Soul Sisters has been pretty decent for me. It has performed well against not just Zoo, Sligh, general aggro and friends, but even combo decks which rely upon creatures. My modern list has diverged greatly from my Legacy list, and not just because I lack SFM and Mom. I've found playing 16 sisters has changed how that deck works, what it answers, and what it worries about; it consistently gets 2 or 3 sisters into play, and targeted removal on my sisters aren't nearly as problematic anymore, especially with the CA engine I've been using (Mentor and Ranger). The infinite life combo has been very strong for me - a significant portion of the format scoops to it.
Mark of Asylum and GY-hate have been useful against Punishing Fire (and Murderous Redcap), and Mark + Auriok Champion make the deck fairly resilient to all forms of burn, including Firespout (which is a common answer people attempt).
Soul Sisters fails against most of the combo decks in the format. It fails against decks which ramp into very large creatures, especially if there are many of them or they have evasion or trample (Affinity is a solid example). It also has varying degrees of failure against well built and played control decks.
peace,
4eak
Any thoughts on potential changes to the ban list on December 20th? I've seen a few comments saying folks don't think anything will change. I tend to agree with that (even though it makes me sad, and I'm borderline ready to rage-quit the format.)
Brainstorm Realist
I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner
I hope it doesn't change. I've heard buzz about Nacatl and Punishing Fires. That would be a big mistake. If you think Zoo dominated Modern is a pain, wait until you play Affinity dominated Modern. The deck is more inconsistent, but its also got more turn 3 kills than Zoo does.
Originally Posted by Draener
Did anyone see the Teachings Control deck posted on the mothership today? Seems pretty good, actually. I may be convinced to ride this sinking ship a little bit longer if a viable control deck becomes available to play. I like Gifts Ungiven and all, but that Teachings deck was pretty hot, dontcha think?
Brainstorm Realist
I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner
I built it and have played about 13 matches with it. Good Lord, is it awful. seriously, don't waste your time
TIME POLICE
It's really hard to make colorable arguments for Teachings when Gifts and Snapcaster exist. The cardpool is so deep that you can double up on Gifts targets, too. The best argument for Teachings that I can concoct is that you are resistant to GY hate, but that's nowhere in maindecks.
Points made, and I hear you...I had already dismissed Teachings, but on a daily event the deck in question did rather well. This doesn't prove anything...the player pool was maybe 8.
Brainstorm Realist
I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner
I really don't get why Chrome Mox is on the banned list for Modern. WotC has a known history of being paranoid of the card. They restricted Chrome Mox in Vintage before it even saw print in Mirrodin. Every other format it was legal in (Legacy, Extended, Standard), it NEVER proved itself to be degenerate or too fast.
I don't know if they banned Chrome Mox because of their overall paranoia with combo or simply they hate the card.
[/$0.02]
Chrome Mox would add consistency to combo decks in Modern, while it might not be the best option to Storm, Splinter Twin combo decks would welcome it with open arms. It pretty much accelerates the deck a full turn, which is something that they don't want to. They want Modern combo going around turn 4.
I'd love to have Chrome Mox around, but I really don't see it happen.
\"Is it just me or are magic players a very very special breed. Who else would try and determine the viability of a fold by what kind of ink was used? Or maybe its the people squinting at tiny illegible print or the people reviewing pages upon pages of this. We should all be detectives or something, because we are an amazing bunch here.\" - Beefybot at mtgnews.com
Chrome Mox would not be that great for Modern storm decks. Like other available options (Desperate Ritual, Pyretic Ritual) it's +1 mana, but unlike the rituals or even a card like Simian Spirit Guide, it costs 2 cards. And unlike the Rituals, it cannot be used with Past in Flames. Storm is not looking for reusable mana, it's looking for 1 big storm turn and Chrome Mox is the worst accelerant it could have on the "go off" turn. Grapeshot requires a lot of storm to win with and Chrome Mox would make the deck dangerously unstable in terms of being able to generate lethal storm. I could see the deck running 1-2 maybe, as a hedge against having too many cantrip effects in hand during the go-off turn, but the fact that PiF turns every instant/sorcery into card advantage makes every non-instant, non-sorcery card in the deck a liability.
As for Splinter Twin, it doesn't solve their biggest problem, which is Combust. Until they come up with a good plan for beating that sideboard card, the deck is going to have issues.
Concerning Storm: I've been toying with the idea of using Empty the Warrens as the primary Win-condition and using Grapeshot as a pseudo-wiper to get dudes off the table in order to swing in with the gobbos. I'm testing the deck in legacy, and I wiped off a Bob and Goyf in order to swing with 14 gobbos (storm count of 6 when I played Grapeshot). It seems pretty sexy...and can be a way to incorporate redundancy. The reason I say this is because I typically see Swath/Grapeshot or Warrens/Bushwhacker...why not Warrens x4 and Grapeshot x 3-4? Curious about other peoples thoughts...But I tend to agree that Chrome Mox isn't the right card for storm.
