11/04/2011 LD: "The Modern Future"

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Latest Developments, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.

For the love of God, just unban some cards, and I promise people will play the format.  The biggest complaint that people have is "everything's banned"  Maybe it's time to unban things..... 
Nice to see willingness to continue supporting the format until it reaches critical mass of players (although how eactly it is going to happen now that tournaments got nerfed is another issue).

Regarding shaping the format, my only suggestion is to make sure Zoo doesn't monopolize the aggro spectrum of Modern, just like it did with Extended during its last years. I would love to see a conscious attempt to design and develop cards specific for the modern formats, and having sweet reprints too so it doesn't end the way of Legacy.
If Limited gets in the way of printing good Constructed cards... Screw limited
For the love of God, just unban some cards, and I promise people will play the format.  The biggest complaint that people have is "everything's banned"  Maybe it's time to unban things..... 


You realize this doesn't actually help in the long run...right?

Think of it this way...let's unban and add Jace and Stoneforge to Standard.  A quick surge of excited players! ... and then attendance drops again.
Stoneforge and Jace arent so good that they need to be banned in a format that includes the last 8 years of cards and will only get bigger.
And yes, I've had my ass kicked by Caw-Blade. I've lost directly to JTMS' ultimate via a mono-blue deck. I've lost to Standard Faeries. I've lost to Standard Dragonstorm. I've lost to Teferi, Spell Burst-buyback, Greater Gifts, Ghost Dad, Force of Will, Tendrils, Legacy Goblins.
Stoneforge, JTMS, Bitterblossom and others havent even been given a chance. And if O-Ring had stuck around, they would've rotated from standard just fine like normal cards. If its really gonna be an Eternal format, lets give it a real try. The biggest reason people won't play isnt because of broken cards, its cuz all the broken cards are $100. Thats what they really need to keep in check.
As a player who loves combo decks, I naturally love modern as a format! However, the bannings of ponder and preordain were...disheartening. I played standard pyromancer ascension for long enough to enjoy casting those spells, and not having any format where I can do that any more (legacy doesn't count. ****ing manabases & force) makes me a little sad. However, I do have a potential solution: unban both of those cards plus mental misstep.

Yes, yes, people will scream that mental misstep was horrendously overpowered in Legacy, that it killed entire archetypes and created a monotonous stream of boring hive-mind decks, and they'd be right. However, Modern is not Legacy, and I don't think the card would be quite as format-bending there for these reasons:

  1. Shocklands. The best mana fixing in the format is in the form of Zenfetch + Ravshock. In Legacy, the original duals don't have this problem, and fetches/city of brass are the only widely-played painful lands. To achieve the same effect in Modern, you must lightning bolt yourself on turn one. For this reason, having a turn one wild nacatl, goblin guide, thoughtsieze, etc. mistepped isn't quite as crushing, as then if they don't want to do nothing turn one, they must lava axe/flame javelin themselves. For most aggressive decks, trading a card out of hand for a card and two damage isn't nearly as crushing when their opponent essentially starts at 14-17.

  2. Ponder/Preordain. Both of these spells are easy prey to the trip spell, and adding something combo AND control can use, while adding a new toy for control, could allow control decks to flourish. Though I agree that ancestral visions certainly too good for control, giving them their best buds from standard can't be that bad.

  3. Force of Will. Or, more specifically, lack therof. The card that does the best imitation in Modern is denying shoal, and it will, very often, not do the trick. Have a 2 drop to pitch? Too bad! I'm playing zoo, where I play nacatl, get my tarmogoyf countered by the far-superior at the job spell snare, and then murder your face with a 4/4 + knight of the reliquary! Also, most of the reliable turn 1 win combos have been eliminated by banning chrome mox and rite of flame, so the format doesn't need something nearly as powerful as force in order to be playable. However, control decks will still need an answer for turn 1 nacatl, goblin guide, lavamancer, etc, on the play, as aggro decks just have too much good stuff for a couple doom blades to be adequate. Even then, as stated before, 2 life is a nontrivial cost in this format.

  4. Brainstorm. Yes, this is another card for which there is no substitute in Modern. However, it is THE defining card of Legacy, considered by many the best card in blue, or even in the entire format, allowing pitifully small mana bases in control decks, evasion from discard spells, shuffling in of combo pieces, and just generally enabling most of the decks in the format. Right now, Modern has...Serum Visions? Sleight of Hand? While these are certainly ok, they lack the power of other cantrip sorceries.

Essentially, I'm asking for the inclusion of some certainly weaker versions of cards already considered format-defining in Legacy which, by interesting coincidence, also serve as both perfect accompaniment and perfect foils to each other. Eternal formats need cards with these powerful effects in order to be interesting, and as it stands, Modern just doesn't have any. Aggro players are certainly happy: the only toy they've lost is green sun's zenith. Combo is even still playable (I've proxied up an interesting take on BOaB's Second Sunrise deck which replaces Ponder with...Ior Ruin Expedition! (Ghost Quarter + Sunrise. Think about it). But control is still pretty much useless. The only six drop in the format that could be good (primeval titan), is only good in ramp/combo decks, and though some sort of blue control splashing tarmogoyf and maybe dark confidant may be ok, it won't consistantly beat nacatl.dec. Consider it...
When I first heard of it I liked Modern a lot but then someone picked up the banhammer and had an epileptic attack. Since then my interest has been minimal, but it only truly became zero when freakin' Ponder and Preordain were banned. I still can't believe that actually happened.
www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/metagame.php?f... This is why we don't play Modern.

