Printable View
The only difference I see is the fact that the cloudpost craziness is less inevitable if vesuva is banned. Control decks will discard/counter the titan and the cloudpost player won't be able to find 15 manas. With Vesuva, it was too easy to reach 15 manas and thus impossible to play control (without a strong LD game plan) against 12-post.
So, now that Modern has gotten it's new face, I'd like to start a discussion with a few questions:
1) With such a hefty ban-list now, will WotC now look to un-ban cards rather than further ban cards? While the format is still finding it's identity, it's a little daunting (even for a modern-bandwagoner like me) to see such a long list of bans.
2) What do you feel is now safe to unban? I know folks have already piped in on what they would like to see happen (myself included) but I'm curious if we can get a somewhat 'objective' discussion going on what tech would help control actually get a foothold (this doesn't automatically mean it should be blue...control as an archetype)
On a side note, the format is looking almost like paper, rock, scissors. Splinter Twin beats Zoo, Zoo beats everything else, if you design a deck to beat Twin it loses to zoo. I believe that control is viable as a more board-control setup rather than a permission-based setup. This is fine with me, I get to dust off my Damnations/Wrath of God/Engineered Explosives. The fact that the viable control in the format isn't primarily blue doesn't bother me at all (and I love blue!) If you want heavy-duty blue control, I suggest playing legacy.
Thoughts?
1. I would hope that they would look for unbans first, otherwise they're won't be any good cards left in the format in a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
2. The only unban I would really like is Chrome Mox. Jace would be nice, as I feel he is (like in Alara standard) rather slow, and easily kept in check by the decks that are good. I strongly doubt they will unban him though. I could really care less about the rest of the cards on the list.
1) agreed
2) No love for Bitterblossom and Ancestral Visions, eh? I'd love to be slinging U/b faeries in modern.
there's no reason for ancestral vision to remain banned, I think it would actually give blue control a tool to compete.
I would much rather have Chrome Mox, honestly. It enables Thirst for Knowledge, which is an excellent draw engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by perm
I think people hate Bitterblossom too much for it to ever come off. I'm kinda meh on Ancestral Visions (I personally like TfK better, but that card needs Mox to be good).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
we can have both, I don't think there's one unban slot or anything
I doubt they will unban more than 1-2 cards at a time, if Legacy gives us any clue.Quote:
Originally Posted by perm
Ancestral Vision getting banned is pretty stupid. It should most definitely come off the banned list.
I have thought that since the list was posted, I think it was placed on the banned list because Faeries played it but that deck is completely neutered. I cannot think of too many deck that can abuse it, nothing more then solid card draw IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
There are a number of things that could've stayed off the banned list to begin with. Hypergenesis was actually kind of meh. I think it's gotten significantly better with GreenPost out of the picture (don't have to worry about opposing Eldrazi) but it's a potential down the road. Right now, where the metagame is at, I don't think it's the best thing to unban although I'm sure Twin would keep it down at least somewhat. But you don't really need another deck cementing Twin in the "must play" position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
Jace, TMS, Bitterblossom and Ancestral Visions could all come off. Yes, Faeries was powerful in Extended. But Faeries was never a real deck in Legacy. Modern, while it obviously looks nothing like Legacy, is similar in terms of speed. The difference is that aggro-control is a joke in Modern, whereas in Legacy, the format's best decks tend to run to that category. I don't think those 3 would make non-combo blue tier 1, but I think it would go a long way towards making it competitive. In the same vein:
Sensei's Divining Top was a mistake. Yes, it's slow. I know. And people hate it. But Top allows slower decks to exist. In a format where both combo and aggro have "must answer now" threats, you have to have the answer to everything or you have to ignore your opponent and fish them out. Sensei's Divining Top allows you to filter your draws, gaining incremental advantage over the long game. Unlike Ponder, which fits best in combo decks digging for a specific card, Sensei's Divining Top is at home in control decks that are looking to go long. Otherwise, those decks will have stretches where they draw dead and their opponent does not, costing them games. This is not to say that combo decks wouldn't use Top if it were available, but simply that it would not be as good as Ponder was. Also, by creating a real control deck, not this tapout permanent-based bullshit, you can help rein in combo.
Another one to look at in a "down the road, let's see where the format goes for now" category is the artifact lands. With a brand new wanna-be Null Rod, Affinity would go back to being a bit of a glass cannon. The only reason I would hesitate is because the new Null Rod is white, making it unusable for many decks. If they print another good, broad artifact hoser in blue or black, I'd say the artifact lands would be safe to come off.
I completely agree on the SDT's. CounterTop wouldn't even really be that hard to play around, TBH. It would give Zoo and Twin fits (which is good!) so I say let the dog loose.
I think these can safely come off the list, too:
Umezawa's Jitte
Golgari Grave-Troll
Dredge without Dread Return is 'meh'. Grave Troll could be huge...but there's plenty of hate available for it, I think.
Jitte is good, but not bannable I don't think. It would give non-Zoo decks a great tool to fight zoo with. I'm not even sure many decks would play Jitte if they had it available. With the format being fairly slow (and no Mystics to cheat it) Sword of A & B seems to be a better option to play for equipment.
The only thing I (slightly) disagree with is letting Chrome Mox off the list. What the combo decks lost with Rite of Flame, they would gain back with Mox. Sure they lose a card to play it, but they are back to having a serious source of free mana-acceleration. To be truly honest, I'd be playing Chrome Mox in a ton of builds, combo and non-combo, if it were available. This makes me a little undecided on whether to unban it or not. I worry about the combo decks taking the card and dominating to a degenerate amount (especially All In Red, and Splinter Twin wouldn't hesitate to play it either.)
