|
1 year ago ::
Nov 20, 2011 - 4:33AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2009
|
As in thread title.
Punishing Fire + Grove of the Burnwillows goes in the two decks that have been regarded as top dogs for a while now, with Worlds confirming their position in the metagame. This despite the fact that these decks have very different game plans. Looking at how the format has been managed so far, it seems very likely to me they will ban one piece of the combo.
In Legacy, Blue is the best color. Let's punish blue, in Modern. And they listened!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 21, 2011 - 1:59AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2009
|
Rofl, this is despite the fact that CFB's Zoo lists were skipping punishing/grove entirely for stuff like snapcaster and geist? I think you need to look at those lists again.
Also, and I've said this over at MTGSalvation as well, people need to take a step back a realize that it's more likely that control cards are going to be UNBANNED as opposed to banning pieces of Zoo. Punishing Fire/Grove of the burnwillows isn't even a key component of Zoo, in fact that's exactly why WotC wanted to establish a banlist that allows zoo to succeed - Zoo is a baseline deck that's pure efficiency. There's no degenerate combo in zoo, nor are there unanswerable threats.
I would sooner put money on control cards coming off the banned list before we see any piece of Zoo getting put onto the banned list.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 21, 2011 - 8:40AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2009
|
Rofl, this is despite the fact that CFB's Zoo lists were skipping punishing/grove entirely for stuff like snapcaster and geist? I think you need to look at those lists again.
Heh. But why skip Grove when you can play it alongside Snapcaster.
www.mtgdecks.net/decks/view/22449
www.mtgdecks.net/decks/view/22421
I wasn't just talking about Zoo, I didn't even mention it by name. I was talking about how Punishing/Grove fits into almost any game plan. And so far they've been banning cards of this caliber.
Personally I hope that Tom LaPille's departure paves the way for a shorter banlist. But judging by how things have been unfolding so far, I'm not optimistic.
In Legacy, Blue is the best color. Let's punish blue, in Modern. And they listened!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 26, 2011 - 12:18PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Mar 27, 2003
|
I honesty have always thought this combo was horribly overrated. Three mana for 1 damage profit just doesn't seem good to me, even if repeatable.
It's really not even about giving niche cards to black.
It should be about giving black cards to Niche.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 26, 2011 - 10:18PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Mar 31, 2010
|
the reason it works so well is because of a few things. the cards work individually as a slightly weaker incinerate that repeats against life gain and constructed playable mana fixing that only slightly helps your opponent in two colors that can easily make up for it with their superb ability to dish out damage.
once you get one of each card, they allow you to knock out one weak blocker a turn. this allows you to get in with one more creature. if it only deals one more damage, you have card advantage. if it deals more than that, you pull forward in the race much more quickly.
if your opponents have big creatures out, this makes every attack difficult to block as your opponent knows you can knock out anything that ends up with less than three left. this will repeat every turn so they have to keep making bad blocks to keep field presence.
if you get a second grove or a second fire, you can double up every turn and when you can't afford to double up you can return both to your hand for a measely two red.
when you need four damage, you can just return it, then next turn cast it, tap grove and cast it again.
sorry about the grammar, I am on my phone.
 You are Red/Blue! Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.How to Create Spoiler:
Show
replace {} with []
{sblock} at the beginning and {/sblock} at the end.
I borrowed this from blood77. All credit goes to him. Great idea for a signature and I'm tired of people not autocarding decks. How to Auto Card Spoiler:
Show
How to Auto Card, with style Spoiler:
Show
How to Auto Deck Auto Deck Spoiler:
Show
(again, replace { with [)
{deck}
Lands 20
4 Halimar Depths
4 Unstable Frontier
8 Island
4 Swamp
Creatures 12
4 Hedron Crab
4 Nemesis of Reason
4 Mnemonic Wall
Spells 28
4 Spreading Seas
4 Suffer the Past
4 Mind Funeral
4 Archive Trap
4 Ponder
4 Into the Roil
4 Soul Manipulation
{/deck}
Result Spoiler:
Show
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 26, 2011 - 10:25PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2003
|
Rofl, this is despite the fact that CFB's Zoo lists were skipping punishing/grove entirely for stuff like snapcaster and geist? I think you need to look at those lists again.
Also, and I've said this over at MTGSalvation as well, people need to take a step back a realize that it's more likely that control cards are going to be UNBANNED as opposed to banning pieces of Zoo. Punishing Fire/Grove of the burnwillows isn't even a key component of Zoo, in fact that's exactly why WotC wanted to establish a banlist that allows zoo to succeed - Zoo is a baseline deck that's pure efficiency. There's no degenerate combo in zoo, nor are there unanswerable threats.
