From 892d840820ce4ce0b69bdc67a2cced4db93ee19f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sam Myers Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 10:08:40 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] finished code, need to do writeup --- .gitignore | 2 + analysis.py | 29 + delver_comments.pickle | 226 +++++++ eldrazi_comments.pickle | 1220 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ miracles_comments.pickle | 186 ++++++ sentiment.txt | 5 + shardless_comments.pickle | 48 ++ storm_comments.pickle | 62 ++ textmining.py | 34 ++ 9 files changed, 1812 insertions(+) create mode 100644 .gitignore create mode 100644 analysis.py create mode 100644 delver_comments.pickle create mode 100644 eldrazi_comments.pickle create mode 100644 miracles_comments.pickle create mode 100644 sentiment.txt create mode 100644 shardless_comments.pickle create mode 100644 storm_comments.pickle create mode 100644 textmining.py diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore new file mode 100644 index 0000000..cbe1ea2 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitignore @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +constants.py +*.pyc diff --git a/analysis.py b/analysis.py new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b04a2ca --- /dev/null +++ b/analysis.py @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +import indicoio +import pickle +from constants import API_KEY + +def analyze_comments(archetype): + f = open('{}_comments.pickle'.format(archetype.lower()), 'r') + stored_comments = pickle.load(f) + + indicoio.config.api_key = API_KEY #configure indico API + + def get_avg_sentiment(comment): + comment_sentences = filter(lambda string: any(c.isalpha() for c in string), comment.split('. ')) + sentiments = [indicoio.sentiment(comment) for comment in comment_sentences] + try: + avg_sentiment = sum(sentiments) / len(sentiments) + except: + return 0.5 + return avg_sentiment + + all_sentiments = [get_avg_sentiment(comment) for comment in stored_comments] + all_average = sum(all_sentiments) / len(all_sentiments) + print 'Average sentiment about {}: '.format(archetype) + str(all_average) + +decks = ['Miracles', 'Shardless', 'Storm', 'Delver'] + +if __name__ == '__main__': + for deck in decks: + analyze_comments(deck) + analyze_comments('Eldrazi') diff --git a/delver_comments.pickle b/delver_comments.pickle new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4734663 --- /dev/null +++ b/delver_comments.pickle @@ -0,0 +1,226 @@ +(lp0 +VThere is no easy answer to this. It depends on a number of variables including your deck configuration, the matchup, the cards in your sideboard, and occasionally your opponent. Don't be afraid to leave in daze on the draw if you think it will be good. \u000a\u000a\u000aMatch ups where daze is generally bad:\u000a\u000aMiracles - Daze is the first card I board out. Good miracles players will fetch basics and play around daze for the entire game. Bolt for their dome is better here. Force is needed to stop counterbalance as counter/top lock stops you from playing magic.\u000a \u000aStorm - ANT usually doesn't care about FOW much less daze. If you don't have enough cards to bring in here and you have to leave it in I would recommend trading it for cantrips if you get the opportunity. It is very unlikely to matter when they decide to go off. Force is B- but makes the cut.\u000a\u000aElves - Daze stops being relevant very quickly and is very easy for elves to play around. They just have so much mana... Force is good though :)\u000a\u000a\u000aMatchups where daze is generally good:\u000a\u000aDelver - This can go either way depending on your main deck/sideboard. If you are playing stifle here you can rely heavily on daze in this matchup and have a big leg up in the great wasteland war. The grindier you are post sideboard the more you will want to board out daze as it gets worse the longer the game goes. I prefer to stay low to the ground with stifle/waste/daze and save sideboard slots for other matchups. Forces are better if you want to play the grind game(especially if your opponent has stifle and you don't), 1-2 is usually enough though.\u000a\u000aSneak & Show - They play multiple 3-4 cmc must counter spells along with counter magic of their own, enough said.\u000a\u000aReanimator - Like Sneak but faster, daze is worse here but will probably stay in unless your board is heavily skewed towards beating combo and graveyard strategies.\u000a\u000aShardless - Daze/Force isn't a great plan, especially against abrupt decay, but you have to win quick here if you want to win at all so I say leave it in. This is another matchup where stifle shines, if you let them get to three lands they will probably bury you.\u000a\u000aMidrange (Stoneblade, Mentor, BUG) - Here is where I like some number of forces on the draw instead of daze. They usually run more lands than you and their cards are high enough impact that I don't mind having a force or two on the draw.\u000a\u000a\u000aThe biggest advice i can give would be to have a solid sideboard plan against the archetypes you expect to face. Don't be afraid to change it up based on what you see from your opponent. \u000a +p1 +aVI'm speaking from the point of view of a RUG Delver player, but they are similar enough so here goes..\u000a\u000aGenerally, I side out 2x Daze when on the draw, unless I'm facing combo where permission is king. Unless my opponent has some serious anti-countering shit, 4x Daze on the play is correct against most anything.\u000a\u000aForce of Will usually is either "shave 1" or "side out all 4", and the latter option is usually against attrition decks, but likely *non-blue* decks. In general, if I'm on the draw and taking out the 2x Dazes, the Forces usually stay in. \u000a\u000aA good non-blue example would be Jund. I'd leave 4x Daze in on the play, 2x Daze on the draw, and side out FoW in games 2 and 3, since they are heavily into 2-for-1 mechanics, so Force can become anti-value, and have a good amount of things in the board to come in that are better value, like Submerge, Rough//Tumble, etc.\u000a\u000aI hope this applies closely enough to Grixis Delver to be relevant for you... +p2 +aVYou really don't want daze on the draw ever...fow can stay but it helps if you replace the dazes with other blue cards. Against decks that aren't trying to combo kill you, it can be correct to take out forces on the play; the card disadvantage can hurt if you Mulligan. Dazes are very strong on the play. Basically these two cards are catch-all counters for game one; afterwards you try to replace them with sideboard cards that are more suited to that particular matchup. +p3 +aVTo your first sentence: \u000aYou, sir, have apparently never played a Delver-mirror in your entire life. Especially one with Stifle on both sides. \u000aI agree though with your statement that generally Daze and Forces should be taken out whenever you have sideboard cards that do a better job at directly countering the opponent's strategy. HOWEVER if you're playing against Delver I'd recommend leaving in all 4 Dazes on the draw. Together with your Stifles and Lightning Bolts they really dictate the opponent's line of play. +p4 +aVBUG Delver has an extremely complicated manabase. Between Decays, Hymns, Lily and the blue backage, it relies heavily on DRS to work. Since you are on Deathblade, you have your own DRS to work with. Just learn how to win DRS duels, and you will greatly improve the MU (or just StP them). Don't forget to play around Daze and Stifle. \u000a\u000aRiP is good, but it hurts you as well. Try Relic of Progenitus instead - it is often one-sided. \u000a\u000a +p5 +aVWhat about the matchup is hard for you? Are other Delver decks also difficult? It feels like you should be favored since you're playing a deck that's just a bit slower, with more powerful cards. +p6 +aVThe rest of the dever matches are easy for that reason, but for some reason I'm either just really bad at the matchup, or can't being their infinite removal +p7 +aV[[Divert]], hits thoughtseize, hymn, and abrupt decay :D +p8 +aV[[Misdirection]] is always fun as well. +p9 +aV \u000a[Misdirection](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Misdirection&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Misdirection) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Misdirection) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p10 +aVhmmm +p11 +aV \u000a[Divert](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Divert&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Divert) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Divert) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p12 +aVJace gives BUG a lot of troubles.\u000aJust focus in 1 to 1 trades and drop a Jace, that would be your final goal. +p13 +aVLingering Souls is great against Delver and Liliana of the Veil. \u000aIn general they can only deal with a Batterskull by getting it off your hand when you have your Stoneforge out, it gets kinda difficult once it hits the board. +p14 +aVSince they don't play Stifle but only Wasteland and Daze getting your basics and getting up to Supreme Verdict might also be a really good option. Though they have Golgari Charm in the board to regenerate, so be wary (not more than 2 though usually and they're good against you anyways). \u000a\u000aAlso True-Name-Nemesis is just a good way to deal with Tarmogoyfs. Rest in Peace shuts pretty much everything down. \u000a\u000aAs you see, Golgari Charm is the MVP against Stoneblade Decks, they don't have more than 2 in the board though so it should be fine. +p15 +aVSome BUG Delver lists run Stifle (at least in my local meta) and play the mana denial game. +p16 +aVThere are two kinds of BUG Delver decks. The more "midrangey" kind that plays Hymn to Tourach and Bayou and the "traditional" version that plays the usual 18 land blue duals only delver manabase. The former plays 4 Stifle usually. It's basically RUG Delver with Decay instead of Bolt and DRS instead of Mongoose. +p17 +aVso do you have problems with RUG Delver? Because in my experience Nimble Mongoose is just way scarier since you don't really have answers to it while Bolt hits all your creatures besides TNN, but for only 1 mana compared to 2 from Decay and can just straight-up kill you on a low life total even though you may have stabilized the board. +p18 +aVI feel favored against RUG with BUG. Decay is obviously great because it kills 2/3 of their threats and can't be countered, and DRS makes their mana denial plan a lot worse. RUG also has trouble with Tarmogoyf, while BUG doesn't as much. I also run 3 copies of Bob, so that helps a lot. I've had good success in the matchup. +p19 +aVI actually meant the matchup between Deathblade and RUG, not BUG and RUG. I compared because OT complained playing a deck where each creature besides TNN is boltable and where Nimble Mongoose should be super scary because it's a mini-TNN where he can't even bring in RiP because of his own Deathrites and Snapcaster Mages. Against his deck RUG seems just even scarier than BUG with stifle. +p20 +aVGiven that you can nor have Perish nor RiP in the sideboard (both good against BUG btw) I honestly don't know why you would play Deathblade over Esper given that it also has a greedier manabase. DRS is good, but is it really worth it? +p21 +aVcould play path to exile in the board +p22 +aVI feel like you need to prioritize the correct things in this matchup. You are the better midrange deck than they are (even if they are playing the super midrangey version with Liliana) so it is in your best interest to safely develop your manabase, play around Daze, and try and get into the midgame. Prioritize killing their first threat but don't be afraid to take a few hits from Delver if it allows you time to setup your superior late game. Deathrite Shaman is amazing because he (a) makes theirs not as good and (b) helps protect you from Wasteland. True-Name Nemesis is excellent especially against the versions with Lili. Postboard any kind of small-creature removal that can kill Deathrites and Delvers (Disfigure for example) is good at keeping you alive until you can play True Names and planewalkers. +p23 +aVBlood Moon, Price of Progress, or Notion Thief, +p24 +aVPrice of Progress in Deathblade seems like a fantastic idea. +p25 +aVI could dig it +p26 +aVSorry to tell you, but Dig is banned :( +p27 +aVdammit, I knew Steve was gonna break [[soldevi digger]] +p28 +aV \u000a[soldevi digger](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=soldevi digger&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=soldevi digger) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!soldevi digger) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p29 +aVWait why can't we play 4 horseman? +p30 +aVNot in delver because you tend not to operate on any lands but in miracles or UW stoneblade you could. Shocks may be better but it depends on the list. The 3+ color blade decks can't support enough basics to make battle lands work but it wouldn't be too bad in UW miracles or stoneblade. +p31 +aVDelver is also built to operate very low to the ground, so it's pretty common for many variants to work best with only two or three lands. To echo what lordoftheshadows said, UW Stoneblade is probably your safest bet for a tempo style deck that runs a lot of basics- it also let's you use back to basics, which is very good at gaining an advantage over the formats nonbasic heavy lists. +p32 +aVWouldn't recommend them in Delver. You often pick up lands with Daze, and shuffle extras away with Brainstorm + Fetch.\u000a\u000aI haven't tried them, but I would suspect they almost never come in untapped in Delver decks, which is very bad. +p33 +aVYeah, delver decks also don't run basics with the exception of UR. All of your lands have to be islands so you can daze, they always have to come in untapped, and you will likely be bouncing some of them.