Also, will there be an announcement on Monday on banlist changes?
Brainstorm Realist
I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner
I don't know about Empty as a primary wincondition in a format that is dominated by aggro. Not only are there lots of blockers but also LOADs of boardsweepers like Volcanic Fallout, EE, Pyroclasm etc.
Most of the listings I've played against have run both, but Grapeshot is always the preferable kill con.
Well, I'm thinking 4x Warrens, 3x Bushwhacker, 2x Grapeshot in the maindeck. Sideboard with 4x Pyro-Swath and 2 more grapeshots.
If what you guys are saying is true, and that the aggro and aggro/control decks are packing low-level wipers, then I think Past In Flames must by default become the engine for storm combo with Grapeshot. It seems that if you can play a fistful of rituals and then flash them all back, you'd have enough storm to cast a lethal Grapeshot.
Is Pyromancer's Swath still being used? I've used it myself, but as I mentioned, I'm testing the maindeck Warrens/Whacker strategy first.
Brainstorm Realist
I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner
What about Burning Vengeance in the side as a way to dodge Warrens hate.
Basically you drop it and then win by Past in Flames -> flash stuff.
Burning Vengeance would give the deck some resilience, for sure...and it would actually make the Grapeshot win condition a lot better with Past in Flames. The only real problem is that it's a 3-card combination after building up storm, where Pyromancer's Swath and Grapeshot is a 2-card combination after building up storm. It would be interesting to see what Burning Vengeance and Past in Flames could do on their own though. I think if Wizards somehow smiles on us and reprintes Brain Freeze, it could be an insane engine. Build up storm, Brain Freeze yourself, flashback Past in Flames, Brain Freeze for the kill. Burning Vengeance allows for an alternative method of slow-rolling Past in Flames by allowing you to just flashback cards for 2 damage each. I think Burning Vengeance is more suited to a control sort of build, and I can't really think of a reason to use BV over Pyromancer Ascension in a slow-rolled combo deck.
All I'm doing is testing Warrens maindeck...if it doesn't work out, i'll go back to Swath/Grapeshot in the main and sideboard Warrens/Bushwhacker. I'm going to squeeze in 2x Grapeshot in the maindeck so I can have a little more flexibility with my sideboard (which is tough in a combo deck already...)
Brainstorm Realist
I close my eyes and sink within myself, relive the gift of precious memories, in need of a fix called innocence. - Chuck Shuldiner
Well, Punishing Fire and Wild Nacatl are now both banned. Modern was already kind of a joke, and this pretty much seals the deal on that claim.
Find enlightenment for just $29.99!
This is a fantastic decision, one card that leads to incredibly unfun games and stifles the format and another that makes ton of decks unplayable. Props to R&D for making it.
im actually inclined more to make a modern zoo deck now. dunno why. For the record my guess is that goyf gets a reprint. if he wasnt gonna get one soon, they'd have banned him over nacatl.
I would identify as a Vintage enthusiast and former Legacy enthusiast but I've refused to get involved in Modern. By involved, I mean I refuse to invest in the format (I'll borrow cards to play). I think the banning of Punishing Fire is fine since it really did dismiss the possibility of gaining any value or long term advantage from creatures with a toughness of two or less. However, my two main complaints about this format are as follows:
1. WotC has banned more cards in Modern than it has with any other format history with the exception of the creation of Legacy (which banned some 60 odd cards). Additionally, WotC has banned at least two cards with every update since the creation of the format; with the exception of this latest banning, previous announcements have banned at least four cards. It would appear that WotC has some very defined ideas about what this format is supposed to look like. However, the way they're shaping these ideas is a very liberal use of the ban hammer. WotC has not given the format time to "settle" so it can begin the process of developing a metagame as the basis for future deck designing. The constant additions to the B&R list makes it a very unstable format which leads me to # two....
2. The instability of the format makes investment unappealing. Some cards like the dual lands are fairly safe investments because even if they're reprinted will still command a decent price since they will obviously see play in Standard. However, one has a disincentive to purchasing the powerful cards in the format because they're likely to get banned; Grove of the Burnwillows being the obvious example since its price will likely drop by as much as +60% with the banning of Punishing Fires. Even though the cards are not as expensive as Legacy or Vintage staples, a hallmark of eternal formats is the investment you make in format staples is one which will keep value over time. I can't reliably conclude that such an investment will hold overtime because of the tendency to ban the best apparent deck.
I understand WotC wanting to careful craft a format that can be a worth and financially viable alternative to Legacy and Vintage and something that will actually get played (unlike Extended). I would also imagine that WotC's desire to create a balanced format quickly is driven by the impending PtQ season. However, they need to let tournament results play out for a while so the format can develop some defined decks and then players can begin adapting to those archetypes.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote