All B/R update speculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bed Decks Palyer

But I'm not interested if Phoenix Ignition assessed the ban. I'm interested if a guy who wrote "if you couldn't see that DRS was leagues and bounds ahead of the power level of Modern then you have bigger issues in card evaluation in general and probably aren't well suited to competitive Magic" predicted the ban. :wink:

---

Every single card on the list, bar one falls into two major categories: UNDERCOSTED RAMP and STUPID BULLSHIT. The three most objectively powerful cards on that list are Skullclamp, SFM and JtMS. They fall into the STUPID BULLSHIT category. all but one of the other cards on the banned list fall into UNDERCOSTED RAMP. Dread Return is a Zombify that costs no mana. Golgari Grave-Troll is underocsted ramp as it found those Narcomeba, which happened to play Dread Return.

The one that doesn't fall there on the list is MM, which is just insane. SDT ramps, albeit very slowly, by manipulating the top of your deck. Sunrise reads 'Win the Game.' in its combo deck. Same with Hypergenesis. IT's a pretty logical thing, given the banlist and the deck compositions of Top8s, that DRS was going to get Banjolnir'd out of Modern, seeing that it falls into both STUPID BULLSHIT and UNDERCOSTED RAMP.

I mean it's easy to see that I have sub-100 posts here and about 500 lifetime on Salvation. Whether I post my opinions online for the "told-you-so's" or not is irrelevant to the logical basis of my positions. I spoke openly about it on my team's local Facebook group and if you really wanted to dig into my post history on salvation I might've said something related to it but I honestly can't be assed to provide evidence.

There's also multiple "professional" players employed by SCG/Fireball who stated the opinion that DRS was overpowered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkenslight

Every single card on the list, bar one falls into two major categories: UNDERCOSTED RAMP and STUPID BULLSHIT.

---

Isn't that what makes the older formats fun/exciting/skill-intensive? Pitting my stupid bullshit against your stupid bullshit? If the only acceptable thing to do is play my one land a turn and then kill you dead with some creatures then why am I even playing Modern, why not just stick with Standard or Limited? Shit, maybe even Pokemon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordofthepit

Considering the logical contortions you had to go through to discredit decks that have been successful, I hope you're not labeling me as having selective perception.

I also hope you're willing to discuss the format civilly, and not blast a new user with a valid point as a "freshman" with his "head up his ass" while calling anyone who disagrees a "jackass". That's rich.

---

I dismiss the strange idea that a deck that was BEFORE and after the printing of TNN a "niche deck" (aka < 3% of metagame presence worldwide) can blame the said Meerfolk for it's problems alone. That's all I said to the topic and there is nothing selective in that.

I usually keep discussion civil and productive, but excuse me getting salty if a completely new member in this forum starts his "productive" post with asking "if I live under a rock" and makes bold statements which are plain false (if you look up data from TheCouncil), just because he does not agree with my POV that "former top tier, now < 3% = dead". It's free to question my harsh definition here, but starting it in such a way is ass and gets the favor returned.

You however did not disagree or point to possible weaknesses in my definition/Proof me wrong with data. You choose to insult me for no reason and even needed to create a strawman for it ... that's just classy dood *SlowClap*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

Um, when you're talking about changes to the format, a ban and unban are essentially the same. Even if the impact is short lived (Land Tax unban anyone), it still destabilizes the format. Ban Show and Tell, the format shifts. Unban Survival of the Fittest, the format shifts. Do you even understand what we're talking about?

I don't understand why you believe a ban would be different than an unban when it comes to altering the format's landscape, even if for a short time (depending on how powerful the card that is banned/unbanned). They certainly achieve the same end result; the format shifts.

---

I don't see why you have to pretend your argument is not flawed. You CANNOT form hypothetical scenario of unbanning Survival, this kind of what-if serves no purpose other than your fantasy. Look at the banning of Mental Misstep or Survival, sure the Meta has certainly shifted. Now, look at the unbanning of Land Tax, did Legacy change at all? Simply put, Wizard is not stupid enough to unban something that will cause the Meta to shift, because that would make the unbanning an idiotic move.

Therefore, banning and unbanning are not the same, and once again, you're wrong, just as I predicted.

Yeah, Land Tax didn't cause a long term shift because it's an outdated card that used to be good 15+ years ago. But what about when Entomb was unbanned? Pretty sure we're still feeling the effect of that decision today.

Bans and unbans cause format shifts, even if it's only for a week or for years. Why you refuse to acknowledge this fact is just beyond me.