\u000a\u000aDelver is one of the archetypes with the least land flexibility. +p34 +aVI think ABU Duals>Shocks>Battles. I wouldn't even play battles in Modern, other than Scapeshift +p35 +aVWhat about in basic heavy Daze decks? Aren't the shocks virtually unplayable there? +p36 +aVI would say they are both unplayable there, but battles especialy because delver decks often stay around 3 ish lands, and not often are they basics. The battles will rarely come in untapped unless you VERY AGGRESSIVELY fetch basics, which can give you color problems. +p37 +aVI feel like you would want at least one shock to fetch to come in untapped early, a split between battle/shocks would probably be best for stoneblade. I wouldn't even try delver without duals due to daze and being so constrained on lands. +p38 +aVI wouldn't want to touch the battle-lands with a ten-foot pole in Legacy. Even in a basic-heavy Stoneblade deck I'm almost never fetching duals to round out my color options later in the game, I'm fetching them because I need access to multiple colors from the same land in the first couple of turns. And in that situation, you can't afford to have your lands come in tapped. Shocklands are a much better substitute, because when you need them untapped, they are, and when you just need to shuffle a Brainstorm or something, you can fetch them tapped. +p39 +aVAbsolutely terrible in delver +p40 +aVYou're much better off with shocks I believe +p41 +aVFor Stoneblade/Miracles the shocklands are the best choice because theyre fetchable and come untapped on demand. Maybe have one (only one!) battle land to fetch up when you do have the 2 basics in play. The next choice would be checklands/filterlands depending on the build (if you run a ton of double W and double U cards the filter land would be better, but again, only as a one of. Same with checklands, one Glacial Fortress never hurts and protects you against Choke.\u000a\u000aSo, something like 2 Shocks, 1 Battle Land and 1 Glacial Fortress would be an okay but very inferior alternative to 4 Tundras for very obvious reasons, but still better than nothing.\u000a\u000aFor Delver sadly you will need at least one dual to use early game with Daze, but the rest can be filled with shocklands. Battle lands are useless because Delver decks usually run between zero and zero basics.\u000a\u000aSo for example a RUG manabase if you're completely broke would be 1 Trop 1 Volc 2 Breeding Pool and 2 Steam Vents, plus the usual assortment of fetches and 4 Wasteland (don't you dare cut any of them) +p42 +aVwould this still be true for a 3 color base if I wanted to go esper/jeskai or for a non dual base just stick to u/w? +p43 +aVIt costs you relatively little in terms of playability to splash red into U/W off of a Mountain and a Steam Vents. And then you get access to Pyroblast, Blood Moon, Wear//Tear, and various other nice options. Also a third color for Engineered Explosives if you want to play it. It does mean you really need Tarns and Mesas, though. +p44 +aVHmm, it depends on many factors. But having limited access to duals you could use it as an opportunity to build something like a Jeskai/Esper Back to Basics based deck, in either Stoneblade or Miracles flavors. Those decks use a crap ton of basics (and usually only run 2 Tundra anyways) and the battle lands could be more comfortable in such a manabase, although the shocklands will always be better.\u000a\u000aIt's a shame that there are no UR or WR battle lands, as it would make a main UW with R sideboard Miracles/Stoneblade deck very viable. But with a Steam vents you should be fine anyways, fetch it EOT if possible to avoid taking 2 damage.\u000a\u000aThe easiest way would be to just take a Miracles manabase and substitute the duals for the aforementioned land combination. +p45 +aVEven more true for 3 color mana base. There's no way you're going to fetch 2 basics and THEN want to fetch a dual with 3 color decks. Shocks work great to make the deck playable right away, don't sweat needing to have all the duals right away. +p46 +aVYou might be able to get away with it in Stoneblade, but you generally will want shocks over battle lands. There are going to be times where you need to fetch for a dual, and need to use the mana immediately in the first few turns. \u000a\u000aDelver absolutely not, most Delver lists don't even run basic lands, so they will always come in tapped. Also, the Delver decks run Daze, and picking up a Battle land is just awful. You wouldn't even want to use shocks in Delver because of Daze. +p47 +aVI wouldn't run them in anything that plays more than 2 colors. +p48 +aVBattles are too slow, as they will almost never come in untapped. And reemmber that shocks can come in tapped if that is acceptable for the turn.\u000a\u000aShocks with daze are rough, yeah, but honestly that just makes me want to fetch a basic island. Maybe up your fetch count by 1 to compensate, helping ensure that you can fetch an island turn 1 and fetch shocks turns 2 and/or 3 +p49 +aVThey would be unplayable. You can't pick them up with Daze so it's a no go. +p50 +aVActually the battle lands that produce blue like [[Prairie Stream]] are Islands so they work with Daze the same as basic Islands, duals and shocks. +p51 +aV \u000a[Prairie Stream](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Prairie Stream&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Prairie Stream) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Prairie Stream) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p52 +aVFocus on the deathblade list, esper is not the right shell for delver if you ask me. I would add a tropical island in place of 1 wasteland and I definitely think you need a second usea with the amount of black you have. It's the cost of running 4c. +p53 +aVugh i don't have the money for one more of either usea/trop... but i guess i'll just play tournaments untili win them, but thank you for the tips. do you think the deck will still kind of work the way it looks like right now?\u000a\u000ai thought so too about the delver list actually.\u000a\u000a/edit: i do have a bayou though!! what should i take out for that? a swamp? or a wasteland? +p54 +aVI would take out a wasteland. I see waste as more of a utility land in this deck than a part of the strategy. You save it for problem lands more than mana screw. You want to curve out into jace/tnn etc. and with only 21 lands and a decently high curve, the denial plan almost never works out.\u000a\u000aBayou is also great to trick people into you being on a dif deck. Maybe throw in a creeping tar pit for the second usea.\u000a\u000aThis is a recent list of mine for reference. I've since taken out a ts and abrupt d for the 4th ponder and jace main, moving the ts to the board.\u000a\u000ahttp://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/4c-deathblade-3/ +p55 +aVwhat should i take out for the tar pit, an island? thank you for your input, i think you're right aboiut the denial plan not really being our plan A! +p56 +aVI've played a bunch of UWR Delver. \u000a\u000a1) It's good at beating other Delver decks. Jitte is really strong, Batterskull is really strong. It's bad at beating Miracles (possibly the worst Delver variant for that plan). Many of its matchups feel like 50/50.\u000a\u000a2) TNN is WAY better than Clique, although you can still play a Clique in the side. If you land one, it drastically cuts down on your opponent's ways to deal with your threat. Often feels like at that point that only have half a dozen cards that matter for the rest of the game if they can't race you.\u000a\u000a3) I like Stifle in the list. I think from that main I'd cut 2 Plow and 2 of Snare/Pierce for them. If you play Stifle, you definitely want the full four Wastelands. Snare is a meta call. It's good if there are a bunch of decks that really lean on two-drops.\u000a\u000a4) I don't love Tutor, but you can probably make it work. I think Needle is probably better than Revoker (less mana, hit by fewer removal spells). You really want Flusterstorm for combo matchups, it's a much better SB card than Pierce or the third Pyroblast since you don't have THAT much room for countermagic anyways. You can even run them main if you're expecting a bunch of Storm. RiP > Cage. I haven't found the difference in mana cost to be a major issue, but RiP is one of your only ways to try to beat something like Lands.\u000a\u000a5) In the UWR shell it's probably just worse than Stoneforge Mystic. If you want to play Pyromancer in a Delver deck, Grixis or UR both take advantage of it better.\u000a\u000aAlso, regarding your lands: Karakas could be a reasonable choice. Less that four Wastelands is not great. Basics are not great unless you're running Moon (which isn't actually a terrible call). Basic Mountain feels like hot garbage, especially. Plateau is pretty bad, you really need all of your duals to make blue. My typical manabase for the deck is:\u000a\u000a4 Wasteland \u000a4 Volc (I want seven duals and don't have a fourth Tundra) \u000a3 Tundra \u000a9 fetches\u000a\u000aThe seventh dual could be a Karakas, a basic Island, or something else although I'd like it to make colored mana. If I were running Moon, I'd probably play something like:\u000a\u000a4 Wasteland \u000a1 Island \u000a1 Plains \u000a3 Tundra \u000a2 Volc \u000a9 Fetches\u000a\u000aOr I could shave a Wasteland, not run the Stifles, and play a third Island so all of my (nonred) spells are castable off of basics. +p57 +aVAppreciate the quick and awesome response. Seems like the snap choice here is to -1 mountain +1 wasteland if anything. The reason it was originally constructed that way was to play around obvious land hate, but maybe i'm being too paranoid about it. I really like swords at 4 since it hits alot of things that bolt can't, looking at you [[Gurmag angler]]. Definately can see [[spell snare]] coming out for [[stifle]] if anything. +p58 +aVIf you're playing Delver, you really don't want to be playing Swords. I was playing three or four originally and have dropped down to two in recent iterations. Haven't missed it a lot. True-Name can obviate the need for hard removal if your opponent isn't going too wide. If you really want the removal you could also try Dismember - unlike other Delver variants, it's easier for this one to get its life total back up. +p59 +aV^^This. A huge upside for UWR Delver as that Jitte and Batterskull can really pad your life total. Dismember is a risky play in other Delver builds, but you can definitely afford to pay some life to kill a resolved Goyf or Angler. It's also totally possible to splash one U-Sea for SB hand disruption (not necessary, but I've definitely seen it), and that U-Sea can make your Dismembers hurt even less. +p60 +aVI'm really not seeing the added benefits of dismember here over swords. They both have the same cmc 1, instead dismember reads "pay 4 life, target creatures gets -5 -5 till eot" where as i can pay 1 white, exile said creature, and opp gets some life to compliment his loss. Swords also has the added benefit of hitting alot more things that dismember can't, especially after a playtesting gauntlet i participated in last night at my lgs. Matched up against BU reanimator, Grixis Delver, Burn, and 4c Loam. Swords was too good against reanimator and the prevalence of that deck alone in the meta only reinforces the need for swords main. Also, protection isn't even relevant here since the only creature that does so is True Name or Mom. I can also Swords my own creatures in a pinch for a squeeze of life if needed.\u000a\u000aTL;DR\u000a\u000aSwords is better than dismember IMHO for a variety of reasons inc. no life loss, more available targets, and higher utility in general. +p61 +aV \u000a[Gurmag angler](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Gurmag angler&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gurmag angler) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Gurmag angler) \u000a[spell snare](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=spell snare&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=spell snare) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!spell snare) \u000a[stifle](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=stifle&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=stifle) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!stifle) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p62 +aVI've been playing UWR Delver for a while now so I hope that I can give you a few insights based on what i think of the deck.\u000a\u000a1. I still play this as my main deck so of course I am going to say it is viable in the meta. It might not be the best delver deck but it is a good deck against other creature decks and the white splash gives you some good sideboard cards. The deck can feel kinda clunky at times but as long as you enjoy the deck and are willing to put the time and effort into it, it can go toe to toe with just about any other deck.\u000a\u000a2. I run 2 main deck TNN and a sideboard Clique and I think the protection is huge. It is almost unstoppable when you can equip it with a batterskull, sword or jitte and will really gum up the board when you need it to.\u000a\u000a3. I am going to combine 3 and 4 because these are cards that I would think about as flex spot cards. The core of the deck is about 56 or so cards that are pretty stock and the remaining is up to what you want. I've toyed with running stifles before but feel like RUG does it better so I decided just to run an extra Pierce and 2 gitaxian probes. I think they are both good cards and don't think they are horrible main deck.\u000a\u000a5. I see you have no Meddling Mages in your sideboard. I run 3 of them and feel like it is one of the most important cards in the deck that I will always try to find a reason to side in. It can be great against Shardless (I have named ancestral visions multiple times) miracles in shutting of terminus or swords and storm for naming Infernal Tutor. When you have 4 color delver decks that are splashing white in the sideboard to play this card, you know its good. other than that I would split between REB and Pyroblast for cards like cabal therapy and Surgical Extraction and maybe cut the COP since burn isn't that bad of a match up.\u000a\u000a6. I don't think this is a pyromancer deck honestly. As has been pointed out, some of the other deck are a better shell for it.\u000a\u000a +p63 +aV1. Definately agree here, this deck has the potential clock of a Delver variant with the added stability of a Stoneblade deck in the later turns. I find this mix highly attractive, since id either play one or the other. \u000a\u000a2. How is that Clique in the side working out for you? What does it come in against? How strong is it once it does come in and hit the field?\u000a\u000a3. I tend to agree with your understanding, which is why it was something i wanted to discuss. Its a dirty play to stifle them T1 then T2 Mystic or Delver, but its really strong against almost any deck. However the potential to top deck this late is pretty worrisome to me since you HAVE to run 4. I was given the suggestion last night to -2 lightning bolt -2 spell snare for the stifle package. Whats your opinion on this?