COME OFF. IT WOULD REALLY HELP THE COLOR DIVERSITY IN MODERN INSTEAD OF MAKKNG WHITE JUST PATH AND RESTO.

There, that should illicit some angry responses for a while before someone else brings up BBE and Jace coming off to balance each other out. And then we can discuss top and begin the cycle anew!

Hey guys, just played in my first Pro Tour (finished 9-7 just out of the money if any of you actually cared about me.) and I have some fundamental news about the entire format concerning everything you guys are concerned about. I'll do a point form post here, so please take everything with care when you read it;

WARNING; THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION ABOUT THE DISCUSSION I HAVE HAD WITH AARON, I HAVE ALSO BEEN GIVEN CONTACT INFORMATION TO SET UP A FORMAL INTERVIEW IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

1. The pro tour line up for the following year was a decision based on a few factors;

A) The Modern format was stale, they felt that was bad for the format.
B) It didn't display enough innovation.
C) They understand how much negative impact this news has, and are heavily reconsidering the announcement based on the information they now have.
D) They are not dismantling Modern in any sense, nor are they disrespecting it, they did not expect this amount level of feedback.

2. The future of Modern

A) They have a minimum standard to expect a few decks of each archetype (3-4ish) (Combo, Aggro, Aggro-Control, Control)[Giving a total of 12 top tier decks] - They are disappointed they have not met this standard.
B) They want the Pro Tour format for the first of every block release to NOT be Modern.
C) They now understand that as stale as Modern is at some current stages, that people want it on the big stage - they are taking these comments to heart.

3. The Modern BANNED LIST

A) I asked Aaron's opinion on the current banned list, and gave him information about recent polls and we discussed 4 cards specifically;

- Bloodbraid Elf; this card comes up in discussion a lot, and is heavily debated within. I explained to him that most users on this website that argue for it's unbanning feel that it's fault is in the same vein as Wild Nacatl - he nodded as if it was a likely possibility.

- Golgari-Grave Troll; this card also comes up in discussion within, I received a very similar discussion compared to BBE.

- Preordain; An absolute no-no, I was told that tools blue decks have access to overall are strong enough for the format currently compared to most other colors (this hints towards a common sense of both color and archetype balance, and not one prioritizing over the other)

- Sword of the Meek; This card comes up in discussion quite a lot, the problem they fear is that it will shut the door down on Aggro permanently, I countered his argument stating that most users feel it's a combo deck that is more susceptible to massive hate and wins slower than Splinter-Twin. This gives us the notion that this card's unbanning will only happen when Aggro decks reach a supreme level and need to have a specific control deck in the meta to balance itself out.

- Seething Song, Green Sun's Zenith, Jace, the Mindsculptor & Stoneforge Mystic ; they have a grave for themselves concerning Modern. They will be legal in Legacy.

I told him about our community, and some common concerns. I hope the Moderators can use this information to their benefit.

EDIT: Added GSZ, typo (I am currently using the Pro Tour Venue computers I apologize)


UPDATE: August 4th

https://twitter.com/PShmanka/status/496482274368819201

Hey guys! I have some unfortunate news regarding the stream - the video was lost, nor am I able to retrieve the audio. There was a great amount of good discussion between Lantern and I, and some great questions that were asked. I will be doing a short video (hopefully only 30 minutes long) as a recap of last night to get the updates out there, and be editing the original post to follow suit.

UPDATE: August 5th

No response yet from Aaron about a formal interview, restreaming to update with video. Re-editing the original post in accordance to more detail.

Below is a link towards the recap of what was discussed last night;

http://www.twitch.tv/nionradio/b/554819741

Update: August 8th
No email response from AF, will keep you all updated!

Comment Hidden