For God's sake, did wizards even playtested enough before picking up the banhammer? And I'm not talking about the latest bannings, even the initial bannings are irrational. Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary are legal while Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic are not? Come on. This just happened to keep calm the Type 2 lovers that hated cawblade decks. Anyone thinks cawblade would *THE* dominating deck in modern? Really?
www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/metagame.php?f... This is why we don't play Modern.

For God's sake, did wizards even playtested enough before picking up the banhammer? And I'm not talking about the latest bannings, even the initial bannings are irrational. Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary are legal while Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic are not? Come on. This just happened to keep calm the Type 2 lovers that hated cawblade decks. Anyone thinks cawblade would *THE* dominating deck in modern? Really?


Wait... what? What's wrong with this chart? It has a good mix of aggro, combo, control and aggro control. That's a lot more varied than Standard and Extended, and it's entire archetypes rather than just decks. And if it's the Zoo number you don't like, I'd say at least half of that number is actually mislabelled Cat Fish/Counter Cat anyway.
"It Takes Time for a Format to Grow"

Maybe you should remember that yourself. The banhammer is a final answer, not a first answer (much like the way you did the bannings in Standard). You should've waited to see if the metagame solved itself before using the hammer like this.

And it seems to me like Wizards seriously thinks the world loves aggro or something. Don't you get it? We're talking Spikes here. They hate losing. Losing to aggro is no more fun than losing to control or combo.
76125763 wrote:
Zindaras' meta is like a fossil, ancient and its secrets yet to be uncovered. Only men of yore, long dead, knew of it.
www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/metagame.php?f... This is why we don't play Modern.

For God's sake, did wizards even playtested enough before picking up the banhammer? And I'm not talking about the latest bannings, even the initial bannings are irrational. Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary are legal while Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic are not? Come on. This just happened to keep calm the Type 2 lovers that hated cawblade decks. Anyone thinks cawblade would *THE* dominating deck in modern? Really?


Wait... what? What's wrong with this chart? It has a good mix of aggro, combo, control and aggro control. That's a lot more varied than Standard and Extended, and it's entire archetypes rather than just decks. And if it's the Zoo number you don't like, I'd say at least half of that number is actually mislabelled Cat Fish/Counter Cat anyway.



Actually yes, I'm annoyed by the sheer number of Zoo/Countercat decks that are used. I mean, even in a 10-player tournament at my local store, half of the players were piloting zoo decks. Gimme a break, really. And there's no "good mix" in that chart, this chart actually implies that aggro decks are dominant while control decks need more staples.

I tried a monoblack control deck, with the idea of disrupting the aggro decks a lot, finished 4th. Guess what? I needed more powerful cards to match their speed. Same goes for U/W Gifts Control and every othe control deck I tried. Melira stood a chance but too much burn/exile cards where ruining my plans.

So, up until now the progress of Modern is pretty much "meh" to me. Can't wizards just unban everything and introcude chaos for a while and THEN we can start banning cards? It would be easier that way.
For the love of God, just unban some cards, and I promise people will play the format.  The biggest complaint that people have is "everything's banned"  Maybe it's time to unban things..... 



I came here to say exactly this.  People like being able to play with their cards.  Since its creation Modern has consistently denied people the chance to play with their cards.

You missed the boat right from the outset when you decided to use "modern" as the cutoff.  As I understand it, the entire reason for Modern was that you realized Legacy was popular and Extended wasn't, but the reserve list hindered the growth of Legacy.  The answer was obvious - a format where every set not covered by the reserve list was legal.  You even had trial data sitting in front of your face - when Modern was on equal footing with Overextended (when Modern had only been used at the Community Cup), player interest in Overextended was much greater and people were joining player-run events on MODO.

Then you banned a boatload of cards right off the bat, things that had not been even remotely problematic in the very similar 2009 Extended format.  Some of the bannings were absurd for a format this size, stuff like Umezawa's Jitte, Golgari Grave-Troll, and Bitterblossom.  I lost most of my interest in the format, but you referred to things being unbanned in Legacy and hinted that might happen in Modern.

Then the PT came and went, and instead of unbanning things you banned six more cards.  It's become very clear that the format you're trying to build is not the format I want to play.
www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/metagame.php?f... This is why we don't play Modern.

For God's sake, did wizards even playtested enough before picking up the banhammer? And I'm not talking about the latest bannings, even the initial bannings are irrational. Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary are legal while Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic are not? Come on. This just happened to keep calm the Type 2 lovers that hated cawblade decks. Anyone thinks cawblade would *THE* dominating deck in modern? Really?