\u000a\u000a4. Ill have to give her a try since i can admit i have almost no play time with this card in the deck. Can definately see it shoring up the rather tense combo matchups i find in my meta. COPR is a meta call in my area, since one of my good friends plays Burn. Ill take the advice on the Pyro/REB split though.\u000a\u000a +p64 +aVI really like Clique in the sideboard. There are some matchups (like combo) where TNN does little to nothing and while Clique is a 3 drop, it's still nice to have some interaction. Otherwise I like it in matchups where games go longer, get grindy and I could really use the extra creature or evasive threat. \u000a\u000aFor stifle, I would suggest moving a StP to the sideboard, and cutting the spell snares. Lightning bolt just gives so much reach where you need to close out a game but you can't push through that last damage or when you really need to get a planeswalker off the board. Stifle is one of those great cards when you can get it to work but is terrible when it doesn't. \u000a\u000aI would definitely add meddling mages. It's a card like cabal therapy in that the more that you play with it, the better it becomes and if all else fails just name the card that you are the most afraid of. Usually I have to talk myself out of sideboarding it in because it can do so much work by cutting off a decks key card. For burn, at GPSeaTac I played against it 3 times and went 2-1. I felt the key was landing a batterskull and making sure you have a counterspell for the fireblast or smash to smithereens. +p65 +aVI agree on the bolts, its been relevant enough where that bolt off the top spells game or helps keep me alive a bit longer by hitting a opposing delver. Ill have to consider Stifle some more, i love the card but im still on the fence about its inclusion. Ill have to play test it heavily i suppose. And yea burn feels like an iffy matchup always. Very tense for me since i know i gotta go 0-100 with my delver and bolts, or aggressively protect a t2 SFM till i can drop the Big Daddy. Even then protection might get burned out and he ends up blowing 2 cards to get rid of it. +p66 +aVAfter you try it out let me know how it works. I had thought about running stifle after the TC ban and before switching to Dig, but would like to know if it's better than probe. It's also refreshing to see a little discussion on this deck since it fell of the map so hard from a year ago. I think I have only run into 2 other people playing UWr Delver in the past year and didn't get to talk to them much about the deck. +p67 +aVIll be sure to post here after some play with it. It would be nice if we could keep this thread relevant and source some great info and tech off eachother. Yea i have the pleasure of a guy at my LGS who mained this for a while, so it affords some quality discussion. But a million heads are better than 2. +p68 +aVOoooo yay, UWR Delver! Really excited to see people interested in this deck! I\u2019ve been playing this deck forever, and I plan to play it at the upcoming Open in Philly. Here is my current updated list if you\u2019re interested:\u000a\u000aLegacy UWR Delver.dec, Built with Decked Builder\u000ahttp://decks.deckedbuilder.com/d/163385\u000a\u000aFigure I\u2019ll try to answer your questions with the experience I\u2019ve had with it. Some of the points are just personal preference and may not necessarily be optimal. Hope this helps! \u000a\u000a1. For viability in the meta I believe this deck is in a fine position. In no way is it the best delver deck to be playing in an open meta, but the deck is playing a lot of powerful cards and you still have the Delver, Daze, Force, Wasteland, Brainstorm, and ponder package that every other delver deck has. You could be doing much worse. For my personal meta this is actually the best delver variant to be playing (Not that I would play another deck if the meta was different haha) as there is a ton of Death and Taxes and Lands. Those are both terrible match-ups for delver. Now I actually believe the Death and Taxes Vs. UWR Delver match-up is pretty close to 50/50 as they can\u2019t really beat True-name/Jitte, especially game 1, but your deck can still fold to Vial or Thalia. Anyway, I think because of this decks adaptive gameplan it has the merits to beat any deck. Just know that there will be match-ups where you draw the wrong half of your deck (Such as a ton of bolts/swords against combo) and lose. \u000a\u000a2. In my list I currently have 0 copies of Vendilion Clique and 2 main-deck True-name, with 1 in the sideboard. I think True-names ability is very powerful in a lot of match-ups and works so well with stoneforge mystic. Obviously Clique is great with equipment too, but it\u2019s very fragile, and the deck doesn\u2019t have a ton of threats. Having threats that most decks can\u2019t kill is where you want to be. Another huge reason I don\u2019t have clique is I think Meddling Mage does most of the disrupting after board, but I will get more into Mage for the sideboard discussion.\u000a \u000a3. I think stifle is a sweet card, but I don\u2019t think it should be played in this deck. The reason rug/grixis delver can play this card is because they have a much easier time holding it up. This version of delver doesn\u2019t always have the luxury of holding up extra mana for stifle as we are only running 4 1-mana threats, and we have to tap out a lot of the time for stoneforge multiple turns in a row to both cast and activate. Rug delver gets to play nimble mongoose allowing them more cheap threats, which will allow them extra mana to leave up for stifle. Same thing goes for Grixis delver. They run deathrite as another 1-mana threat. Also deathrite just gives them extra mana itself to cast stifle. Also the card can just be underwhelming a lot of the time. Loses a lot of its utility in the mid-late game, which you will have to resort to a lot of the times.\u000a\u000a4. I agree with you about this card being too narrow. I think spell pierce is just better. Sure it can be hard to hold up like stifle, but I think the card is too strong not to play. It has always had merit in a ton of match-ups playing the deck .\u000a\u000a5. Meddling Mage. I don\u2019t ever see myself playing less than 3 of this card in my sideboard, but I\u2019m almost always jamming 4. This card is so good and is a huge draw to playing this deck. I think this is the best possible meddling mage deck. It works so well with the tempo/midrange aspects of the deck and it is good in so many match-ups. It\u2019s a cheap disruptive threat that we can suit up with equipment. A Meddling Mage with a sword of feast and famine against any combo deck is just insane. I have 3 maindeck probes in my list that go really well with meddling mage. Most of the other sideboard cards are pretty obvious. I guess rest in peace is worth talking about as this card is another huge draw for me to play the deck. This is the best possible graveyard hate card to play, and we get to utilize it with absolutely no drawback. This helps a ton in the life from the loam match-ups. Making those match-ups actually winnable. I think lands is one of if not the worst match-up for this deck/every delver deck. Saying that I have never lost to the deck thanks to meddling mage, true-name, and rest in peace. I\u2019m sure that will change eventually. \u000a\u000a6. This is not a pyro deck. If you want to play pyro grixis is by far the best shell. The triple threat of pyro/probe/cabal therapy is just too strong. \u000a\u000aSorry for any rambling, but I would love to discuss this deck with you further if you have any questions.\u000a +p69 +aVInteresting take on the build. How do the 3 mb Git probes suit you? Im curious the the extra draw fairs? Im getting kinda hyped here lol thinking about -2 spell snare +1 wear/tear +1 spell pierce out of the board and making room for +2 meddling mage into the board. +p70 +aVI love Snapcaster Mage, does it make sense to include a few copies? +p71 +aVIts worth testing at the very least, though i feel snapcaster fits stronger into the pure stoneblade shell than the hybrid this list seeks to create. He might fit a nich where the recurrence might be valuable, but i dont think its necessary and is overly redundant.\u000a\u000aIf i were to try him out, it would be at 2 and my changes would be -1StP and - Lightning bolt. Sleeve it up and do some testing, report back to us with your results. Id really like to see this thread develop with multiple testers all trying new ideas and reporting in, since it benefits us all! +p72 +aV1. The deck is fine in almost any metagame. However 3 basics seem to much to me. I play one Island because I hate losing to t1 wasteland. Spell snare is probably a meta call as I don't play them at all.\u000a\u000a2. My list plays 2 TNNs and no Clique at all. (I would consider one if there are more Miracles players around, but TNN is probably even better)\u000a\u000a3. Stifle is a card that I sneak into my deck to surprise people sometimes. But the deck seems better without.\u000a\u000a4. Meddling Mage is an all star in this deck. Always play 3-4. Enlightened tutor seems too slow. Would you rather play t1 Delver into t2 (insert any cmc2 hate card) or play t1 tutor into t2 hate card (If you draw your second land and you won't)? \u000a\u000a5. I've tried Young Pyromancer but it doesn't have any synergy with your Stoneforge Mystic/TNN plan so I dropped him.\u000a\u000aSorry for the bad formating, I'm on my phone right now. If you have any further questions feel free to ask. +p73 +aVIve dropped the mountain here for the 4th Wasteland. Unfortunately 4c Loam is a thing where i play so i need the 2 atleast. Regarding the Etutor board, the ideology behind it is that i can side in the 3 tutors + hate card and have an effective 4 copies of said hate card, and most are cheap enough that we can Etutor drop hate t3 while still maintaining a proactive gameplan t1 and t2. +p74 +aVYou could get by with one volc. It's not ideal but it's better than nothing. I' we had success with only 3 volcs in my ur delver builds as well. \u000a\u000aUr delver is a great entry to the format. Have fun! +p75 +aVI guess you mean with Steam Vents as substitute? Because only playing 3 Mountains (1volc 2 mountains) with 2 Fireblast and a lot of ways to find them seems really weird. +p76 +aVSorry for the confusion I thought his question was if he could get by with one volc and steam vents and was agreeing he could. wasteland decks won't be fun to play against especially once they figure out you have shocks. Since fireblast is the finisher you generally won't care that the shock is entering tapped to preserve a bit of life and stay out of bolt range. \u000a\u000aDaze is the only real problem I see with the shock idea. Although casting brainstorm in response to a wasteland activation and dazing yourself to save the land is pretty fun. +p77 +aVHi! I've been playing with this deck at my local lgs and it's awesome! I'm playing a very similar list, with +2 ponders, -2 CLs. The 18 lands in my opinion are pretty necessary. You want to be able to curve out, drop dudes, and be able to follow up with multiple spells. also, Fireblast is an all-star in the deck. This card allows for turn 3 wins with a combination of it and multiple prowess triggers. \u000ahere is my current iteration:\u000a3 Bloodstained Mire\u000a2 Island\u000a2 Mountain\u000a3 Polluted Delta\u000a4 Scalding Tarn\u000a4 Volcanic Island\u000a4 Brainstorm\u000a2 Chain Lightning\u000a4 Daze\u000a4 Delver of Secrets\u000a2 Fireblast\u000a4 Force of Will\u000a4 Gitaxian Probe\u000a4 Lightning Bolt\u000a4 Monastery Swiftspear\u000a4 Ponder\u000a2 Price of Progress\u000a4 Stormchaser Mage\u000aSideboard:\u000a\u000a2 Exquisite Firecraft\u000a2 Flusterstorm\u000a1 Grim Lavamancer\u000a1 Pithing Needle\u000a2 Pyroblast\u000a2 Smash to Smithereens\u000a2 Submerge\u000a1 Sulfuric Vortex\u000a2 Surgical Extraction\u000a +p78 +aVLooks pretty sweet, but im not sure it is doing anything that UR Delver isnt already doing. Stormchaser instead of Pyromancer might not add a whole lot, but maybe i'm undervaluing the evasion too much.\u000a\u000aI think you want to take a page from UR Delver and drop to 16 lands and +2 Ponders. +p79 +aVI disagree in that stormchaser doesnt add anything special. Peezy is a long game card, that takes multiple turns to make offensive. Stormchaser can get in for 4-6 uncblockable damage the first two turns it enters play, which is incredible in this sort of deck.especially in multiples. +p80 +aVI'm testing a similar build right now to some success. \u000a\u000aIt feels really smooth and the evasion that storm chaser provides has been good. It can be very explosive. I have found no need for 18 lands. I think you can easily get by with 15-16. I also don't play fireblast. But I don't hate it in the list. \u000a\u000aThat gives me access to 2 more ponder and a grim lavamancer. Lavamancer is very good in this deck. Eidolon out of the board is a house. And I really like blood moon in this shell as well. \u000a\u000aIt's definitely a good option as a starter deck that gives you flexibility if you want to play other delver variants in the future. +p81 +aVI don't know about Blood Moon in a deck that plays Price of Progress I'd rather have more of those in the SB. \u000a\u000aGo out there kid, show the Lands players out there what you're made of! +p82 +aVI don't understand your comment. Blood moon makes non-basic lands into non-basic mountains... PoP will still work if that is your concern.\u000a\u000aEdit: If you think you just don't need/like it and want to go more linear on the burn plan that is totally reasonable. It's just another tool we have access to.