Jan 28, Banned/Restriced list announcement

8 posts / 0 new
Last post

Dear Erik Lauer,



Open letter, regarding your article "January 28, 2013 DCI Banned ":


        I’m part of a very active magic community in Richmond, VA. During my time at local pre-releases (prior to this article coming out), I heard multiple fellow players say that they were avoiding Modern PTQs because they feel the environment if overregulated. This is an opinion I have heard espoused since the creation of modern, and it has not gone away. Have you thought about an article explaining why there was a need to ban more cards to counteract the numbers that Jund is showing, as opposed to removing powerful alternatives from the banned list? I feel that this could help the community’s feelings toward modern more than mentioning the one card that has recently been removed from the banned list while banning two more?



I’m curious about the following:






  •   mental misstepo





    • stops Jund’s disruption, bolts, and explosive Deathrite shaman draws (by the way, this guy is everywhere)




    • oh, by the way, this is good against storm as well





  • Punishing fire





    • Kills almost everything in the deck and recovers from the disruption





  • Wild Nacatl





    • As Jund typically has a poor matchup against agro strategies





  • Ponder/pre-ordain/Jace/ancestral visions





    • If you're using the idea that Jund is so prevalent wny aren't we unbanning any control cards in a format where there are next to no control decks




    • Anywhere





I’d appreciate anything you have to say in regard to the other side of the coin.



Thank you for your time and input,
Todd Scott

Here let me answer this for you....

mental misstepo

stops Jund’s disruption, bolts, and explosive Deathrite shaman draws (by the way, this guy is everywhere)


oh, by the way, this is good against storm as well



Misstep is extremely unfun.  You know what sucks worse than having to figure out how any possible deck matches up against Jund?  Having to figure that out while keeping 4 slots open for Missteps.  You know what's worse than losing to Storm on turn 3?  Losing to them on turn 3 even though you got into a Misstep war.  Misstep is just a bad idea.  It's banned for good reason.

Punishing fire

Kills almost everything in the deck and recovers from the disruption



Again, you know what's worse than being 1-for-1ed by Jund into oblivion?  Being 0-for-1ed into oblivion.  Infinite removal spells are very, very bad for the format.  Why would any deck that is already playing red not play 4x Grove of the Burnwillows and 4x Punishing Fire?  Why wouldn't any deck currently playing green do the same?  Why would any deck not play red or green?  What happens (and did happen) is that every deck adds green or red and plays those 8 cards.  Nice diverse format you've got there...


Wild Nacatl

As Jund typically has a poor matchup against agro strategies



Now, this is an odd one, and I'm not really one for defending this particular ban, but there are reasons it was banned.  It basically made any non-Affinity, non-Naya aggro deck strictly worse.  There wasn't any diversity in a full third of the metagame (because let's be honest, there is no control.  Modern is 1/3 combo, 1/3 aggro and 1/3 Jund).  Again, having Nacatl around just kind of made it an automatic 4-of in that style of deck.  Now, the metagame has shifted so that Nacatl isn't all that powerful any more.


Ponder/pre-ordain/Jace/ancestral visions

If you're using the idea that Jund is so prevalent wny aren't we unbanning any control cards in a format where there are next to no control decks Anywhere



Now, the first two are banned for very, very good reasons.  With them in the format, combo decks become so insanely consistent that it makes most other decks obsolete.  Then it really becomes who wins the die roll.  Jace, on the other hand, would be a fine unban simply because it wouldn't do much to the format while Bloodbraid Elf was still around.  Now, with BBE banned, Jace would probably be a bit oppressive.  Visions would also be fine as an unban because there is little chance for it to be abused.  The only time it's broken is if it's cascaded into.  The only possible cascade card is BBE, and a deck with BBE wouldn't want to be cascading into Visions all that often.  Still, the though behind the Visions ban is probably that since the format is meant to be a turn 4 format, if you give decks access to Visions (specifically combo decks), you put a hard ceiling on the fifth turn.  It's going to be extremely hard for any deck to win the game if the opponent gets to draw 4 cards their fifth turn.  So every deck would be hard wired to win on turn 4 or disrupt the opponent's turn 4 and win turn 5 with 3 extra cards.



All of the bans are pretty easy to explain if you just think about the format.  It's the reasons they've given for the bans that seem a bit off.


All of the bans are pretty easy to explain if you just think about the format.  It's the reasons they've given for the bans that seem a bit off.




Your post is very well done. I feel sad that the guy who made this thread is probably not going to bother reading it, because I think he just logged in to complain.

Also, I agree with the bit I quoted. They are bad at explaining themselves, but that doesn't mean when they ban stuff it isn't uncalled for.

Also, the complaint that this format is overregulated is pretty dang unfounded. There are currently 60 cards on the Legacy Banned List. There are half that many on the Modern banned list. You might gripe  about the format being overregulated, but thats just because they are still properly forming the B/R list because the format has only been around for about 2 years and they quashed a lot of brewing by making major tournaments the focus early on.

(at)MrEnglish22

Also, the complaint that this format is overregulated is pretty dang unfounded. There are currently 60 cards on the Legacy Banned List. There are half that many on the Modern banned list. You might gripe  about the format being overregulated, but thats just because they are still properly forming the B/R list because the format has only been around for about 2 years and they quashed a lot of brewing by making major tournaments the focus early on.

To be fair, there are 12,752 in the Legacy format and only 7,276 card in Modern.  Both formats are regulated at about 0.004% of the card base. 

@mikemearls The office is basically empty this week, which opens up all sorts of possibilities for low shenanigans

@mikemearls In essence, all those arguments I lost are being unlost. Won, if you will. We're doing it MY way, baby.

@biotech66 aren't you the boss anyway? isn't "DO IT OR I FIRE YOU!" still an option?

@mikemearls I think Perkins would throat punch me if I ever tried that. And I'd give him a glowing quarterly review for it.

I'd say that the format does feel a bit overregulated right now, but it's also because the format is still in it's infancy.  It's more about the fact that every B&R announcement brings new changes.  Still, the Legacy ban list (which is pretty solid) has been cultivated over almost two decades.  Modern has only existed for about a year, and is a completely manufactured format.  The card pool was selected and given to the players instead of the players selecting it themselves. 

I think the format is always going to feel a bit artificial and overregulated just because of the fact that it is much harder for it to regulate itself.  In Legacy, if a combo becomes too oppressive, Force of Wills get played a lot more (as does discard, other counterspells and a ton of other hate).  In Modern, the card pool doesn't include such catch-all answers and the hate cards are a lot more narrow.  So when a deck gets out of control, usually the only way to return the format to a balanced state is to ban/unban something.
I'd say that the format does feel a bit overregulated right now, but it's also because the format is still in it's infancy.  It's more about the fact that every B&R announcement brings new changes.  Still, the Legacy ban list (which is pretty solid) has been cultivated over almost two decades.  Modern has only existed for about a year, and is a completely manufactured format.  The card pool was selected and given to the players instead of the players selecting it themselves. 

I think the format is always going to feel a bit artificial and overregulated just because of the fact that it is much harder for it to regulate itself.  In Legacy, if a combo becomes too oppressive, Force of Wills get played a lot more (as does discard, other counterspells and a ton of other hate).  In Modern, the card pool doesn't include such catch-all answers and the hate cards are a lot more narrow.  So when a deck gets out of control, usually the only way to return the format to a balanced state is to ban/unban something.



This about sums it up.

Frankly, I think that if the format is full of T4 decks, Ancestral Visions would be okay. But then you don't really have a reason not to play Combo decks like Twin, because you just auto-win every T4 and there isn't anything beyond racing.

(at)MrEnglish22

I'm responding to an 8 month-old thread, so I doubt it'll get any more activity, but I don't understand the complaints about the bannings in Modern.  Sounds like a bunch of whiney middle-class white college kids that had someone tell them "no, you can't have that" for the first time in their lives.  Half of the game is supposed to be about brewing.  When everyone's running the exact same deck, you've lost half of the experience of the game.  No one wants to watch the same movie 20 times.  Congrats to the first guy that broke (fill in the blank combo/archetype).  Congrats to the first guy that net-decked it and dominated his FNM area.  You're all smarter than us.  Can we move on now?

I can understand if people are angry because they brewed a deck and perfected it over months or years only to have key pieces banned.  However, none of the bannings ever affect homebrews.  Just net-deck another archetype like you did the last one.

Life changes.  You can't live at your parents' house rent-free forever.  You can't play the same deck in MTG forever.  If you want pure consistency in content and rules, play chess.  If you want to experience the same gaming experience over and over for years, play WoW.

Detroit_Timber wrote:

I'm responding to an 8 month-old thread, so I doubt it'll get any more activity, but I don't understand the complaints about the bannings in Modern.  Sounds like a bunch of whiney middle-class white college kids that had someone tell them "no, you can't have that" for the first time in their lives.  Half of the game is supposed to be about brewing.  When everyone's running the exact same deck, you've lost half of the experience of the game.  No one wants to watch the same movie 20 times.  Congrats to the first guy that broke (fill in the blank combo/archetype).  Congrats to the first guy that net-decked it and dominated his FNM area.  You're all smarter than us.  Can we move on now?

I can understand if people are angry because they brewed a deck and perfected it over months or years only to have key pieces banned.  However, none of the bannings ever affect homebrews.  Just net-deck another archetype like you did the last one.

Life changes.  You can't live at your parents' house rent-free forever.  You can't play the same deck in MTG forever.  If you want pure consistency in content and rules, play chess.  If you want to experience the same gaming experience over and over for years, play WoW.

 

Its more "I spent all this money on this deck and now I can't play it."

Also, if Legacy is any evidence (which is what WotC's goal of Modern is - a more accesible, noob friendly legacy) then you can play the same deck for years.

(at)MrEnglish22