Wait... what? What's wrong with this chart? It has a good mix of aggro, combo, control and aggro control. That's a lot more varied than Standard and Extended, and it's entire archetypes rather than just decks. And if it's the Zoo number you don't like, I'd say at least half of that number is actually mislabelled Cat Fish/Counter Cat anyway.



Actually yes, I'm annoyed by the sheer number of Zoo/Countercat decks that are used. I mean, even in a 10-player tournament at my local store, half of the players were piloting zoo decks. Gimme a break, really. And there's no "good mix" in that chart, this chart actually implies that aggro decks are dominant while control decks need more staples.

I tried a monoblack control deck, with the idea of disrupting the aggro decks a lot, finished 4th. Guess what? I needed more powerful cards to match their speed. Same goes for U/W Gifts Control and every othe control deck I tried. Melira stood a chance but too much burn/exile cards where ruining my plans.

So, up until now the progress of Modern is pretty much "meh" to me. Can't wizards just unban everything and introcude chaos for a while and THEN we can start banning cards? It would be easier that way.


You say that like they're actually the same deck. They really, really aren't. If you figure it as 50/50, Zoo and Counter Cat are represented about the same as Exarch Twin. And there's only really one other popular aggro deck in the top, the rest are combo and control. A lot of different ones to boot.

I guess you have the right through some greviances if your meta is swarming with zoo, but it doesn't seem the norm. Also also, Mono Black control is not, has never been, and will never be a real deck.
Every single post has mentioned the ban list.... Catching on to the pattern here wizards... maybe you guys should read some of these posts so you can get it through your heads that people want to play with the cards they want to play with and not the cards you THINK they want to play with.

Modern as a format was super exciting then the ban list was announced as an EPIC FAIL and destroyed many peoples interest. Now when people play in the PTQs remember its not because they like the format, its because they are trying to go pro and will do whatever it takes. Just keep that in mind.
I'm about to catch a ton of crap for this, but I think I might be the only person out there who doesn't mind this format. It's not the "ideal" world, but I was one of the OverExtended testers, so we all know how I feel there. Even Overextended needed some changes now and then, but Gavin was a very conservative developer, and I'm sure that provided Wizards with some good data. 

As an OverExtended player, I recall seeing multiple Jace/Stoneforge decks finishing 4-0 or 3-1 every week. I also recall the same about 12 Post. Zoo and Elves were next in line, and occasionally, something unique would slip through the cracks and garner some attention, but that success was never very long for this world.

Just look at the Overextended results for yourself. Gavin's website is still up with decklists, so you can see what Modern would basically look like with access to Jace, Stoneforge, Misstep, Blossom, and all the other cards people complain about wanting back. I myself played Misstep on several occasions, and found myself still getting blown out by aggro decks, despite not playing particularly painful manabases. My best "success" came on the back of a Rack-Discard deck, whose only defining strength was the ability to beat aggro if I played like a Pro, and normal control if I had a decent opener. Every other matchup was basically unwinnable. 12 Post once had a turn where Emrakul and Ulamog came down in the same turn.

I happen to like the changes made. What they've done, whether players really like it or not, is eliminate the most common starting points for most players, and I like that. It forces us all to become better overall, by making us build and test decks for ourselves, rather than using the same starting points we do in Legacy. This format is trying to build its own identity, seperate from any other, and cannot do that if people don't want to give it the time of day. 

Simply put, if you really want to play broken combo or hard-lock control decks, go play Legacy.  I'm not a fan of aggro, but if all I have to do is beat it to win in this new format, I can do that all day.


As a storeowner, tournament organizer and judge, I try to just stay quiet when WOTC or one of their employees posts an article or policy I don't agree with... but LaPille sure makes it hard for me to stay quiet Tongue Out


"I've heard complaints on Twitter and through my email that blame us for changing the format in the wrong way. Although I sympathize with those who were frustrated, I was part of the group that discussed how we were going to change things, and I'm fairly confident that we made things better. Only time will tell.


My simpler explanation for the phenomenon is that we changed the format at all."

My explanation is you created a format out of thin-air that should've been over-extended to begin with, but instead you went with a poorly thought out legacy/extended hybrid and banned a whole lot of cards before the format ever had a chance to take hold.

I echo what others said, bannings should be the last thing you want to do.  That's also a sentiment Lapille himself and various members of r&d have stated over the years- They don't like to ban cards.

Yet they kick a format off by banning a whole bunch of cards including a some with no prior history of breaking a format.  Ancestral Visions, good card... broken?  No.  And I'm the furthest thing from a blue mage you can find Laughing

The bannings after the PT in fairness made mostly sense, but still some headscratchers made it onto the list.  And I still maintain half the cards on that list probably wouldn't need to be banned if Mental Misstep was legal, but that's impossible to prove since MM is probably staying on there for good.

Anyway I think people want to play the format, but they are just hesitatant because they don't want to invest in entire decks only to see the banhammer drop shortly after, which is really the only consistent action you guys have taken with the format.

I know the format will heat up post Worlds, and since you're going to be shoving it down people's throats as PTQ's, it won't have any choice but to be played... but that won't mean it will end up a success.  I think it could be, but WOTC really needs to just let it takes its course for a while, and I'm not sure Tom and a couple others can help themselves for that long.  I just can't see them sit idly by and take no action unless it's absolutely necessary.  They want to 'nurture' the format, and feel the best way to do that is to constantly change the metagame before it has a real chance to settle... thus making players unsettled Undecided

Personally, I'm going to support Modern in my store... but not until 2012 after the format is more developed.  I want to support it, but it's hard to do so when the players aren't really behind it yet and WOTC keeps greatly altering the format.  So I'm going to wait a while.  I know that's how the majority of storeowners in my area feel.  My hope is by the time I run weekly events for Modern, the format will have grown more and players will have embraced it more, but honestly that can only be done if WOTC just stay out of the early stages of its growth.  For the love of all that's pure in the world, just let the meta shake out.

Banning cards is a last resort measure according to various members of WOTC including Tom. 
For the good of the format, please try to actually practice what you preach.

- Dave Feinstein
Whilst I don't question stoneforge and Jace's banning, there were a few bannings that I am disappointed with... green sun's zenith for example. That seemed less like a measure of last resort and more like a decision to nix a certain turn 1 play - my goodness, was it really that powerful that you needed to kill the card? Why not just ban dryad arbor instead?

Every single post has mentioned the ban list.... Catching on to the pattern here wizards... maybe you guys should read some of these posts so you can get it through your heads that people want to play with the cards they want to play with and not the cards you THINK they want to play with.

Modern as a format was super exciting then the ban list was announced as an EPIC FAIL and destroyed many peoples interest. Now when people play in the PTQs remember its not because they like the format, its because they are trying to go pro and will do whatever it takes. Just keep that in mind.



Tom LaPille's response to that is " Players want decklists. Some want to just copy them and have something to play. Others want to know what they need to try to beat.", i.e. the bannings themselves are not what caused problems, it's that we want netdecks and a settled metagame. Frankly I find this offensive. We know the netdecks and the metagame and while relatively balanced, it's just plain unattractive. The man's completely unable to admit mistakes.
In Legacy, Blue is the best color. Let's punish blue, in Modern. And they listened!
While some Magic players enjoy figuring out a new format while working in the dark, the majority of Magic players like more guidance than that.

Is this why Magic forums all over the internet are perpetually clogged with threads complaining that there are too few netdecks? Good to finally hear an explanation for that.

Also: *facepalm*

www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/metagame.php?f... This is why we don't play Modern.

For God's sake, did wizards even playtested enough before picking up the banhammer? And I'm not talking about the latest bannings, even the initial bannings are irrational. Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary are legal while Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic are not? Come on. This just happened to keep calm the Type 2 lovers that hated cawblade decks. Anyone thinks cawblade would *THE* dominating deck in modern? Really?


Wait... what? What's wrong with this chart? It has a good mix of aggro, combo, control and aggro control. That's a lot more varied than Standard and Extended, and it's entire archetypes rather than just decks. And if it's the Zoo number you don't like, I'd say at least half of that number is actually mislabelled Cat Fish/Counter Cat anyway.



Actually yes, I'm annoyed by the sheer number of Zoo/Countercat decks that are used. I mean, even in a 10-player tournament at my local store, half of the players were piloting zoo decks. Gimme a break, really. And there's no "good mix" in that chart, this chart actually implies that aggro decks are dominant while control decks need more staples.

I tried a monoblack control deck, with the idea of disrupting the aggro decks a lot, finished 4th. Guess what? I needed more powerful cards to match their speed. Same goes for U/W Gifts Control and every othe control deck I tried. Melira stood a chance but too much burn/exile cards where ruining my plans.

So, up until now the progress of Modern is pretty much "meh" to me. Can't wizards just unban everything and introcude chaos for a while and THEN we can start banning cards? It would be easier that way.

I totally agree with that, this formats is made for Zoo decks to bash your face every single match, and what is left for people like me, who love control/combo decks? day by day our resourses are becoming smaller; now control decks are a way too slow to match Aggro, combo decks are more and more fragile and easy to disrupt.

I don't want to play a format ruled by Zoo decks, is just... not interesting, and a bit stressful...but finally, only time will tell
@ Roeher: +1. I agree with the bannings too.

@Dlfixer: That kind of thinking was what got Dark Ritual banned instead of Necropotence back in the day. Wizards has learned their lessons since then. Enablers for the most part should NOT be banned over the actual problem cards, especially not to just sate the current players by letting them continue to play with a card they like because it's frankly OP. It's like Survival of the Fittest: yes, you can ban Dryad Arbor/Vengevine, but sooner or later something else will come along and break the card, and soon enough you have things banned in the double digits just to keep one card functioning, which just isn't worth it.