\u000a\u000aThe difference is that blood moon is one card combo in that it can just end a game on the spot. Where PoP is more like a finisher. both are good an reasonable. +p83 +aVOh wow, shame on me. I played against it so often but never realized it (propably because Wasteland doesn't work). But yeah now you say it I know that legendary lands still have their rule even under a Blood Moon. \u000a\u000aStill, thinking about the decks you'd want it in (BUG, Lands, 4c-loam) Price would be better as a finisher imo. I disagree with bringing BM in against other Delver decks, so both BM am PoP would only be "ok" against these decks. \u000aI mean, PoP has just the upside of fitting right into the game plan, flipping Delver etc. \u000a\u000aAnyways, thanks for pointing out! +p84 +aVNo worries. Wasteland doesn't work because wasteland itself would be a mountain. Pop definitely fits better in terms of the decks overall game plan. I was simply suggesting moon out of the board in addition to pop, not in its stead. \u000a\u000a\u000aWhether you want both or not it's purely a meta call. I play in a small local meta that has 2 cloudpost players as well at 1-2 lands players. I'm still running 2 pops main and one in the board. +p85 +aVFireblast works fine with Steam Vents, and I definitely think it's playable with only 1 dual. +p86 +aVI agree with only having 16 lands since Ponder is also just a good turn 1 play that can either find you a second land or get you a smooth next draws. \u000aFrom back in my days I have the experience that 3 Volcanics is enough, you also don't really need 4 for like any other Legacy deck, even Sneak&Show only plays 3. \u000aSo I'd cut a Volcanic and a Fetchland. You can just get 1-2 Volcanics and 1-2 Steam Vents, the difference between 0 to 1 Volcanic heavily outweights the impact on any further Volcanics you'll add. \u000aJust saying because with the current price hype of duals regarding EMA I'd rather wait a while until the dust has settled. +p87 +aVForce of Will is not "free" no matter what anyone tells you. It costs cards and life.\u000a\u000aDaze, on the other hand, is actually free. +p88 +aVDaze costs tempo. It isn't free. +p89 +aV10% of the deck costs more than 1 mana. There's no downside. +p90 +aVEver played a Delver mirror where your opponent is on Daze, Wasteland and Stifle? The tempo-loss from Daze is definitely not free, especially when you want to cast e.g. a Stormchaser Mage around Daze. \u000a\u000aDon't get me wrong, Daze is great and against Delver I never board any of them out (I play Stifle and Wasteland, too though so I wouldn't recommend it for this build on the draw). +p91 +aVWhen one steps back and looks at UWR Delver beyond its questionable deck construction philosophies, it's actually really good against the top tier decks at the moment, other than Miracles. (E.g. Other delver decks, Shardless, DnT, ANT, S&T, Elves, and is the best Delver variant against Lands) +p92 +aVSaying something is the best delver variant against lands is a little like saying someone is the least crooked man in the mob or the least gay village person. Still, as a lands player I would actually say the really burny UR lists are actually probably best vs me, because the mana denial plan works worst against them and even if I deal with their creatures they can often burn me out, plus SB price of progress which someone in my group running UR would play is an absolute blowout. +p93 +aVI was playing UR Delver with 4x Price in the main last night. Didn't do much for my Burn matchup, but was nice against the other decks I played when it came up. +p94 +aVYeah, about that miracles matchup. I lose game 1 in 7 minutes. I win game 2 in 35 minutes, I lose game 3 in 5 minutes. That's what sucks about that.\u000a\u000aWith eternal masters and except for the dual lands I will have the whole thing foiled. So I really want this deck to be a thing, but even I know with 3+ years piloting experience, you can't win 7 out of 9 matches in a GP (but 6...) and its tuff to take a 5 rounder with it. I've had greater success with Shardless because of a card called Abrupt Decay... +p95 +aVI was thinking about this last night, and it honestly it's probably better as just a straight up Jeskai stoneblade deck rather than with delver. +p96 +aVI can give a more in depth response later, but the main advantage that delver has over a slower blade deck is the ability to stretch the opponent's removal.\u000a\u000aIt's easy to remove a SFM when it's the only threat presented to you. It's much harder when there's a Delver clocking you, especially while being threatened by Daze and Wasteland.\u000a\u000aIf RUG Delver is a Ferrari, UWR is a freight train. +p97 +aVand its much harder to clock someone when you've given them two timewalks StP'ing something 3 or 4 turns ago. +p98 +aVOk I mean that's one of the reasons I loved the deck was because the mana base is so flexible it allows me to swap to something else within those colors, miracles, stone blade, sneak and show, ur delver, etc. \u000a\u000a\u000aPart of me is curious to see the rest of the spoilers from EM. Because over time I'll probably build miracles, for some reason I gravitate to Grindy decks across every format. During GP NJ almost all my matches went to time. That was draining as hell, that being said if I'm gonna play grinding wouldn't miracles be the go to?\u000a\u000a\u000aAlso is the source's list for stoneblade up to date? +p99 +aVyeah, I drained my vacay fund at work and am thinking about grabbing a couple of duals. I have Trops and Volcs and can't decide if I want to grab Undergrounds or Tundras (I currently only have Temur Delver) +p100 +aVIf you're a lifetime Delver player, it's definitely the Seas imo. Since you already have the Volcanic Islands and the Tropical Islands, getting Seas would let you transition easily from RUG to BUG and Grixis/4color. +p101 +aVHaha I wouldn't say lifetime but yeah I've been playing for 2 or 3 years. +p102 +aVDefinitely the Seas then. Like you, I played RUG for a really long time until I got my Seas and started playing Team America. I still sleeve up the geese sometimes for smaller locals, though. \u000a\u000aIf you're anything like me, you'll never play Miracles even if it is the #1 deck in the format heh. +p103 +aVPersonally I'd grab the seas. Worse cast it's easier to turn seas into tundras plus trade or cash. Than the opposite +p104 +aVYeah that's what I'm leaning towards as well. It's easier to transition from temur delver to Grixis delver as well. +p105 +aV[This](http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?21441-Deck-Blade-Control&p=913354&viewfull=1#post913354) is the most recently posted UWr list on the thread. I have the build I used earlier in the thread, but I haven't touched stoneblade in months so..\u000a\u000aIt's pretty rough as a UWr player when most of the discussion is Esper, I've taken to mostly lurking in the Miracles thread to see if I can't apply some of their tech. +p106 +aVI played it and every hand was usually 1-2 lands, 1-2 cantrip, removal spell, stoneforge + daze, and it felt fucking awful.\u000a\u000aThat said, you get to play Meddling Mage and Red Blast in the sb and True Name + Equipment, so it's not all bad. It's just not very good at playing a tempo game. \u000a\u000aAs /u/KangaRod said, you're probably better off playing it as a UWR Blade deck rather than a Delver deck. +p107 +aVI think what I might do is rebuild into stoneblade and gradually build into miracles depending on the EM spoilers +p108 +aVI played UWR Delver at my local weekly and did well this week (4-0). It can be a metagame deck (and I think it's in a good place right now) but it's not going to be a high tier deck unless more cards are printed for it.\u000a\u000aI think 4c Delver is the most reliable delver deck right now and it has done the best of withstanding metagame changes since it became a deck in FRF. +p109 +aVThe main problem for this matchup (in my opinion) is the approach Delver decks take to any given field: Delver decks are for the most part designed to fight other blue decks, combo decks in particular. The tempo plan of Stifle/Wasteland/Daze is effective much of the time vs. fair decks, but if e.g. Stoneblade develops their mana, Delver strategies can have a hard time keeping up.\u000a\u000aThis is essentially what's happening in the Eldrazi matchup. Their lands tap for multiple mana, which diminishes the value of cards like Daze and Spell Pierce, and Eye of Ugin reduces the cost of their creatures, making you more reliant of Force of Will to stop their threats, which is card disadvantage. I haven't seen an Eldrazi list that runs fetchlands, so Stifle can't really stop their mana. \u000a\u000aFurthermore, Abrupt Decay is pretty weak against the deck (but typically necessary for Chalice and Trinisphere), and Lighting Bolt can't kill Thought-Knot Seer or Reality Smasher.\u000a\u000aAll this makes Wasteland much more important than it is vs. other decks. What you could do is include in your sideboard something like Crucible of Worlds or Life from the Loam.\u000a\u000aI suspect you also want stronger removal spells to handle their board. (Dismember and Murderous Cut come to mind.) \u000a\u000aOne idea I've been toying with for the sideboard is bounce spells. Combining bounce and recursive mana denial might be a way to stall the deck long enough for a Delver or Tarmogoyf to either finish the opponent or get them into Lightning Bolt range. (Note: this is pure speculation.) +p110 +aVE.Stompy player here (but I've also played heaps of RUG Delver), these are my thoughts so far. Basically, the Delver/Wasteland draws are your best draws, and capitalising on our fragile mana base is most important. Forcing us to have few lands and only able to deploy small threats that can be eaten by Goyf will usually allow you to get there. Abrupt Decay is also very helpful in dealing with Chalice, so it's nice you have that main. That being said, you will have a lot of dead cards and throwing these at any opportunity is important. Daze anything (esp. Chalice if you're lucky) since it'll often be difficult for them to pay as the deck taps out very frequently and of course Force/BS away your Pierces and Stifles (though you can Stifle TKS trigger, kind of sweet) because if they don't hit a Chalice then they're basically useless. I don't think Pyro is amazing since he gets dwarfed quickly and Smasher doesn't care about chump blockers, so more Anglers or Goyfs are good.\u000a\u000aFrom SB Loam is great (E.Stompy can't beat Wastelock), Therapy is very good, since the deck doesn't empty its hand fast at times and you can tag a Seer or Smasher, Dismember is good of course and maybe some more hard removal (Murderous Cut, even Terminate) is something you can look into.\u000a\u000aBut yeah, get on the board quickly with a Delver (fliers are super hard to deal with for E.Stompy too), make sure Chalice is off the table via Decay/Force/Daze and then just dig for Wastelands and more beatsticks - you have tools, just refining these and digging for them will let you get there. :) +p111 +aVI play Grixis Delver so take my thoughts with that in mind:\u000a\u000aYour best plan of attack is a T1 delver. Daze anything you can as they can quickly build up lots of mana, making Daze a dead draw by T3+. Deathrite is another great play because it helps ramp you passed Thorn (usually in the sb) and Trinisphere, should one resolve. Pyromancer tokens don't do much against Smasher, but they are great at chumping Thought-Knot and large Endless Ones (ex: I was able to hold back a 7/7 Endless One for 3 turns while my flipped delver crashed in). \u000a\u000aBolt Mimics ASAP; this will stop some of the explosiveness of the deck. Also, Bolt doesn't hit Thought-Knot or Smasher so unless you're hitting a small Endless One or something, they are stuck going to the dome. \u000a\u000aWasteland is obviously huge and you should prioritize hands that have it.\u000a\u000aHaving access to Cabal Therapy + Probe for game 2+ is really great. Getting rid of their prison pieces and/or smashers really slows them down and allows you to develop your board. Bonus points if you can Surgical these cards after Therapy ;) \u000a\u000aI went 2-0 against the colorless Eldrazi deck at my weekly on Tuesday. You have the tools to fight through it, just prioritize keeping hands that have those tools. +p112 +a. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/eldrazi_comments.pickle b/eldrazi_comments.pickle new file mode 100644 index 0000000..46d6b8a --- /dev/null +++ b/eldrazi_comments.pickle @@ -0,0 +1,1220 @@ +(lp0 +VI just don't think playing three tron lands naturally, much less on turn 4, and then playing the new Eldrazi could ever be better than playing Karn or Wurmcoil in the same situation. If Eye or Temple get banned I think you play whichever doesn't get banned and then Heartless Summoning. You probably move back into a more midrange control strategy with that, maybe B/W or B/R. +p1 +aVI like this analysis, but I wonder if more hybrid decks are possible without eye, that have enough eldrazi for temple to be useful. There are some pretty nice cards like displacer and tks that give good value without putting you all in on the eldrazi plan (like eye and mimic would).\u000a\u000aHeartless ramp won't be happy about losing eye but you will still be able to build it. No clue I'd it will be good enough though. +p2 +aVWhy bother dropping a t3 blight herder when you can play karn? \u000a \u000aEdit: reality smasher* regardless, karn is still the best thing you can play off of a t3 tron +p3 +aVNot to mention that it's not even going to be a t3 blight herder with friends in most circumstances. Natural Tron + Relic works, 2pc Tron + Map + Tormod's Crypt works at card disadvantage - none of these are impressive lines. +p4 +aVOh man i actually meant reality smasher haha for some reason i always mix up the names of the two. +p5 +aVReality Smasher smashes face (thanks to trample) and Blight Herder has a herd of Scions to shepherd. +p6 +aVExaclty this. I've played against tron eldrazi, and all of their threats feel massively less impactful than just getting a karn or a wurmcoil out there. +p7 +aVI think Eldrazi players go to Legacy. +p8 +aVThis is what I plan on. +p9 +aVTurning off the insane eldrazi mimic openers is one big strike against heartless summoning IMO. It also shuts off drowner of hope for those builds still running it. \u000a\u000aJust feels like there's too much splash damage that cuts the edge you'd get by powering out the drazi quickly. +p10 +aVIf im going midrange and I need the ramp, I'm playing ancient stirrings, or I'm playing mind stone. +p11 +aVThe heartless summoning decks are really more ramp/value decks than aggro. Sure it would be nice to mimic ulamog, but that just feels a little win more. +p12 +aVAssuming [[Eye of Ugin]] gets banned, I think you main 4 [[Vesuva]] in its place +p13 +aVA good idea but with only 4 copy targets in your deck you'd have to count on sometimes getting bake of your opponent. +p14 +aV \u000a[Eye of Ugin](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Eye of Ugin&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Eye of Ugin) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Eye of Ugin) \u000a[Vesuva](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Vesuva&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Vesuva) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Vesuva) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p15 +aVI think Thespian stage would work better. You can play it safely without having temple in your hand and just wait to use the copy feature, while having the choice to copy other lands in the meantime. +p16 +aVI think the deck dies. Eldrazi is already fairly inconsistent (it regularly mulligans multiple times to find Eye or Temple) so reducing the number of that effect they get to play by half just makes the deck into a much slower Zoo deck, effectively. +p17 +aVI enjoy seeing you squirm +p18 +aVBecause losing twin hurt so much for you? +p19 +aVThat's the implication, yeah. +p20 +aVPrecisely! Others must suffer as i have. +p21 +aVI think you'd stick with Heartless summoning and move up to playing things like Ulamog. I'm pretty sure the deck would look a lot like the current Heartless Eldrazi deck, but with the temples swapped out of course. +p22 +aVIf one is banned, the Heartless version with Wasteland Strangler is my first thought of where you'd go. Definitely not Tron lands, as the investment needed to get Tron on T3 ties up too much mana for you to bother with the Eldrazi. There are better payoffs.