Arsenal, I think you're misreading people's use of the word stability, if they used that word. Unbanning a moderately powerful card is akin to the printing of a moderately powerful card that changes the format, and essentially no one is opposed to that sort of motion and instability. It's incomparable to the organizational instability felt when existing cards that people have in current decks are booted out of play. Especially if the bannings seem to be part of an ill-advised strategy of shaping a format and mixing things up with periodic nerfings. "The format's different now and my favorite card is worse" type of instability is quite a bit different from "I am unable to play my favorite card now" type of instability. Frequent bannings also create the sort of feeling of instability that the format's card pool and management is insufficient to handle varied strategies and adjust. I don't think anyone really is appealing to a forever status quo.

That was not what Dice_Box was saying though. He stated that he feels that Modern is unstable because he felt like their bannings were out of nowhere and you couldn't see them coming like you can (sometimes) in Legacy.

I then stated that he was mistaken and almost all recent Modern bannings (and unbannings) could be seen ahead of time if familiar enough with the format. I then quoted Phoenix Ignition's 1-15-14 post about DRS likely being on the chopping block as an example.

And regarding twndomn, his claim of unbans not impacting the format whatsoever is just wrong. Not every unban will have a long term impact, but Entomb, Time Spiral and Metalworker+Grim Monolith getting unbanned all have had a lasting effect on the Legacy landscape. Entomb in particular because of it's use in top tier Reanimator, but even decks like Jund Depths utilize the card to success. These are examples of unbans that have resulted in the format shifting, destabilizing momentarily, then stabilizing over time.

My only regret is selling two KotRs on MODO on Sunday because I needed some tixs. Now they have more than doubled in price already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

Yeah, Land Tax didn't cause a long term shift because it's an outdated card that used to be good 15+ years ago. But what about when Entomb was unbanned? Pretty sure we're still feeling the effect of that decision today.

Bans and unbans cause format shifts, even if it's only for a week or for years. Why you refuse to acknowledge this fact is just beyond me.

---

Therefore, you acknowledge that while banning may cause a shift in the meta, but unbanning, like the case of Land Tax, does not. In other words, I'm correct that banning and unbanning are not the same and you agree. Since you agree that Land Tax did not cause, then your following statement of bans and unbans cause format shift is simply false. It's time for you to acknowledge your own contradiction, you even agree to the case when your statement is not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkenslight

Every single card on the list, bar one falls into two major categories: UNDERCOSTED RAMP and STUPID BULLSHIT. The three most objectively powerful cards on that list are Skullclamp, SFM and JtMS. They fall into the STUPID BULLSHIT category. all but one of the other cards on the banned list fall into UNDERCOSTED RAMP. Dread Return is a Zombify that costs no mana. Golgari Grave-Troll is underocsted ramp as it found those Narcomeba, which happened to play Dread Return.

The one that doesn't fall there on the list is MM, which is just insane. SDT ramps, albeit very slowly, by manipulating the top of your deck. Sunrise reads 'Win the Game.' in its combo deck. Same with Hypergenesis. IT's a pretty logical thing, given the banlist and the deck compositions of Top8s, that DRS was going to get Banjolnir'd out of Modern, seeing that it falls into both STUPID BULLSHIT and UNDERCOSTED RAMP.

---

And where did Wild Nacatl fall when it was first banned?

I am saying that this came out of nowhere. On Salvation people joked about this ban, but it was not a serious view that it would happen. To me and many others, it's a left field and it feels sower. It's also a format where they shotgun their bans. One deck doing well, Ponder and Preordain. Not one or the other, both at once. Almost each ban is a two at once approach. Is like saying "Fuck this deck in particular." It's stupid.

We are talking about a format where Grave troll and Top are banned, so I should have known this would happen.

What hits me the hardest is I was enjoying modern. This format everyone said was shit was great. I liked it. Now my deck is dead, the Pod cards in my folder (Was building) are not really that useful and I feel like I wasted my time.

Oh and sorry I was in the format a month and did not see this coming. Guess that makes me unfit for competitive Magic. You know the thing I have been doing since 04. What a day

Sent from my mobile, forgive spelling and grammatical errors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twndomn

Therefore, you acknowledge that while banning may cause a shift in the meta, but unbanning, like the case of Land Tax, does not. In other words, I'm correct that banning and unbanning are not the same and you agree. Since you agree that Land Tax did not cause, then your following statement of bans and unbans cause format shift is simply false. It's time for you to acknowledge your own contradiction, you even agree to the case when your statement is not true.