If the bans in the past made sense I would agree with you, but I don't have faith in wizards to make a rational ban/unban. Clearly some things need to be unbanned, but we have never gotten any indication that Wizards has the vision to do that. Punishing Fire is so easy to deal with and is far from ubiquitous, so banning it would set an even worse president than they already have.
That said, I do not even try to guess what they will ban anymore due to the absurd bans so far.
I honesty have always thought this combo was horribly overrated. Three mana for 1 damage profit just doesn't seem good to me, even if repeatable.
OMG...someone who agrees with me. I have been saying the same thing for months @ MTGS, but I get a lot of condescending replies about how I don't "get it".
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 28, 2011 - 5:23AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2007
|
I run it in legacy, it's definately solid. Infinite removal is pretty much nuts. It allows you to kill things early on without having to sandbag good removal for bigger scary guys later down the road. On the play it kills Nacatl, and on the draw is can kill Quasali pridemage and Heirarch, but doubles up later on. It makes Pestermite virtually useless in Twin combo decks.
It's not "3 mana for one damage", that's the worst possible outcome for the combo. Only once the game stalls out do you start grinding away their life total, but additional copiies of either piece speed up this clock. Most of the time, it's just lots of removal, it allows you to ruin their board position so much, that the pinging for one can end up as a viable way to win since you've got the ability to keep the field clean.
I don't think it's necessary to describe why having virtually infinite removal is bad. In control decks with lots of mana, they can get some serious value from the combo that out-values pretty much everything in the format.
Website for my radio series: http://www.cyrusbalesfilms.co.uk/id2.html
For the facebook group of my radio series, search for "Who will save us now?" Please join!
Follow my regular articles on: http://www.manaleak.com/mtguk/
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 28, 2011 - 9:24AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2003
|
It's not "3 mana for one damage", that's the worst possible outcome for the combo. Only once the game stalls out do you start grinding away their life total, but additional copiies of either piece speed up this clock. Most of the time, it's just lots of removal, it allows you to ruin their board position so much, that the pinging for one can end up as a viable way to win since you've got the ability to keep the field clean.
I undersatand what it does, and how it is very useful, but not how it is such a big thing that it is ban worthy or even a combo you would splash for. The only games I have lost due to the combo have been when I am running a deck that was not well built/tuned. It is a tool, and can be annoying if you are unprepared, but it is still only a tool.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 29, 2011 - 2:18AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2007
|
Most people in the UK are playing the combo now, from zoo, to 4 colour gifts and twin. It invalidates anything X/2 or smaller, making decks like Boros completely unplayable.
Does it need to be banned? I'm not really sure to be honest. It's one of the best things you can do in the format to point where aggro combo and control are running it. It isn't massively destructive to the format because it goes in a lot of decks, but it is one of the best things you can do in modern. The point comes to whether something that most decks are using is too format defining to be allowed to exist. It does mean that a control deck can't rely on cards like Vendillion Clique, Snapcaster Mage and others to win the game for you since your opponent will eventually draw their fires and stop you. Control does need a helping hand a bit in the format I think.
Some of the stuff on the banned list does seem a lot worse than punishing fires combo, which alone adds validity to the banning arguement.
Website for my radio series: http://www.cyrusbalesfilms.co.uk/id2.html
For the facebook group of my radio series, search for "Who will save us now?" Please join!
Follow my regular articles on: http://www.manaleak.com/mtguk/
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Nov 29, 2011 - 6:02PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2009
|
I run it in legacy, it's definately solid.
QFT. People are splashing red in G/W Maverick just to be able to use Punishing Fire. This despite that in Legacy people play many more outs to it, manabases need to be more resilient, creatures are generally bigger, and many decks don't care at all about a recurring Shock.
If they do ban it, in a way it would be a bad precedent, as it would establish that repeatable removal is banworthy, even if it's just a recurring Shock. One could then make a strong point that Vedalken Shackles is likewise banworthy, which sounds a bit ridiculous. (And Jace and Bitterblossom would probably stay on the banlist forever.)
EDIT:
Patrick Chapin suggested today in an article (to which I don't have access) that Punishing Fire and Wild Nacatl should be banned. While I doubt that Wild Nacatl will be banned, I believe the likelihood of Punishing/Grove getting banned has increased significantly just because of his "hawkish" stance.
In Legacy, Blue is the best color. Let's punish blue, in Modern. And they listened!
|
|
|