\u000a\u000aIf both are banned, the deck is dead. This is somewhat likely as Wizards have a tendency to overreact to lame duck formats (witness the massacre that hit Affinity in Standard; any two of Disciple, Ravager and Plating would have solved that deck, instead we had two of that trio PLUS the six artifact lands all taken out back and shot) +p23 +aVAffinity was still the best deck after they banned it from what I've seen and heard +p24 +aVIt was #1 after the first banning (Skullclamp).\u000a\u000aAfter the second it was completely dead. +p25 +aVIt's better for them to overreact than underreact. If you ban what you think is the minimum and it turns out you're wrong, you look incompetent and players lose faith in your ability to manage the game. If you ban everything, so there is no chance of it surviving, you accomplish your goal without risk of having to come back in 4 months and ban something again +p26 +aVThis kills the Eldrazi. +p27 +aVthe deck will die I think if both are banned. If eye is banned the deck might live on. +p28 +aVBut be more fair, like post-bans affinity. +p29 +aVWhen Eldrazi does get banned, I'll be 99% sure WotC is going to hit temple. WotC will leave eye unbanned for tron players. +p30 +aVWhy would you think that? It's the same crappy reasoning players had for wanting to ban Lilly rather than bloodbraid elf +p31 +aVBanning Eye or Temple is irrelevant, the deck won't be destroying the meta anymore. Speculating on the potential effects of different bans on the deck when after the next ban and restricted update we will have a new set release which might impact Modern more than the last one and a couple of months in between.. Just so pointless. +p32 +aVI'm confused by this post, you're not defending the power level of the Eldrazi deck, are you?\u000a\u000aI don't think any unbans or new cards will fix the oppressive Eldrazi decks +p33 +aVI believe he means it doesn't matter which one gets banned, but that it will make eldrazi bad until the point where it isn't toppling over the meta. +p34 +aVHe isn't defending eldrazi. He's saying speculating on what will be good on April 11th is meaningless. If one of the two lands is banned, it doesn't change what (the post-ban) eldrazi deck will look like that much. There might also be unbannings and modern defining cards in innistrad, so who knows what will be playable +p35 +aVEye of Ugin is definitely getting banned, maybe Reality Smasher as well. I think without the eye, I think the deck will run temple and then the urzatron lands, but will eventually drop down to at least tier 2. +p36 +aVThey only need to ban Eldrazi Temple to bring the decks power level in line with the top end of the format. +p37 +aVThey only need to ban one of the lands imo. It would slow down the deck and make it inconsistent enough to not be the best deck. +p38 +aVWhy would they get rid of eye over temple? If they hit eye then they are hurting tron too, and I don't think that's a deck that Is really in need of that right now, and hitting temple just takes care of the problem they are facing with Eldrazi decks +p39 +aVTron really doesn't get hit that badly if they ban eye. Its inevitability drops a bit, but it would be trivial to adapt the deck. +p40 +aVIts just what I think, but with Eye you can play Mimics for free on turn one, compared to temple that can only play one Mimic at a time. To me, I feel like that is a bigger problem. +p41 +aV> Eye of Ugin is definitely getting banned, maybe Reality Smasher as well\u000a\u000aWhy would they ban Reality Smasher?\u000a +p42 +aVI feel like Reality Smasher is a big part of the problem. The deck drops free mimics with Eye and then Smasher makes them big. Without Eye it slows the deck down, but Smasher can still drop relatively early, and a 5/5 trample haste with protection is still a problem for the meta. I think its a big enough issue that Wizards may deal with it. +p43 +aVIt's hardly an issue when cast on turn 5. +p44 +aVYeah, but with temple or urza lands it can come out turn 3. +p45 +aVYes, with perfect draws, it can come out on turn three. The mana is the issue not the 5/5. +p46 +aVWhich is in no way more oppressive or scary than a t3 wurmcoil or karn. I get what you're saying but it's not that powerful. +p47 +aVNot by itself, but Mimic is still out there. And with Karn and Wurmcoil, you can kill it with a spell pretty easily. The whole discard thing, combined with haste trample, and coming out turn 3 feels powerful to me. +p48 +aVIt's powerful sure. But there are decks that can work around Smasher with cards like Loxodon Smiter and Obstinate Baloth. I would also personally claim that dealing with a karn is significantly harder that a smasher. And unless you're exiling it, killing wurmcoil can just create more problems. +p49 +aVIm not saying its more or less powerful Im saying it is powerful and an important part of the deck, and that Wizards might get rid of it as well. +p50 +aVI was going to sign onto mobile just to downvote this, but it takes less effort to simply tell you that banning Reality Smasher would be absurd. +p51 +aVI'll just do it for you +p52 +aVUpvote for good guy salt +p53 +aVYou can just uncheck "Use subreddit style" or /r/modernmagic+null +p54 +aV[[Worship]] is 4CMC, but totally worth it if you can survive long enough to play it. Maybe add some Spirit Links to the main or side to survive longer. You're a 4-5 turn aggro deck and they're a 3-4 turn aggro deck, so you'd better be ready to race!\u000a\u000aAnd of course, side in a couple [[Seal of Primordium]] if they're on a build with Chalice. Natures Claim won't work on a Chalice set to 1CMC. +p55 +aV \u000a[Seal of Primordium](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Seal of Primordium&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Seal of Primordium) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Seal of Primordium) \u000a[Worship](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Worship&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Worship) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Worship) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p56 +aVThank you! I will try Worship and I think about adding 2 Spirit Links to the main. +p57 +aVGhostly prison is much better than worship. Comes out sooner and is at the sweet spot in the bogles curve. \u000a\u000aLifelink is key to the match so I'd definitely add some spirit links, and consider an unflinching courage. \u000a\u000aOne thing that confuses me is I don't get why people don't use Qasali pridemage as ench/artifact removal -- it's a backup creature you can use in a pinch too. +p58 +aVSo you don't want to cast Daybreak Coronet on Turn 3? :o +p59 +aVBogles will only hit their 4th land drop on turn 4 around half the time. +p60 +aVI've always maindecked Qasali Pridemages in Bogles. Exalted is super relevant to our gameplan of aggressively beating down, and having flexible ench/artifact removal maindeck is super relevant in the metagame, since we can just lose outright to an unanswered spellskite or opposing Worship or Ensnaring Bridge. Having an extra creature to sac to Liliana is also huge and dodges another way we just get massively blown out. +p61 +aVI actually think bogles is positioned well vs eldrazi. You just have to make sure you side in enough cards to save you from spellskite, chalice on 1 and ratchet bomb. Thankfully most versions do not run All is Dust as that would just wreck you. So get those Stony Silence's and Seal of Primordium's ready. +p62 +aVI've really been liking spirit mantle, it allows your bogles to block really well until you can suit up a coronet and start beating down. It really helps.\u000a\u000aIf you're having issues with the colorless lists that play ratchet bomb/chalice/spellskite, then stony silence and seal of primordium will help you out. In the absence of those cards, I think the matchup is pretty favorable. +p63 +aVLOL?\u000a\u000aEDIT: not laughing at your post - just laughing at the fact this conversation is still happening at all - about hex proof or any deck for that matter. Let's circle back mid-April? +p64 +aV[[Slippery BogLE]] +p65 +aV \u000a[Slippery BogLE](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Slippery BogLE&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Slippery BogLE) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Slippery BogLE) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p66 +aVWell, that's a start at communication. They have a responsibility to vendors and players, so I'm not surprised they won't be emergency banning. I just have to hope they will acknowledge they messed the format up, that a correction is coming, and that a reevaluation of how the Modern PT is handled is coming up.\u000a\u000a\u000aJust kidding, let's burn his house down. +p67 +aVI want them to unban some cards. But we know for sure they will just ban some Eldrazi cards +p68 +aV>Just kidding, let's burn his house down.\u000a\u000aNext pro Tour ban - Islands. \u000a\u000aReasoning:\u000a\u000a* Better than 4 of in many popular decks \u000a* Many new players dislike playing against decks that use them\u000a* We've been told they've been used to do unfair things \u000a* Market research suggests they are insufficiently pew pew \u000a* Limits design space by enabling blue\u000a* Has had too many top 8 showings\u000a* Isn't forests +p69 +aV22 Islands in GP Copenhagen's Top 8. Why is this menace still around? +p70 +aVCards which utilize blue mana consistently push our vision for nwo complexity levels, because of this regretfully blue mana is banned. +p71 +aVthis is uh... we're talking about modern here... Blue is already dead. In fact, basics are dead. If anything they need to print more powerful basics lands. I was looking the other day and apparently they used to print cards like Savannah and Badlands. I was thinking they could bring back that cycle but just make them basic as well. +p72 +aVwell, i guess that does get around the RL +p73 +aVyeah... a painlessly fetchable dual land that does not die to techedge nor ghostquarter :D definitely not OP :D +p74 +aVJust FYI, it does die to ghost quarter, it can kill basics. Not that it makes your point any less valid. +p75 +aVYeah right, but if you have "basics" like this it will be replaced with a same dual land which would not make any sense :) +p76 +aVWell.... That's a duh on my part. Haha. +p77 +aV> this is uh... we're talking about modern here... Blue is already dead.\u000a\u000aNonsense. Blue is exactly where green was back before M10: A support color.\u000a\u000aIt's quite telling to me that the only blue and black cards that see play are either a) printed before M10, b) widely considered design mistakes, or c) multicolored. +p78 +aVAt least black's playables and mistakes aren't all banned like blue's are. +p79 +aVDunno what you're smoking but black has gotten decent support with delve and kalitus. +p80 +aVBlue got support with delve too, it just got taken away. +p81 +aVKinda makes that a moot point doesn't it?\u000a\u000aIt's gotten jace, keranos, Sphinx Rev, and snaps but we're kinda digging here. +p82 +aVthis isnt true for black. \u000a\u000akalitas, tasigur, murderous cut, lillana, thoughtseize, and plenty of other playables disagree with you +p83 +aV> tasigur, murderous cut\u000a\u000aDelve is widely considered a design mistake. Cards like Gurmag Angler and Hooting Mandrils should not be Modern playable. They're vanilla commons. They only reason they're fine is because they're vanilla creatures. Cards like Become Immense should also probably just not exist. No comment on Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time.\u000a\u000a> thoughtseize\u000a\u000aPrinted before M10. Should have said IoK, but I've heard people say that's considered a design error, too, and should've been 2 or less.. It's not clear if they'll ever print a similar card.\u000a\u000a> lillana\u000a\u000aAlso largely considered a design mistake at 3 mana. It's easily the second most powerful Planeswalker ever printed.\u000a\u000aKalitas is the only one I'd give you, but it remains to be seen just how good it is. I've never seen it more than a 1-of.\u000a\u000aThe other one is phyrexian mana with Dismember and Gitaxian Probe. I'm fairly certain both those cards have to be considered essentially design errors. I bet they'd be {B/P}{B/P}{2} and {U/P}{1} if they were to be made again. Mental Misstep was definitely a design error.\u000a\u000aThis is my point. WotC has black and blue wedged into a super small design space. They hate counterspells. They hate discard. They mostly hate bounce. They hate graveyard manipulation. They hate card draw. They hate deck manipulation. Only white gets mass removal. Only white and green get non-creature removal, except for red's artifact removal. Creature removal has been getting worse. Green gets the best large creatures. White and red get the best small creatures. So... what the heck are black and blue supposed to do?\u000a +p84 +aVNo offense, but *any* card seeing wide play in Modern is a design mistake, or close to one.\u000a\u000aIf blue and black are "just support colors," then what the heck are the main colors? I guess red can be considered one, since Burn is a thing. White sure as hell isn't one. Almost none of those great small creature that White gets see modern play, except in Death and Taxes/Hatebears (a perpetually Tier 2 deck). I wouldn't exactly call Green a main color, either, except maybe Abzan Company/Chord decks.