---

Stop strawmaning. I said that bans and unbans cause format shifts. Unbanning Entomb caused a major format shift. Time Spiral and Grim Monolith+Metalworker getting unbanned also caused a shift, although to a lesser degree. When Land Tax was unbanned, for that week anyway, had everyone on CounterTop trying to abuse it.

I'm not agreeing with you at all nor have I contradicted myself. Again, stop with the strawmans.
________________________________________________

Dice_Box

I never said you were unfit for competitive Magic. However, as someone who has been in Modern for 30 days, maybe you're not the best person to evaluate which cards are banworthy and which aren't?

No, I am not that's why I spent a good amount of time on Salvation before I spent any money. Over there no one seamed to legitimately think DRS was getting the axe. Also not a person over there I have seen has ever said Troll needed to stay banned.

So no, I am far from the most knowable person on the format. But I did spend about 4 months reading on everything while I built my deck. So I am not the most uneducated either.

Sent from my mobile, forgive spelling and grammatical errors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

True, but that was 3 years ago. Since then, the bannings have been fairly easy to detect and foresee if you paid attention to Modern. Which is what I'm saying to Dice_Box; Modern bannings aren't as "out of nowhere" as he thinks. Perhaps it's because he's relatively new to the format, but the banning of DRS really wasn't that big of a shock.

---

I think it's the opposite. 3 years ago isn't that long (or maybe you're the one who's relatively new?).

Other Eternal formats have maybe 0-2 bannings+unbannings per year. They occur at a glacial pace, after due consideration of impact on format, very rarely just reactive or experimental (Legacy banning of SotF and Mental Misstep possibly the only exceptions). I suspect most of us older players remember the birth of Modern like it was recent history and factor in those 2 waves of bannings in our assessments of it. Most players I know think Modern has the rep of "too hasty bannings/unbannings". In 3 years it has had more changes to the banlist than any other format in Magic history since like 1996*

*(except maybe the Extended combo-banhammer over a decade ago, but that was because people were running ridiculous things like 4 Dark Ritual + 4 Lotus Petal + 4 Necropotence + 4 Mana Vault + X Yawgmoth's Will in a non-eternal format, not because they were turning green 1-drops sideways)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzra

Isn't that what makes the older formats fun/exciting/skill-intensive? Pitting my stupid bullshit against your stupid bullshit? If the only acceptable thing to do is play my one land a turn and then kill you dead with some creatures then why am I even playing Modern, why not just stick with Standard or Limited? Shit, maybe even Pokemon.

---

Hey don't go bad-mouthing Pokemon! The competitive battling scene in that is actually quite interesting and complex. Certainly better than Modern.

Because 3 years ago is when Modern became a format? And I've been playing Magic with Mirage, Legacy since '06, joined this site in '07. I've been around.

I don't care how many times Modern has seen changes to it's Banned list compared to other formats. Why? Because I don't compare it to other formats. It's dumb to compare it to other formats as it's not trying to do what the other formats are trying to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

Because 3 years ago is when Modern became a format?

---

Yeah, exactly. Since it's inception there have been a lot of random bannings because cards were strong, but for very different reasons than bannings in other formats. I think the underlying reasons are more what is drawing criticism. Legacy could have easily banned Tarmogoyf 5 years ago for better arguments than Modern has to cut BBE and DRS, but I think it's remained a better format because they didn't.

Quote:

---

Because I don't compare it to other formats. It's dumb to compare it to other formats as it's not trying to do what the other formats are trying to do.

---

Wait, what were you debating with twn about then? Sure sounded like it involved changes to Modern and Legacy banlists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FTW

Yeah, exactly. Since it's inception there have been a lot of random bannings because cards were strong, but for very different reasons than bannings in other formats. I think the underlying reasons are more what is drawing criticism. Legacy could have easily banned Tarmogoyf 5 years ago for better arguments than Modern has to cut BBE and DRS, but I think it's remained a better format because they didn't.

Wait, what were you debating with twn about then? Sure sounded like it involved changes to Modern and Legacy banlists.

---

No. I stated that bans and unbans cause shifts in formats. Twndomn disagreed, stating that only bans cause shifts and unbannings do not impact the format whatsoever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

If you're uninterested in Modern, great, there's a format that can satisfy your Magic needs... it's called Legacy. Why do Legacy players insist on trying to make Modern into Legacy-lite? Why do Legacy players cry about not being able to play Ponder, Dread Return, JtMS, etc in Modern when they can just play with those cards in Legacy? Why can't Legacy be Legacy and Modern be Modern?