Of course Wizards do sometimes ban enablers, but only when they are insanely good and makes the deck that uses it incredibly uninteractive and unfun.
I Love modern , it is by far my facvirite format , it's a deck builders format like no other and the bannings have helped keep it fresh. It it was up to me there would be a banning of all the top cards every quarter keeping the format in constant fluke.

Nowadays I only play online and the reson I think modern failed there was simple. 

The gap between the banning being announced and coming into effect was too long. People didn't want to play pre-ban matches in a format which was about to change and people got bored of brewing because they coudn't test in a competitive format in the new enviroment.

I stroungly beleive as more people's favirite sets rotate out modern will become big , the bannings only make it more accesible , I play a $50 rogue combo deck and regularly beat the big players like zoo , The formats wide open and the best fun which can be had in magic now.

Wizards need to promate it more online though (as they do all the other formats ) because people have decks just no one has the confidence to join a queue anymore because they don't think it will start.

Please don't unban anything , If anything ban more. and people complaining about preordain and ponder there are other ways to make you deck consistent and magic was worked fine for about 15 years without pre-ordain.

well done on making modern   
When I first heard of it I liked Modern a lot but then someone picked up the banhammer and had an epileptic attack. Since then my interest has been minimal, but it only truly became zero when freakin' Ponder and Preordain were banned. I still can't believe that actually happened.



This, a thousand times.  When Modern was first announced, (aka right after the Community Cup), I hoped on MTGO, bought a couple decks, and couldn't stop playing the format.  I loved it so much, and then *BOOM*, the first round of random bannings came and took away most of my interest. The next round really killed any desire I might have had.

There's a reason the policy of "Banning as a last resort" has worked so well for WoTC over they years; it's because people like playing with thier cards (the cards we paid good money for from WoTC), and to just tell the playerbase that they can't play with a good deal of their cards ESPECIALLY with no tourament data to back it up is a slap in the face to players.  I mean, I really, really feel bad for all the players who bought Stoneforge Mystics and Jace, the Mind Sculptors at thier peak only to have them banned out of Type 2, Extended AND Modern.
This format is another in a long line of changes to the extended PTQ season. That has changed every year for several years now. For the changes to stop, modern has to be the answer, but it just doesn't appear that it is. So if it isn't, you'll just change it again and effort on Modern is wasted. All the changes made has created a cycle that is not favorable here. If this format doesn't work, history says the format gets scrapped in less than 10 months. Therefore getting involved with it is risky. If players avoid it for that reason, then attendance is down and we are proven right.

On top of that, you've created a format that is supposed to end on turn 4, but it didn't. You are trying to make that happen, but that means decks get banned left and right. Your real problem is the format has no force of will. The result is it looks like who goes first is really important. The Chapin line from coverage about having 8 seconds of priority all game was rough for the format. The history here is not in favor of embracing the format because there is too much uncertainty if it will actually stay around, a deck I choose to play will not get banned, or an important match will come down to who goes first and who has a grand total of 8 seconds of priority. I know it is going to be a PTQ format, but with all the OP changes and all the uncertainty about this format, I will probably just skip that PTQ season. Why get involved with an unstable format when the PTQs are the only events that matter? Buy a deck. Play a total of 3 events. No thanks.

You all really should have gone with overextended since it was player driven so it offers what players want. They were already working out the problems. They gave you data so you didn't have to work in the dark, but didn't take it. You hired the guy that crafted it which is good, but honestly it looks like you didn't want to let others do your job for you. The best reason you could give for tossing away a grassroots effort was appearances of card frames. That decision doesn't inspire confidence that you've fixed the extended PTQ season.

If in 12 months and several more rounds of bannings you appear to really be behind this format, maybe I'll try it. However, you are asking a lot of players to get to this point as Mr.  Feinstein stated in a very well written response.
I think what a lot of people are missing about the bannings is that they are not just trying to make a balanced format. They want a balanced format that plays a certain way. if they just wanted balanced, yes they could just let the format loose and then ban accordingly. But they are looking to make a certain format, and its clear that certain things just would not be able to exist in that format.

For pete's sake, people are talking about too much being banned, but freaking Bloodbraid Elf is seeing zero play. And she was the most powerful card in standard for awhile.

If anything, I think another handful of cards need to be banned, starting with Wild Nacatl.

They haven't done the best job of portraying what their ideal end state is, but I know what I want, and they are moving towards it with every change they have made:

I want a format that, moving forward, if 8 people have gathered for FNM, and 6 really want to play modern, the other two won't feel automatically out of contention because they only have their standard decks. They may not win the tournament, but they can at least expect to win some games.

The Let-Loose-then-Ban format so many are espousing does nothing but dream-crush the players with only standard decks with a string of vicious losses.

Its necessary that the newer player feel like they have a chance, if they do, they will be much more willing to also invest into the format, even if thats just buying a couple playsets of quick upgrades they can make to their standard deck when playing modern.

www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/metagame.php?f... This is why we don't play Modern.