\u000a\u000aIn Modern, every color needs other colors to cover all the bases, unless your strategy is very linear (see Burn, Merfolk). And even those decks often splash other colors in order to cover weaknesses. \u000a\u000aAnd that's a good thing! The color pie is supposed to create tension between mucking up your manabase and having access to different effects. +p85 +aVGreen is the main color in Modern, followed by Red.\u000a\u000aTron is Green. The Red is pretty irrelevant and can easily be any other color. Losing Ancient Stirrings and Sylvan Scrying would severely harm the deck, though.\u000a\u000aInfect is Green. Needed for the pump spells and creatures.\u000a\u000aScapeshift is Green with mountains. Need green for the ramp and scapeshift.\u000a\u000aBoggles is Green. Needed for the pump spells and creatures.\u000a\u000aAffinity is Colorless. It can be Red or Blue support, but often it's just colorless. One wonders why they don't run more Green.\u000a\u000aChord/Company is Green. Literally the foundation of the deck.\u000a\u000aZoo is Green. Could be Naya or R/G, but it's always Green.\u000a\u000aLantern Control is usually Green/Black, although, like Affinity it's actually colorless.\u000a\u000aEven *Twin* was sometimes Green (TarmoTwin).\u000a\u000aSo, what else is there?\u000a\u000aRed Deck Wins, which is Red or R/b. \u000aStorm is R/u. \u000aMerfolk is Blue. \u000a\u000aGreen is *by far* the most powerful color in Modern.\u000a +p86 +aVPod was green, goyf is green, bbe was green. Each considered mistakes. Infect as a mechanic is debatable as a mistake as well. Almost everything that's a staple in modern was either a mistake or an answer to a mistake (decay, also green). The "mistake" qualifier is useless for studying cards in modern both because it's not official (you're just writing everything in UB off as one) and because it's irrelevant. The cards are in modern and you're cherry picking. \u000a\u000aEvery single deck you named runs other colors/colorless and in many of them, green plays mostly a support role in the deck (tron is definitely a colorless based deck with green cantrips and tutors) or is a very limited splash (burn definitely a red deck, rug twin). \u000a\u000aGrixis isn't green. UR twin wasn't green. TC delver wasn't green and neither are the surviving UR/grixis delver archetypes. Affinity isn't green. UWR isn't green. Ad nauseam, merfolk, soul sisters, blue moon, 8 rack, BW tokens, skred, tezzeret, U tron, and mardu aren't green. I could go on into less popular decks but you get the point. \u000a\u000aBurn is very very red, scapeshift is very blue, lantern and tron are very colorless. Zoo, company, jund, boggles, and infect? Yep those are your real green decks. Those five. If you count green in burn/tron you have to count blue and black in things like scapeshift and jund or abzan company. \u000a\u000aIs green the best color? Maybe, maybe not. But it's not the core of most decks and it's definitely not in every deck. Look at legacy for an example of a format dominated by a color (and even there they have alternate decks).\u000a\u000aAlso white is definitely worse off than blue or black. Blue recently got two cards banned and Jace VP. Black recently got Tasigur/angler/cut and kalitas (who is the real deal in jund). Mistakes or no they were printed and some are still legal. Green got company/become immense (delve = mistake so doesnt count? Lol) recently and what else? Green cards like goyf, elves, nacatl, all the support cards like stirrings/scrying are old or mistakes. +p87 +aVEven though you've clearly cherry-picked your list to make your argument look more compelling, overall you do make a decent point. (Tron uses Green, but it's payoff spells are all colorless. TarmoTwin was most definitely *not* a Green deck, usually splashing for a playset of a single card, plus sideboard options.) \u000a\u000aAt least right now, Green is very powerful. I just don't see it as a problem, after such a long period of URx dominance (Twin, Grixis Control, Cruise Delver before that). Colors rise and fall in prominence; the only constant is that White sucks. +p88 +aVTrue, the worst opening in Magic is pretty much always going to be, "Plains. Go."\u000a +p89 +aVJust to answer your question, Phyrexian mana in its entirety has been called a mistake. So if R&D could go back I think they would just not make GitProbe and Dismember at all. +p90 +aVI think I've been convinced about black being shit for mono color, black multi colored is still amazing though, and the color itself does great for splash utility +p91 +aVYes, like blue it's a support color. +p92 +aVThoughtseize was originally printed in Lorwyn in 2007. +p93 +aVsure, but it was also printed after m10, and that doesnt change the fact that black is one of the strongest colors prior to the eldrazi menace +p94 +aVA reprint is not "printed". +p95 +aVEr them how do they make them? \u000a\u000aEdit: I am imagining a high tech card breeding machine, after the first printing they keep some breeding stock so they don't have to print the cards again, just allow them to breed naturally. +p96 +aVConjured from the dark realm, obviously. +p97 +aVs-s-s-s-s-s-s-sure\u000a\u000aFor clarity:\u000ahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwUDLv52nrc&feature=youtu.be&t=194 +p98 +aVBasic duals... *shudder* +p99 +aVAs nice as that sounds, 'basic duals' would almost assuredly destroy legacy. One of the key cards that keeps legacy's metagame stable is Wasteland. Take away the ability to stop people playing 4-5c decks and the format devolves into the "does he play blood moon?" gamble that modern is... +p100 +aVBasic Duals would dodge Blood Moon and Back to Basics aswell. +p101 +aVFair enough... PoP as well... \u000a\u000aHm, either way I think it would only be negative for the format, but that was incorrect of me to say. +p102 +aVWhen your most popular blue deck is aggro you might be a modern player\u000a\u000aWhen a perfectly fine mainstay of your format gets banned "just because," you might be a modern player\u000a\u000aIf 95% of the cards in the best deck are standard playable and you're not playing in standard, you might be a modern player +p103 +aVPretty sure that everyone should have expected this. Even at the worst of times with unprecedented metagames, there's never been an emergency banning, except for Jar. And Jar was stupid. Yes, Eldrazi is stupid too, but Jar was far stupider. It was a standard deck that could probably go toe to toe with today's vintage decks.\u000a\u000aIn case you need a snapshot of what Jar was capable of, take a look at the [Gauntlet of Greatness season 1 finals](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2IZ5OOJx0M). Genuinely silly stuff. +p104 +aVOh how I love and miss Jar and the myriad of stupid possibilities that it created. +p105 +aVPlay edh, jar is everywhere. I currently like playing extra land drops and shepard of emeria. Multiple jars per turn. +p106 +aVCool, dude!\u000a\u000a\u000a*jumps out window* +p107 +aVhttps://youtu.be/vkWzXx_AHig?t=5 +p108 +aVAt least the people who bought into eldrazi after flogging their old twin deck know how long they've got to abandon ship again +p109 +aVMore than they deserve! Filthy turncloaks. +p110 +aVFor all my frustration with modern, for the decks I've loved and lost, the decks I love now that don't stand a chance, I fully support waiting until April. I can survive a month or two without winning modern. If we expect this format to be treated as Eternal, we need to treat it as Eternal ourselves, and respect the *long* term situation.\u000a\u000aThe timing and process of ban issuance isn't the problem with modern. If we want this format to be here ten or twenty years later, then it's better to wait a month. +p111 +aVI really don't get the reasoning of "not setting a bad precedent". I just don't understand why we have to wait.\u000a\u000aAre we really waiting for the meta to adjust? Is anyone out there thinking that it will regulate itself?\u000a\u000aThe only reason I can accept is that wizards is making more money. That's ok, we need them, so let them sell their packs with eldrazi. But I don't think we have to "secure moderns integrity" or shit like that.\u000a\u000aThis is a pure money decision. We don't need to defend it. +p112 +aV> I really don't get the reasoning of "not setting a bad precedent". I just don't understand why we have to wait.\u000a\u000aBecause people are already gunshy about Modern because of all the bans. If they start emergency banning, too, that will only increase uncertainty. +p113 +aVIf you really want to see what happens when a TCG starts dipping their toes into e-banning, go play yugioh. +p114 +aVThere is a modern grand prix in two weeks. You can't just ban cards out of the blue that close to an event, people need time to acquire new cards. +p115 +aVAnd there are local tournaments too. Imagine making plans on Thursday to go to your local modern for fetches tournament on Saturday and then haveing you deck become illegal out of the blue on Friday with no warning. +p116 +aV> not setting a bad precedent\u000a\u000aLet's say they set a precedent. Eldrazi is too powerful, let's emergency ban. Not only did they let the public dictate when an emergency ban happens, but they just unintentionally set a standard for when a modern deck gets an emergency ban.\u000a\u000aIf another deck gets a 40% win percentage at a Pro Tour, does it trigger an emergency ban? When does the emergency ban get triggered? When enough people complain? What happens when people who you don't agree with start complaining about another deck? Does an emergency ban happen?\u000a\u000aBasically, you have to realize that once you set a precedent, you set a standard. The standard currently being that "any deck that gets 40+% of the field in a Pro Tour has 2 weeks to reduce its numbers in the next SCG open (but before any GP) or else it gets an emergency ban".\u000a\u000aDoes that feel right to you, because that's what you're calling for? Alternatively, they can say in April that this is not what they want the format to be and update it at the next round of bannings to avoid setting a dumb precedent. +p117 +aVWell said +p118 +aVJust ride it like Zendikar does: fight the eldrazi to the death even if there is no hope. +p119 +aVhey man im doing my part, bushwacker zoo. im like 2-0 vs eldrazi (one of which was like eldrazi light as he couldnt afford eye of ugin and the other was a great draw by me, and a triple mul by him). +p120 +aVI chose the route of the planeswalkers last zendikar set: "peace, bitches" +p121 +aVMore of a smoldering crater than a footprint +p122 +aVWell that's unacceptable.\u000a\u000aCycling lands aren't modern-legal. +p123 +aVMan--before the set came out I was so sure of a blasted landscape reprint... +p124 +aVx-post from r/MagicTCG:\u000a\u000aGood. There does need to be a ban, or multiple ones, to at least slow down Eldrazi decks for sure. That being said, the only reason to do an emergency ban is IF THE HEALTH OF THE GAME IS THREATENED. Given attendance numbers at SCG Louisville, and I'm guessing Wizards has internal numbers from Magic online, it appears people are not yet leaving Modern in droves, so taking care of this in the normal process is the right solution. April isn't that far away, guys. +p125 +aVI don't mind waiting, I really don't.\u000a\u000aThe only reason I mind this particular time is because the only Modern GP within reasonable driving distance is coming up and the format is in shambles.\u000a\u000aIf this was off season with no big Modern events, I'd be a little more patient. +p126 +aVIf people are going to leave in droves, which they will, why wait for them to leave before fixing the known problem? +p127 +aVYou seem to exactly how other people will behave, care to let us all know when weed will be legal, or who the next president is? +p128 +aVWhere I live, weed *is* legal. +p129 +aVYeah, and grizzly Adams had a beard. +p130 +aVGrizzly Adams DID have a beard haha! +p131 +aVI eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast.. +p132 +aVYou eat shit for breakfast?? +p133 +aVBecause an emergency ban sets a dangerous precedent. Letting Modern go until April is kind of shitty, but probably less shitty overall than making people fear that their $1000+ Modern deck could halve in value at any moment, rather than 4 specific days each year. +p134 +aVBecause everyone knows the deck is getting a ban in April and they will all come back. +p135 +aVBecause you don't know that they will. You're just speculating. +p136 +aVEven if you operate under the assumption they won't leave wizards is still left staring at a format with nary an opinion to be found that deviates from "modern is awful right now but I expect a ban soon" or "I play this deck because it's so broken". Operating under the assumption that all of those people are bluffing and won't leave the new universal opinion of modern will be ammended to "modern is awful". The people harmed by such a ban are not deeply enfranchised players of the deck who have been on it for years and would feel cheated by the ban (not that that saved twin), it's people that looked at a new set and an old land, saw it was degenerate and jumped on board for some free tournament wins, or speccers who frankly aren't wizards target market. The cost of leaving it alone is the spiraling trust of players in wizards to handle the format competently, and many having long term plans of enjoying finally having a local GP to attend dashed as it gets swallowed because wizards doesn't want to appear flustered, or grinders giving these ones a miss. It's gotten so bad most people I talk to consider it rude to bring the deck to fnms, the only tangible gain from leaving it alone is saving face on wizards part, if it was an issue with standard I would fully understand, there are a lot of casual standard players who don't know the ins and outs of banning a and would feel cheated if their new cards were suddenly not allowed to be played, but it's modern, those who play modern know better. Not to mention the majority of players don't care about the newly printed cards they are calling for an eye ban, or eye and temple, but the mimic camp is small. +p137 +aVControversial opinion incoming: Modern was already awful.