---

1. I'm not crying

2. My entire point was that there are quite a few top tier decks in modern (RUG delver, Jund, UR Delver, Junk, Merfolk) where 75% of the decks overlap with their Legacy counterparts, so how on earth is Wizards not going to make them some watered-down version of already existing Legacy decks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I dismiss the strange idea that a deck that was BEFORE and after the printing of TNN a "niche deck" (aka < 3% of metagame presence worldwide) can blame the said Meerfolk for it's problems alone. That's all I said to the topic and there is nothing selective in that.

I usually keep discussion civil and productive, but excuse me getting salty if a completely new member in this forum starts his "productive" post with asking "if I live under a rock" and makes bold statements which are plain false (if you look up data from TheCouncil), just because he does not agree with my POV that "former top tier, now < 3% = dead". It's free to question my harsh definition here, but starting it in such a way is ass and gets the favor returned.

You however did not disagree or point to possible weaknesses in my definition/Proof me wrong with data. You choose to insult me for no reason and even needed to create a strawman for it ... that's just classy dood *SlowClap*

---

People like you are forcing Legacy in the direction of Modern: a metagame of 8 decks, the rest of the field has no chance.

A deck that can win tournaments is not dead. Which of the data I provided was false or wrong? I merely showed that Goblins was more than capable of winning big tournaments before TNN. A dead deck doesn't win tournaments, a dead deck doesn't make the DTB section of this forum! It is a deck that has no chance at all. Take Zoo for example. When was the last time this deck won something meaningfull?

I just want to make clear that it is very important for Legacy that people keep playing 3% decks. When people stop doing this because these decks make no chance at all, we end up with the same format as Modern: a dull metagame in which only a few decks are a meaningfull choice to win. Is this what you want?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nielsie

People like you are forcing Legacy in the direction of Modern: a metagame of 8 decks, the rest of the field has no chance.

A deck that can win tournaments is not dead. Which of the data I provided was false or wrong? I merely showed that Goblins was more than capable of winning big tournaments before TNN. A dead deck doesn't win tournaments, a dead deck doesn't make the DTB section of this forum! It is a deck that has no chance at all. Take Zoo for example. When was the last time this deck won something meaningfull?

I just want to make clear that it is very important for Legacy that people keep playing 3% decks. When people stop doing this because these decks make no chance at all, we end up with the same format as Modern: a dull metagame in which only a few decks are a meaningfull choice to win. Is this what you want?

---

Nonsense. In Legacy there is no thing like "no chance across the whole metagame" and I see no reason why forcing people to adapt leads Legacy the way of Modern in which WotC reacts to peoples bitching and removing the need to metagame with a decree in Form of the B&R list. Waving the Modern-flag here is yellow-press-Argumentation. Can you give me any indication that not banning TNN eliminates the whole bunch of niche decks from legacy?

Zoo? Try this one I remembered here on the Forum: Top 8 SCG Seattle

There are still a load of fringe decks making top 16 appearances and that's the Beauty of Legacy. That did not change with TNN. There's is no point in blaming TNN for a meta full of sweepers and shedding tears about Goblins being hit sooooo hard by the hate people have in stock for TNN while Elves still win tournaments.

I'm not going to explain to you the difference of modern and Legacy. Keep your thin-aired analogies for yourself or come up with substance

Maybe someone should just bother playing Zoo again... Who knows how it'll do.

I for one am toying with the idea of running a 40 euro UR Gelectrode + Curiosity deck the next event I go to, simply because it can burn down every creature not called Nimble Mongoose or TNN since I don't see any S&T or Reanimator at my local meta. Just have to work on my manabase a little bit...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kage

1. I'm not crying

2. My entire point was that there are quite a few top tier decks in modern (RUG delver, Jund, UR Delver, Junk, Merfolk) where 75% of the decks overlap with their Legacy counterparts, so how on earth is Wizards not going to make them some watered-down version of already existing Legacy decks?

---

If you believe that RUG Delver, Merfolk and UR Delver are among the top tier in Modern, that just goes to show how little you understand about the format. Aside from Jund and Junk/Rock, which are now crippled/dead, none of those decks are close to the top tier at all. The top tier includes Jund/Rock (90% Legacy overlap, unsurprisingly, it represented an unhealthy portion of the meta), Pod decks (no Legacy overlap), Tron (no Legacy overlap), UWR Control (no Legacy overlap), Twin Exarch (no Legacy overlap) and Affinity (far, far more competitive in Modern than it's Legacy counterpart).