For God's sake, did wizards even playtested enough before picking up the banhammer? And I'm not talking about the latest bannings, even the initial bannings are irrational. Tarmogoyf and Knight of the Reliquary are legal while Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Stoneforge Mystic are not? Come on. This just happened to keep calm the Type 2 lovers that hated cawblade decks. Anyone thinks cawblade would *THE* dominating deck in modern? Really?


Wait... what? What's wrong with this chart? It has a good mix of aggro, combo, control and aggro control. That's a lot more varied than Standard and Extended, and it's entire archetypes rather than just decks. And if it's the Zoo number you don't like, I'd say at least half of that number is actually mislabelled Cat Fish/Counter Cat anyway.



Actually yes, I'm annoyed by the sheer number of Zoo/Countercat decks that are used. I mean, even in a 10-player tournament at my local store, half of the players were piloting zoo decks. Gimme a break, really. And there's no "good mix" in that chart, this chart actually implies that aggro decks are dominant while control decks need more staples.

I tried a monoblack control deck, with the idea of disrupting the aggro decks a lot, finished 4th. Guess what? I needed more powerful cards to match their speed. Same goes for U/W Gifts Control and every othe control deck I tried. Melira stood a chance but too much burn/exile cards where ruining my plans.

So, up until now the progress of Modern is pretty much "meh" to me. Can't wizards just unban everything and introcude chaos for a while and THEN we can start banning cards? It would be easier that way.


You say that like they're actually the same deck. They really, really aren't. If you figure it as 50/50, Zoo and Counter Cat are represented about the same as Exarch Twin. And there's only really one other popular aggro deck in the top, the rest are combo and control. A lot of different ones to boot.

I guess you have the right through some greviances if your meta is swarming with zoo, but it doesn't seem the norm. Also also, Mono Black control is not, has never been, and will never be a real deck.



I believe Autumn-Tail said exactly what I'm trying to say here. "I don't want to play in a format full of zoo decks". I despise zoo in the first place, I believe that it doesn't introduce mathematical paterns of thinking at any point during playing with it, I completely hate the fact that it's so "kill, kill, then use big dudes and kill again" like, and now the Eternal format we had so much hopes for it, of being balanced etc, are ruined. Great.

I don't really care if Countercat and Zoo are different types of decks. They use the same primitive way of thinking and that's what I call "zoo logic".

I tried monoblack as a "rogue" deck and I already explained its problems. I believe it is a real deck and had fun playing with it. But I seek more than fun here.

From a rational point of view, zoo gets all the legacy power level staples except the dual lands (I'm talking about Tarmogoyf, Knight of the Reliquary, Wild Nacatl etc) while control and combo decks got no such power-level staples. Wizards banned Stoneforge, Jace, Bitterblossom and the rest with one of their main excuses being "we don't want those cards to bring the metagame to a power level of legacy". Seriously, and then they leave out of the banlist Tarmogoyf? Except I've missed something, this seems really really wrong to me.

And just because someone mentioned it somewhere here; Legacy is not Vintage, it's not all about broken-combos and hard locks. Who plays hard locks in legacy anyway? And the "broken combos" are easily disrupted by Force of Will and its little friends. Play before you speak.

Because people complaining are always more vocal than people who are not,


I'm gonna go ahead and say what a lot of people think but don't take the time to write:


Modern is okay. The bannings are fine. You can ban more if you have to. Make it a new original format.


I'll be happy to follow Modern events next year.


Thank you.

I love that people are whining about Zoo/aggro, the least winning-est archetype in Magic while simultaneously complaining about it not involving math.

Aggro is nothing but math and is the hardest type of deck to win with because it's the easiest to hate on and hardest to change with the meta (because your win condition is consistency/density which means you don't have many flexible slots).

Creatures are creatures, if you can't beat them you don't deserve to win.
This article confused the hell out of me. I thought when Modern was announced, Wizards said that the format would have more bannings and unbannings more frequently than normal, that way when things are banned or unbanned it's less of a big deal. That doing this would make it so much different than Legacy and Vintage, and keep it fresh all the time even though it's an Eternal format.

And then along comes this article, and you make claims that there will be less bannings in the future. This completely goes against that.

See, I've thought players have been really, really childish in complaining about the bannings, because the format is still interesting, even with them, and when I thought Modern was going to have lots of bannings and unbannings I thought they were childish for not just sucking it up and saying "maybe next time it'll be unbanned, but until then I'll enjoy this other deck."

But not that you're saying they're right, that you should be banning less, that completely breaks that argument against them. Sure, I still find them to be childish, because the format isn't dead, players are just acting like stockbrokers and freaking out at any change when they should just continue doing what they're doing, but telling them they're right about the bannings breaks any chance you have of using bannings and unbannings to frequently shake up the format, which was a great idea if only the oft-complaining Magic player base could get used to it. Well, so much for that plan I guess.
I love that people are whining about Zoo/aggro, the least winning-est archetype in Magic while simultaneously complaining about it not involving math.