\u000a\u000aWhat has Modern actually got going for it? It's cheap? No, it's absurdly expensive. It's diverse? Not really, strategically it's far from diverse. Lots of different decks that all do the same thing. You can do whatever you want and it's viable? Far from it, IMO Modern is the least brewable format. \u000a\u000ae.g. look at Vintage. Highest power level format. Yet still more brewable than Modern. Vintage isn't played quite enough that there are set decklists, so everyone essentially plays their own list but they all look the same to everyone else: either you play Shops or Dredge or Blue. But if you play blue, there are sooooo many different ways to go with it, and you can make up your own. Want to play mono-blue standstill in Vintage? Why the fuck not? Do it. +p138 +aVVintage is not the best example of a healthy format imo.. Have you watched VSL? People often get locked out by turn 1, and it's sometimes rock paper scissors with matchups and starting hands.. Not always, but it feels bad when it happens.. \u000aModern might not be perfect, but it's still a vastly better format.. +p139 +aVThe VSL is not representative of Vintage at all. It's well known as an extremely warped metagame.\u000a\u000aAnd there's nothing unhealthy about what you describe. Those are parts of the format that people like an appreciate. Modern is actually very similarly swingy. +p140 +aVModern is cheaper than legacy and less expensive than standard in the long run, accounting for decks rotating.\u000a\u000aModern was plenty diverse before the Eldrazi menace and the Twin banning. A little aggro heavy and control light, but nothing major.\u000a\u000aModern is a highly brewable format. In my experience, I've had more luck with brews in modern than in any other format I've played. The power level gap between tier one and three is tiny compared to other formats. Tier two / three decks show up in SCG or GP top 8s all the time. Compare to vintage, where every deck has to have all the same broken cards and very few strategies can actually compete. +p141 +aVModern has one viable archetype: linear aggro. That's it. Vintage has control, prison, combo, midrange, aggro, tempo, etc. It's varied and great. +p142 +aVThat's only true because of this eldrazi meta. Before eldrazi and before Twin was banned, the format was quite healthily diverse. There was tempo, combo, midrange, aggro, etc. etc.. +p143 +aVI think the appeal comes from the format essentially being "These are the cards we've printed since we got our proverbial shit together." It's the mending of formats. Unfortunately that means it's pretty low on things that are considered "unfun" for the opponent like land hate and playable counter magic and consistent combos. We are left with good old aggro. +p144 +aV"This isn't working! Instead of the people leaving, they're staying in droves!" +p145 +aVThey knew this was coming.\u000a\u000aThey knew when they cancelled the Modern PT what was coming. They didn't want to deal with it then.\u000a\u000aNow, they're letting us live in this crappy world for a bit longer, as if to say, "Told you so."\u000a\u000aI kinda can't wait to see where all this goes.\u000a\u000aI love Modern. +p146 +aVThe reason for cancelling the Modern Pro Tour was because we were switching Standard to two block sets and as such they wanted to showcase the different decks and 'formats.' (Granted this first set would have largely been abzan and rally everywhere)\u000a\u000aThe problem is that this change wasn't announced until a while after the cancellation. All we knew was that Wizards was cancelling Modern "because." Modern is the people's format, and as such, it felt like an attack on the format. They rallied in defense.\u000a\u000aIf they had announced the set change and *then* said Modern wouldn't be a Pro Tour format, I'm willing to be there would have been less outrage. There still would have been some, because the people want to watch and potentially play their favorite format at the highest level. +p147 +aVthe thing is we asked for modern to have a PT. and wizards was like no pls. and we demanded it. so they said fuck you, no pod, no twin, have fun with eldrazi assholes! so now we have Zombie Modern, and wizards is like you like the modern PT HUH DONT YOU! IT PUTS THE TWIN IN THE BASKET OR IT GETS THE BAN HAMMER AGAIN! +p148 +aVConfusing the twin/pod issue with the eldrazi one is not really helpful as they are both separate, with their timings being a coincidence. +p149 +aVThey're different issues, but there is some crossover. The reasons they gave for banning Twin were thin at best. Pushing out other Ux strategies? Yeah because U is such a strong color in Modern. Meta share? That's the one that's hilarious. At it's height Twin only had 11% meta share. That's laughable when you look at Eldrazi now. \u000a +p150 +aVYer appreciate there is a bit of cross over in that if twin was banned it might reduce the eldrazi metagame. But I disagree that Twin was only banned to cause a shake up. It won 50% of all modern PTs, and it won the last modern gp before the ban including 3 in the top 8. Finally if you look at modern gps in the last year all 10 of them have had twin in the top 8. +p151 +aVThere were hints of other UR decks bubbling to the top immediately after the ban, though. RUG Delver, Blue Moon decks, Scapeshift, etc. Once the PT Eldrazi deck and its derivatives are gone, we might very well see the Twin ban be justified.\u000a\u000aI don't like that it was banned, no sir or ma'am. However, I trust enough in the justification to not call it "thin". +p152 +aVBoth got banned right before the pt, which is because they want to "shake it up before the pt". And as for eldrazi i included it because it's another thing that has messed up the format since it has been given the pt again. +p153 +aVJust two things to add. Twin would have likely folded to Eldrazi pretty hard. Second, look at meta share. When you compare Twin and Eldrazi it isn't even close. That makes the Twin banning look even more unnecessary and that it was done to "shake things up for the sake of shaking things up". +p154 +aVI hate this false dichotomy that they keep toting. \u000a\u000aA modern pro tour doesn't necessitate shake-up bans. Wizards does that because they want to, not because they have to.\u000a\u000aThings like the twin banning isn't 'our fault' for wanting to watch our favorite format played by the world's best. It's their rigid vision for how pro tours will function. \u000a\u000aMismanagement of the format is not our fault. +p155 +aVYou know, there are quite a few people that don't see the twin ban as mismanagement or just a shake-up ban. I definitely think all of this "timing" stuff is bullshit though. IMO they should have banned twin a long time ago. Banning to shake up the format is super counter-intuitive to the plan of having realistic competitions. One in which skill is a big determining factor. Banning to shake up the format to get people interested is fucked up. +p156 +aVYou think they should have banned Twin long ago because you're salty about losing to it. Twin has never been too dominant in Modern. Twin should not have been banned. It simply does not meet any criteria.\u000a\u000aTwin has long been used as an example of the sort of card that will always be legal in Modern. People ask 'what are the criteria for banning' and the answer is pretty much 'turn 4 rule, too dominant. Twin is a good example of a deck that is strong but not dominant and doesn't break the turn 4 rule because it never wins before turn 4.' +p157 +aVI just want to be able to play cool decks without feeling bad about new bans all the time. I didn't even play twin, but I feel really bad for those folks. And now people are saying Affinity needs a ban because it's the only untouched pillar of the format basically. Maybe Wizards really needs to get their shit together and actually test for Modern, maybe something else, but either way some part of their decision making process over there needs to change. +p158 +aVThis is the worst part. I was a twin player, and I don't feel like it should have been banned, but now people are calling for something from Affinity to be banned. Affinity isn't an unhealthy deck. Sure, it's linear and fast, but it's also very disruptable. You don't ban a deck because it's good. Being good isn't unhealthy. If every good card gets banned then we're left with a bunch of shitty cards to play in shitty decks. \u000a\u000aTake things off the ban list. Introduce new, powerful answer cards into the format. If not through standard, then through a separate supplemental set.\u000a\u000aModern's meta was absolutely amazing three months ago. You never knew what tier 2 deck could show up in the top eight of a major. Yeah, there were format staples, but so fucking what? Nothing was unbeatable. If Wizards doesn't quickly change the way they're handling the format, I'm never going to enjoy it again. There will be no point in playing. +p159 +aV> This is the worst part. I was a twin player, and I don't feel like it should have been banned, but now people are calling for something from Affinity to be banned. Affinity isn't an unhealthy deck. Sure, it's linear and fast, but it's also very disruptable. You don't ban a deck because it's good. Being good isn't unhealthy. If every good card gets banned then we're left with a bunch of shitty cards to play in shitty decks.\u000a\u000aI don't play Affinity, but I am very much against them hitting Affinity in the next B&R update. Affinity is only putting up the numbers it is because it's the only deck that stands a decent chance against Eldrazi. If they reign in Eldrazi, I think we'll see a swing back towards midrange. Affinity is a deck that is very easily hated out. Once the meta balances out, I don't think Affinity will be putting up the same numbers. +p160 +aVThis. Every time Wizards says that bans are necessary for a PT format, it means they have no idea what they're talking about. +p161 +aVPlease, tell us more from your extensive experience managing the biggest TCG in the world. +p162 +aVYeah because WotC clearly are doing it all right! That's why everyone constantly complains about all the various ways in which they fuck things up.\u000a\u000aEMA has no dual lands. They constantly fuck up Modern. They banned people for no reason for their own leaky mistakes. etc. etc. etc. MTGO is still shit. etc. etc. etc. +p163 +aVPeople complain about fucking everything, because everyone thinks they're entitled to get things exactly how they want them. That's not how the real world works. +p164 +aVNo, people do not complain about everything. Nobody would be complaining about Eternal Masters if it had reserved list cards in it. Nobody would be complaining about Modern if they had any sane idea how to manage the banlist.\u000a\u000aPeople complain about things they fuck up. You can't just respond to all the complaints with 'you guys just complain about everything'. No, WotC fucks up everything. +p165 +aV> No, people do not complain about everything. Nobody would be complaining about Eternal Masters if it had reserved list cards in it. Nobody would be complaining about Modern if they had any sane idea how to manage the banlist.\u000a\u000aPeople have *lots* of other complaints about Modern, and I'm sure there would be at least a *little* controversy if they were including RL cards.\u000a\u000aI think people *do* complain about everything, but not *everyone* complains about *each* thing; just like anywhere else online, when people say "I can't win; first I did this and you people didn't like it, but then I switched and you didn't like that either" -- they're probably just talking to multiple people who have different opinions, and you can't please them all. Addressing one person's complaints just creates new ones for others. At some point WotC has to set aside the peanut gallery and think for themselves to decide the direction they want to take the game, and when they do so, their motivations, no matter how pure, will never be 100% aligned with those of any given player. +p166 +aV>People have lots of other complaints about Modern, and I'm sure there would be at least a little controversy if they were including RL cards.\u000a\u000aAnd all of them are as a result of their terrible handling of the banlist. Too linear? Banlist issue. Eldrazi? Banlist issue. etc.\u000a\u000a +p167 +aVDude, people complained about Expediations! Even if you hate them (as I do, no interest in owning them whatsoever), how is it bad that you may get a $100+ card in any given pack you open?\u000a\u000aAnd now they print Eternal Masters, with Legacy staples in it. Staples that many thought they'd never reprint, even though they're on the Reserve List. And all people like you can do is complain that there are no Reserve List cards on it. \u000a\u000aSome people really do complain about everything. +p168 +aV>Dude, people complained about Expediations! Even if you hate them (as I do, no interest in owning them whatsoever), how is it bad that you may get a $100+ card in any given pack you open?\u000a\u000aBecause they need to reprint all those cards en masse properly, and printing them in a way that doesn't make the formats that depend on them more accessible is a giant 'fuck you'.\u000a\u000a>And now they print Eternal Masters, with Legacy staples in it. Staples that many thought they'd never reprint, even though they're on the Reserve List. And all people like you can do is complain that there are no Reserve List cards on it.\u000a\u000a**AND DOING SO, AS I'VE EXPLAINED, HAS MADE LEGACY MUCH MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE TO PLAY.**\u000a\u000a +p169 +aVNo one should be complaining about Eternal Masters in the first place. You're only complaint is that it doesn't have cards from the reserved list. If you expected cards from the reserved list to be printed then you're crazy. +p170 +aVYeah, no you're correct.\u000a\u000aThe fact is though, they couldn't just come out and say something like:\u000a\u000aHey players, you're going to absolutely hate the format and call us a bunch of idiots when we print a deck that is as consistent and aggressive as affinity, but more resilient. So, we're cancelling the pro-tour for modern. +p171 +aVSo we know that a ban is coming. Are they willing to let modern Eldrazi keep a sol land? I could make an argument for either one or both.\u000a\u000aTake out both and pretty much kills this version of the deck. This is fitting with Wizards past actions by killing the key pieces. Maybe Tron will start packing some Eldrazi to fill the blind spot from the eye ban.\u000a\u000aTake out Eye of Ugin and leave temple in and the deck gets slowed down a bit, but with Vesuva and land fetches it could still be a problem down the line.\u000a\u000aLeave Eye and take out temple, and there's no collateral damage to Tron. Maybe the deck still survives with the discount from eye and some smaller creatures.