And so what if there's card overlap? A good card is a good card and some overlap will be inevitable. Snapcaster Mage saw play in Standard and sees play in Modern, Legacy and Vintage currently. Supreme Verdict sees play in Standard, Modern and Legacy. Just because there is a deck in Modern that shares cards with a deck in Legacy doesn't mean that Modern is trying to be a watered down Legacy.

Seriously, stop trying to compare the two formats. They have mostly different card pools, completely different objectives, a completely different targeted player base, etc. Trying to draw any conclusions on Modern based off what Legacy does/doesn't do is just dumb.

So when is the next announcement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PirateKing

So when is the next announcement?

---

Soon. We should all begin the arguments now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PirateKing

So when is the next announcement?

---

April 28th is the next announcement. Cue circular discussion of Earthcraft, Mind Twist, Black Vise, followed by suggestions of ridiculous cards like Survival and Mental Misstep.

COntract from Below anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feaor

April 28th is the next announcement. Cue circular discussion of Earthcraft, Mind Twist, Black Vise, followed by suggestions of ridiculous cards like Survival and Mental Misstep.

---

You forgot TNN in the ridiculous category for being banned.

Contract seems totally fair, I mean, what if you ante up a beta dual?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HSCK

You forgot TNN in the ridiculous category for being banned.

Contract seems totally fair, I mean, what if you ante up a beta dual?

---

Nice try Troll. I would tell you do go look at data but apparently TC Decks isn't actually Data.

Guys, don't you remember? Unbannings have never (and will never) had any impact whatsoever on the format. :laugh:

Also, the only data that everyone should be using to discuss what the Feb 2014 meta looks like is all right here: http://www.channelfireball.com/artic...game-analysis/. Marvel at the narrow data from November 1st, 2013! Soooo much value!!!

Remember all those Opens that Maverick top 8'ed.....oh wait. New spec since the B/R won't be up for awhile, Basilisk type creatures. Ones that can be Abrupt Decay'ed or Bolt'ed too, especially since the format's so warped by TNN they're good!

September-November 2013:

Tarmogeddon 8 - 5 out of 188: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=11682&iddeck=85513

SCG Philly - 6 out of 280: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=11710&iddeck=85724

Legacy Ovino 8 - 2 out of 407: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=11877&iddeck=86942

GPT Valencia - 2 out of 134: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=11975&iddeck=87714

Legacy Jouernaut 2 - 6 out of 167: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12180&iddeck=89263

BoM Last 3 Bye Trial - 4 out of 279: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12123&iddeck=88841

BoM Last 3 Bye Trial - 5 out of 279: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12123&iddeck=88842

SCG Los Angeles - 8 out of 281: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12129&iddeck=88897

BoM Main Event - 8 out of 695: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12122&iddeck=88837

Maverick was doing just fine globally in the 2 months preceeding TNN and still could take advantage of a meta new to TNN in November. I have data to support my position that Maverick was still a meta consideration pre-TNN... do you have any data to support your position that it was not?

EDIT: Took out a Top 16 SCG Los Angeles finish due to misidentification.

So Team America has replaced Shardless BUG as the primer BUG deck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DragoFireheart

So Team America has replaced Shardless BUG as the primer BUG deck?

---

Why cast a 2/2 that might draw 3 cards when you can cast a 5/5 flier and simply win the game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megadeus

Why cast a 2/2 that might draw 3 cards when you can cast a 5/5 flier and simply win the game?

---

Yup. 5/5 Flyer > TNN. Since TNN's printing, Team America is a much better metagame choice than Shardless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megadeus

Why cast a 2/2 that might draw 3 cards when you can cast a 5/5 flier and simply win the game?

---

And why get stalled by a TNN and then have your agents/strixes mauled by an unblockable Jitte when Stalker resists that and races naked TNN?

The decks that can support SFM-TNN or ignore SFM-TNN will rise to the top. All the other decks, even if they're in colors that have theoretical TNN answers, will sink to the bottom. The data since November 2013 has shown this to be the case; the only abberation is Miracles, but I suspect that many Miracles players just play Blade Control now (could be wrong).

Stoneforge was fine too before TNN. In this format it certainly wasn't oppressive.

TNN is such a dumb, non-interactive and pointless card I hope it gets banned on principle alone. "Yes, what this format needs is a 3-mana Blue Progenitus... who can be equipped"

Stellar card design there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arsenal

SCG Los Angeles - 13 out of 281: http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=12129&iddeck=88902

---

As the guy who ran the deck, this is not Maverick. It's just SCG being bad at deck names. It's Junk.