Give the format time to actually shake out. I understand it's an online format and that metagame can adapt and catch up quickly, but come on... It's only October 4th. Innistrad has been legal and the new bans in effect for FOUR days, and people are already talking of unbans?
Seriously, give the format some time to breathe and develop. If the format shows healthy numbers and nothing combo-esque dominating dailies and paper tournaments, then I would expect at least 1 to 2 banned rotations of "no changes" before we see any action on the unban side. The DCI is going to want to make sure that the foundation for the metagame and format is concrete before they start unbanning cards and letting people play with their brews. If something proves overly dominating, then they will ban it.
Don't fall victim to the clamoring for instant gratification of things being banned or unbanned, otherwise the format will fail because it will never be given time to actually stablize and develop properly.
The biggest problem now is that there aren't enough IRL tournaments being played and attended to "give" the format some new decks. 90% of the folks that show up are just copying whatever they find online card for card. You need more time and more tourneys for the people who still build decks to ... well ... build decks that beat the 3 most popular decks. We get 25-30 for legacy tourney ... free, $100 payout, we maybe get 10 for a free, $100 payout, modern tourney. Out of those 10 8 are just playing card for card (excluding cost issues of Tarmogoyf and shocks) something from the last PT / PTQ / MOL Daily.
Repeated for posterity. Nicely worded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sims
I agree with you I just wanted ask don't you think that there are cards on the Banned list that should not have been there right off the bat?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sims
Possibly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wereodile
I've played long enough in various formats to realize that because something is broken in one format doesn't mean it's broken in another, but I also know that certain types of cards have a potential to be way more powerful when the cardpool is a certain size.
For example: Rite of flame is inferior to Dark Ritual, arguably Cabal ritual as well, but in a format where there aren't many 1 mana ritual effects and the most explosive ritual is Seething Song... Rite of Flame suddenly fuels broken plays. It's not really degenerate in Legacy, it wasn't really degenerate (as i recall) in standard. But we could see in Modern it had enough cards it wanted to accelerate into that Rite was a perfect fit in almost every combo deck (even ones like non-storm ascension and hive mind were running Rite)
So I am trying to be very objective when I look at the modern banned list. Would GGT be safe with DR banned? I'm not sure, there is a zombify with flashback in Innistrad, maybe it wouldn't be safe. Maybe it would fuel a powerhouse Dredge-Vine/Ruinator deck.
Would Jitte be fine? Well it's typically head and shoulders above Swords of A and B in aggro metagames, and even warped a standard/block format to being "play jitte just to kill enemy jittes." Would it be too powerful? Maybe not. But if it started warping the format into control decks with 4 creatures running jittes to kill opposing jittes and increase their clock, that's a pretty heavy slant towards format warping. Would it happen? That remains to be seen.
I can make a pretty logical argument for just about every card on the Modern banned list, and I can make an argument for most of them to come off. I'd just really like to see the format stabalize and start to flesh itself out before we clamor for more bannings or unbannings. In my opinion, while some of the initial banned cards from Modern and it's first banned sweep might have been a surprise, I don't think they went far enough. Rite of Flame at the very least should have gone with mind sculptor and Stoneforge, because anyone looking at the b/r list and available sets could tell there were viable Red based ritual storm decks and combo decks that were going to run rampant... But again, they're trying to get the format to a point where it's stable and has a solid foundation before they're going to think about giving us anything that is even possibly remotely dangerous from that list.
Your whole answer was great but this part really straightened me out, it's true all those cards can go one way or the other. Thanks again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sims
I know I'm in a huge minority, but I don't understand so much bitching about cards being on the banned list, maybe someone could explain it better. To me it sounds like the complaints are all from people who love pet cards and want to play with them in a non-legacy format. Why should I care about Ancestral Visions being on the banned list? Sure, it might be fun to play with, but is it really stifling your fun to bring another deck or use a slightly different card?
I have more fun deckbuilding than I do playing, it's always been my thing. Bannings are good for me in that respect because I get a whole new pool of usable cards after any one card is banned. After they banned Survival in legacy I could then look towards attrition cards that black runs, as they got slightly more high powered. The same is true for any modern banning, other cards that were off the radar pop up.
Now as for people who only are players of the game for wins instead of for fun, you can continue to play whatever deck is the best netdecked one you can fine. Banning something just means you have to look for the new best deck and play that. No big deal, right?
If you like dabbling in both activities or playing the game for the fun of it (like I do as well) then these cards might have some sentimental value to you and you may just really want to play Ancestral Visions. My argument here is to just find a different fun deck/card to play that's fun. There are plenty of flavorful cards that are playable (Death cloud, Gifts Ungiven, Bloodbraid Elf).
Maybe I really am in the minority, but I don't see the relevance of having giant discussions on unbanning cards unless it really is a pet card of yours. Unbanning banned cards is a huge hassle for WotC, because they don't know how bad the format can get by just the addition of a single card (See: Legacy with Mental Misstep). The card pool changes enough just from the addition of new sets.
No offense meant here Phoenix Ignition, but it's more annoying when people say 'why the pointless discussion blah blah blah...'
We're talkin' shop. Nothing more, nothing less. We enjoy the conversation for it's own sake. We aren't changing anything (duh) just sharing opinions and slinging arguments back and forth in a civilized way. No harm in that, and tbh, it's more about fun than anything else (just like magic as a whole.) It isn't bitching...it's discussion. There's a big difference, and the way to tell is by the attitude demonstrated in the post.