Aggro is nothing but math and is the hardest type of deck to win with because it's the easiest to hate on and hardest to change with the meta (because your win condition is consistency/density which means you don't have many flexible slots).

Creatures are creatures, if you can't beat them you don't deserve to win.



QFT
Seems to me the real issue of the complaints is that Zoo is being artificially propped up to win more than it historically should, mostly by a Harrison Bergeron crippling of everything else.
I love that people are whining about Zoo/aggro, the least winning-est archetype in Magic while simultaneously complaining about it not involving math.

Aggro is nothing but math and is the hardest type of deck to win with because it's the easiest to hate on and hardest to change with the meta (because your win condition is consistency/density which means you don't have many flexible slots).

Creatures are creatures, if you can't beat them you don't deserve to win.

IMO, you use "history of archetypes winning percentage" because it's the only argument you have that actually has a chance of being valid/rational. However, I don't care what happened in the past. I care on what happens now.

And just because I happen to be a mathematics university student, could you please explain to me on which part of playing-with-the-deck process, aggro decks include maths? Yes, I know deckbuilding is 100% maths, I'm not questioning that, I'm asking you on which part of piloting an aggro deck you would think in any mathematical way.
Dunno, man.

Speaking as an online player, Modern is far from dead from where I'm sitting. Overdrive! attendance continues to increase, I've seen a wide variety of decks flow through those halls, and Modern games are much easier to find casually. This does not point to a dead format.

Sure, the DEs aren't firing. And that's understandable. People are waiting to netdeck Worlds. And everyone's still busy playing w/Innistraad. Modern 2mans are firing, tho!

I do not wish to participate in this Community Site.

And just because I happen to be a mathematics university student, could you please explain to me on which part of playing-with-the-deck process, aggro decks include maths? Yes, I know deckbuilding is 100% maths, I'm not questioning that, I'm asking you on which part of piloting an aggro deck you would think in any mathematical way.


Based on what I have on the board, how many turns do I have to win?
If he plays ANY creature?
Cards between then and now? Number of removal he's played, chances he's drawn, etc..

Is it worth the risk to play another creature for the shortening of the clock versus playing into removal/sweepers?

I have played Magic since Timespiral.

Control is SO much easier to play and leads to more wins than Aggro.

Control:
Did I lose yet? No?  Than I'm winning.

Aggro: Did I win yet? No.  Than I'm losing.

It is far easier to stall and than win with a few cards and adapt to the meta than it is to build a critical density of threats and then make room to adapt to answers.
And just because I happen to be a mathematics university student, could you please explain to me on which part of playing-with-the-deck process, aggro decks include maths? Yes, I know deckbuilding is 100% maths, I'm not questioning that, I'm asking you on which part of piloting an aggro deck you would think in any mathematical way.


Based on what I have on the board, how many turns do I have to win?
If he plays ANY creature?
Cards between then and now? Number of removal he's played, chances he's drawn, etc..

Is it worth the risk to play another creature for the shortening of the clock versus playing into removal/sweepers?

I have played Magic since Timespiral.

Control is SO much easier to play and leads to more wins than Aggro.

Control:
Did I lose yet? No?  Than I'm winning.

Aggro: Did I win yet? No.  Than I'm losing.

It is far easier to stall and than win with a few cards and adapt to the meta than it is to build a critical density of threats and then make room to adapt to answers.

I play magic since Odyssey.

Your way of thinking is completely different than mine. I was 80% sure that you're an aggro player. Now I'm 100% sure. You think really oversimplified.

Calculating your opponent's chances of playing a removal spell, knowing how and when to attack/block are basic knowledge for an mtg player. It's what you teach a new guy after you explain the basics. Even the stack is more difficult to undestand for a new player than what you just mentioned. You're not proving anything.

Aggro is popular because it's simple and easy to handle. Since players haven't netdecked any lists yet (as many of you previously mentioned) they're all playing zoo. Why? Because it's simple, powerfull and even if new decks come up, it will still be a strong tier 1 deck. If they could play reanimator, which is also incredibly simple, they would play reanimator.

Control decks need a very accurate amount of knowledge regarding the opponent's deck, knowing what and when to counter, what and when to destroy and must make the game keep smoothly like a fine piece of clockwork. You've got to estimate both your chances of drawing the card you want to reduce your opponent's field advantage to zero and your opponent's chances to avoid your strike, and if you miss, it can lead to an overwhelming defeat. Take a legacy deck for example, Team America. That's exaclty the case of a heavy control deck that needs perfect knowledge on both the opponent's deck and the user's deck itself.

Serious, non-simple combo decks most of the time have to estimate a stack 5 times larger than normal, knowing when to unleash that giant stack, accurately estimating the possibilities of success and at the same time knowing how to play around your opponent's counterspells/disruption/heavy attacks. A great example is Ad Nauseam Tendrils or Hive Mind, also Legacy decks.

And you still insist that aggro decks do include maths, compared to combo and control decks?

There's nothing wrong in being an aggro player, there's nothing wrong in being simple-minded. It's actually a very practical way of thinking - not wanting to tire your mind, hating headaches etc. But I won't accept aggro decks as "complicated" decks.

Because people complaining are always more vocal than people who are not,


I'm gonna go ahead and say what a lot of people think but don't take the time to write:


Modern is okay. The bannings are fine. You can ban more if you have to. Make it a new original format.


I'll be happy to follow Modern events next year.


Thank you.




Agreed.

And also:

Let's say that the bannings HAVE made zoo into the unstoppable juggernaut that it is, which I don't believe, but for the sake of argument let's say that's the case.

There's two ways of approaching this situation:

1) With the tools that I still have available, how can I beat Zoo?

or

2) Waaaah, Unban some cards so I can beat Zoo.

The great thing about the first approach is that YOU WILL WIN TOURNAMENTS! if everyone's playing Zoo, and you figure out the way to beat it, you are set. The second approach will always keep you in the sidelines, not brewing, not playing and not having fun.
Why is Latest Developments turning into a PR mouthpiece for all mistakes?
IMAGE(http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/1374/linkaraemrakul.png)

Simply put, if you really want to play broken combo or hard-lock control decks, go play Legacy.  I'm not a fan of aggro, but if all I have to do is beat it to win in this new format, I can do that all day.



The flip side of this is if you want to play "normal" magic, go play Standard or Draft or Sealed.  Those just happen to be by far the most promoted formats, so if that's what you like it's not hard to find a game.  Legacy is great, but it can't be heavily promoted as a format if WotC is unwilling to get rid of the reserve list.  There should be a supported high-power format, that's the niche that WotC should be trying to fill here.

Because people complaining are always more vocal than people who are not,


I'm gonna go ahead and say what a lot of people think but don't take the time to write:


Modern is okay. The bannings are fine. You can ban more if you have to. Make it a new original format.


I'll be happy to follow Modern events next year.


Thank you.




Agreed.

And also:

Let's say that the bannings HAVE made zoo into the unstoppable juggernaut that it is, which I don't believe, but for the sake of argument let's say that's the case.

There's two ways of approaching this situation:

1) With the tools that I still have available, how can I beat Zoo?

or

2) Waaaah, Unban some cards so I can beat Zoo.

The great thing about the first approach is that YOU WILL WIN TOURNAMENTS! if everyone's playing Zoo, and you figure out the way to beat it, you are set. The second approach will always keep you in the sidelines, not brewing, not playing and not having fun.



Three things.

1. Wizards has proven time and time again that anything is likely to get the axe other than zoo.  Even if somebody cooks up something that can defeat zoo, that deck may not survive the next banlist. Note Lapille didn't say they'll stop bannings, just they'll "slow down". Call me paranoid, but this sounds way more like "We're just watching for the next challenger to Zoo", than "We're trying to balance this format."
2. The current level of control in Modern is not enough to match with Zoo, unless you completely hate them out. But the chances of a hate deck winning? Only if nobody plays anything else other than what you're hating on. So it still doesn't solve the problem.
3. Tarmo, despite being proven time and time again that it's the most OP creature in the game, is not on the banlist. I can't fathom any reason other than "Wizard encourages everyone to play zoo" for this to be.

Three things.


3. Tarmo, despite being proven time and time again that it's the most OP creature in the game, is not on the banlist. I can't fathom any reason other than "Wizard encourages everyone to play zoo" for this to be.



That's an interesting way to phrase it. You can't fathom any other reason. Maybe you just gotta fathom a little deeper.

Seriously, do it, brainstorm a decklist that can take out your basic Zoo deck. You say that you'd only beat it if you specifically hate against it. But Zoo is all creatures and every deck plays creatures, I don't have to make a diagram of all the kill spells that'll take out both a Frost Titan AND a Tarmogoyf, do I? What about all the spells that'll take out a goyf AND a pesky control artifact. They're all out there, it's just that people haven't used them because the previous environments didn't need them or made them hard to play.
Go look through gatherer, they're there.

Edit: I screwed up those quote boxes something fierce
Believe me, I've been running MBC (which some people say it's not a deck, well whatever) since 2002. My playgroup happen to like creature decks and I eat all of them for lunch.

And guess what? Somebody show up with any kind of combo, my deck's dead.

They play control, I'm dead.

Even UG madness was hard to beat.

And I'm fairly certain I don't have much of a chance against caw.

Things you're forgetting about MBC.

1. It's slow, versatile kills are even slower.
2. Black creatures are more vulnerable to your own sweepers than enemy sweeps.
3. It has zero solution for any deck which the noncreature portion is enough to kill you, and zoo builds can sometimes do that, and RDW certainly can do that.
4. Any kind of early-game control manabase in modern -burns- you.

Yes, there's plenty of cards in modern that can kill a tarmo or stop zoo dead, but the problem is, that pile of kill spells you put together is only going to hate out a pure creature deck, and nothing more.

So until the day the enviornment becomes "everybody plays zoo but you", your strategy will never win you tournaments.
Sign In to post comments