\u000a\u000aOverall, we know something is going, it just depends how hard Wizards wants to hit this deck. +p172 +aVMaybe take our Mimics ? It's the card which allows for the most explosive starts (and potential T2/3 kills). The deck would still exist and be strong, people would not need to sell everything at discounted prices but it would most certainly be less of a Tiers 0 deck, I think (though this would need some testing). +p173 +aVIf you consider it as to what feels bad when playing (a criteria they don't outright use but may affect their decisions), "turn 2 4/4 4-drop that makes my hand a mulligan" is not too far below "dropping 3 free 2/1s and 2/2s on turn 1".\u000a\u000aI would be willing to bet a large amount of people would be unsatisfied if that former play was left in the format, though I don't know if that should add weight to the ban discussion at large. +p174 +aVEye allows all of the most degenerate plays the deck has to offer. Temple can SoL 1 thing, and you're powering out a cardpool that's restricted to 3 sets. Eye frequently represents more than 2 mana a turn AND tutors.\u000a\u000aWith just Eldrazi Temple, the deck probably remains a deck. But only double temple hands are as crazy as "the nuts" in any other aggro deck. +p175 +aVBut banning eye hits tron hard as well.. there is no real right answer to this in my eyes, and I am about finished putting together a eldrazi list as well because I already had temples and eyes before the spike, however the deck is likely to powerful in its current state, and I would like a banning I think temple is more likely than eye because leaving eye doesn't hurt tron and it lets eldrazi stay a fairly strong deck and the legend rule punishes the double eye hands where double temple makes you a happy man +p176 +aVEye is not a critical piece of tron, it's also the far more busted of the two fast mana lands. Eye produces more than 2 mana a turn for Eldrazi and needs to be removed to balance the deck.\u000a\u000aProtecting Tron is not critical for the health of the format. The question really is between banning Eye or banning Eye and Temple. +p177 +aVI don't feel that way at all, tron relies heavily on eye to keep threats flowing, also while eye can provide 4+ mana per turn that is also assuming you have all 3 drop eldrazi or it is exceedingly late and you still have a large hand for some reason and you haven't bricked and drew another eye to disrupt the mana you have down. +p178 +aVI know you're worried about your tron deck but you need to be realistic about this. Cards that dominate the pro tour and subsequent events don't tank in price without a reason. +p179 +aVI am aware of this however, I do not play tron, look at my flair, my point is that yes there is a ban income that much is obvious to everyone, but I am arguing that eye is not the biggest offender, temple is honestly more powerful overall, eye is flashier with the t1 4 mimic into t2 vile aggregate kills but temple is more versatile, non legendary and banning it only hurts eldrazi. also the deck doesn't need to be killed, only weakened, having four eye is much less powerful overall than having the four temples you can play willie nilly and make TKS and Reality smasher easy as all hell to get the colorless to cast them, eye doesn't reduce the (c) costs only the generic mana, overall it seems more dangerous but is much less overall strong. +p180 +aVYou are wrong. +p181 +aVOkay, convincing argument, you win. your logic far outstrips my own and I concede to your wisdom. +p182 +aVArgument has already been presented. If you think eye isn't problematic, go ahead and spec on them before April rolls around. +p183 +aVThat's okay with me,\u000a\u000aI'm just gonna play Legacy or some other game in the meantime (maybe Standard a bit, because MOCS would be useful to do)\u000a\u000aYes I'm MTGO only. and modern doesn't look very useful to play if I can't play affinity nor eldrazi atm on there...\u000a\u000aSo sure.\u000aI'll just be playing another format or game. +p184 +aVThis showcases an issue Modern faces. Standard and Limited drive the most sales and therefore all playtesting is done with only those formats in mind. Modern is never playtested before the set is released and now the worst case scenario happens as a result: the format becomes all but unplayable for two or three months. +p185 +aVYeah... I probably won't be flying interstate for gp Melbourne then. That's a lot of money to be bored losing to eldrazi. Shame, this is the first Australian modern gp in years too. +p186 +aVThis is not a footprint. We're already talking about the state of Modern with respect to the Eldrazi in terms of Combo Winter, Caw Blade, and Affinity Standard. +p187 +aVYes, because everyone on reddit loves to blow things out of proportion. This is nowhere near as bad as any of those things. +p188 +aVThis is a million times worse than Cawblade. +p189 +aVI'm going to assume by Cawblade you mean 'Standard while JTMS was legal'. There were 32 copies of JTMS in the top 8 of GP Dallas in 2011, and 26 copies at GP Singapore right before it got banned. \u000a\u000aSo no, it's not "a million times worse than Cawblade". +p190 +aVThis is far worse than Cawblade Standard. The number of copies in the top 8 is not the sole factor used to determine if a deck is broken.\u000a\u000aCaw-Blade Standard was an excellent format. It was full of interesting, even, skill-testing matchups. Cawblade was prevalent, but it was also a really, really great mirror to play. The format was a LOT of fun, Jace was a fun card to play with, Stoneforge Mystic was great, the other decks in the format were great.\u000a\u000aModern at the moment is absolute cancer. If you're not playing Eldrazi you're playing some other awful linear aggro deck. +p191 +aVIf it is worth anything to you. Lsv said last night that the eldrazi was not that strongest deck he had ever played. He said caw blade was. And a toss up between eldrazi and his pt winning elf deck +p192 +aVRe-read my post. I said nothing about the comparative diversity of the format, nor the power. +p193 +aVHave you seen the art? Eldrazi have big feet +p194 +aVIt's not nearly that bad. Exaggerating like this doesn't help either side. +p195 +aVIt's not as bad as combo winter. But it is absolutely comparable. +p196 +aVWhat's the use of that comparison if not as a comparison of degrees of brokenness? Everyone agrees that those formats and this format are broken. \u000a\u000aThis format is substantially less broken than those formats though. \u000a\u000a +p197 +aVThe point I was making was that while for example Abzan midrange might have been 25%+ of the Standard meta in THS-KTK Standard, it was still a reasonably healthy metagame. It wasn't really comparable to any of the historically unhealthy metagames. It wasn't anything even close to combo winter or affinity standard or caw blade standard. \u000a\u000aIn comparison, this Modern environment is so unhealthy that it can be meaningfully compared to those. You can have a reasonable debate on whether this is more or less healthy than CawBlade. You can reasonably justify either of those points of view, I think. I personally think this is worse, and I think I can justify that belief, but I also can understand why others think Cawblade was worse. \u000a\u000aTL;DR: this format is quite reasonably comparable in brokenness to those formats. It's at the same order of magnitude of brokenness.\u000a\u000aAnd personally? I'd much rather play in Caw-blade Standard than this current Modern environment. +p198 +aVAt least Caw Blade has an interesting mirror. +p199 +aVIt's not Combo Winter bad, no. The reason we're talking about it in the same terms is because it's rare that the metagame is so unhealthy that we just don't want to engage it. The most prominent examples of such times are the ones I listed above.\u000a\u000aThe worst part of the current situation, though, is that Combo Winter had a hoser deck: 400 Islands. Caw Blade had a hoser deck. Affinity Standard had a hoser deck. Eldrazi does not have such a deck. There are serious questions as to whether such a deck can exist, given that the engine of brokenness is a pair of lands that allow you to cheat extensively on mana before meaningful land destruction can come down.\u000a +p200 +aVCombo Winter is an exaggeration.\u000a\u000aThat said, the Pro Tour and SCG Open results made me cancel my plans to go to GP Detroit. I hope that more people do that and Wizards takes notice. +p201 +aVDetroit local here. Preparing for endless Eldrazi and Lantern Control rounds. +p202 +aVIt's not even close to combo winter +p203 +aVYou're right. Combo winter had multiple viable decks. Modern doesn't. Modern is a faster format than that Standard environment, though. Every single viable deck in Modern is capable of winning on turn 3, just like in combo winter. +p204 +aVI'd like to see a game where Jund or Tron wins on turn three, or heck... Even the UW control deck that went pretty high on the PT. :) +p205 +aVJund isn't viable in Modern at the moment, and even before Eldrazi it was the only fair deck in the format.\u000a\u000aTron regularly wins on turn 3. The game just isn't over on turn 3. It still wins on turn 3, just like Amulet's turn 3 win rate looked lower than it really was, because it regularly won the game on turn 3 but didn't always actually finish the game on that turn.\u000a\u000aThe game can be over without being over. Turn 3 Karn is a win 95% of the time. +p206 +aVTwin was also fair, but I understand your point. +p207 +aVMarginally. +p208 +aVI'll agree with that. +p209 +aVi mean it did a whole lot of fair things to set up an easily disrupted unfair thing. +p210 +aVVery easily disrupted. Why were people so mad about having to run instant speed removal? It's CONSTRUCTED MAGIC, all constructed magic formats require you to have instant-speed removal. +p211 +aVI think they shouldve banned Exarch. Allow the combo to still exist but make it weaker and more susceptible to removal. +p212 +aV> Turn 3 Karn is a win 95% of the time.\u000a\u000aYeah...not always. 95% is a little ambitious. 75% maybe... +p213 +aVEntirely true. The funniest thing about this is people that are saying "It's not as bad as XYZ." Like memory jar is the go-to "it's not as bad as..." Well...It kind of is...\u000a\u000aYou know what cards are trash tier right now? Snapcaster, bolt, tarmogoyf, abrupt decay. Bloodbraid would likely be bad right now as well. +p214 +aVI was just thinking about this. BBE is a strictly worse version of thought not seer. Best case BBE hits a thought seize but it still has a body that is considerably smaller. Although BBE can out right win games if your lucky enough to hit a timely bolt with it. +p215 +aVI think the problem with BBE will always be its ability to hit Lili (Kommand is probably up there); hitting thoughtsieze off BBE is more like worst case than best. +p216 +aVjund is bad. A fucking basically legacy deck is bad. A good stuff deck is bad. Like what the fuck. +p217 +aVNow it's just Jund Badstuff +p218 +aVNah, the stuff is still good, but it's just not good enough anymore. +p219 +aVSo, does this mean we'll get 1 month more of Eldrazi dominance or 1 year? +p220 +aVI'd assume normal time line means SOI, because there's the possibility of a BR update with every set release +p221 +aV50% Eldrazi through the rest of the year will legitimately kill Modern. People will grudgingly wait until the April B&R update, but if nothing changes they will start to sell out. +p222 +aVHell, I'm considering even now trying to trade my modern collection into a miracles deck. +p223 +aVIf you are really considering doing this, now is the time. Legacy staples are about to skyrocket because of EMA. +p224 +aVYep. I just need to find a volc and two tundras, the rest of the stuff I need I don't think is on the reserve list so I'll probably just wait and see if it's in EMA.\u000a\u000aI'm considering using topdeck.ru to buy the duals for a fairly cheap price, is that something you have any experience with? +p225 +aVI would advise moving on those sooner than later, with a lot of Legacy staples becoming more available, I can see people joining the format and duals getting more expensive as a result. +p226 +aVI've only used pucatrade as far as sites like that go, but had zero issues with that. I'm sure its the same thing. I always recommend filming yourself opening the envelope on your phone and checking to see if its real so you can prove you got sent a fake. I got sent a fake wasteland from ebay one time and had no way to prove it. +p227 +aVThis is a good thing.\u000a\u000aDespite how terrible this Eldrazi thing is, despite how obvious it is that something needs to be banned, despite how obvious it is that something will be banned - it is important that we have some protection against ourselves and our overreactions.\u000a\u000aIf only Wizards would communicate a little sooner.\u000a\u000aI am sad that we will lose 3 GP's to this problem though :( +p228 +aVOnce the plunge in event attendance becomes a clear trend, Wizards will have to do something. +p229 +aVHow many big Modern events are there between now and April 8? +p230 +aVNot sure. But I think the impact may be felt more at lower levels of play. If stores with weekly Modern events see a huge reduction in attendance, they're gonna be pretty pissed at Wizards +p231 +aVThis is not surprising at all, emergency banning Eldrazi sets a bad precedent. If they ban now we're going to have people crying for a ban every time a new deck breaks out at a tournament. It's essentially a forgone conclusion at this point that this archetype will be gone with the next B&R update, we just need to wait out the storm. +p232 +aV>This is not surprising at all, emergency banning Eldrazi sets a bad precedent.\u000a\u000aThat when the format is broken, they'll ban something from the broken deck? That's a good precedent.\u000a\u000a>If they ban now we're going to have people crying for a ban every time a new deck breaks out at a tournament.\u000a\u000aLol, as if we didn't already have this. Look, Eldrazi isn't just some flash in the pan. It's not just some breakout deck. This is not even slightly comparable to when Lantern Control or Amulet Bloom broke out and won a single tournament then fell back into being fairly obscure. +p233 +aVAmulet Bloom still ate a ban... that aside, the precedent it sets is that if the Pros can come up with a list and spike a tournament (ala extended Elves), that is fine. If the deck then proves to be too powerful and can't be stopped (what is going on now), they will ban it at the next possible juncture. This gives them time to look at statistics and make the correct decision as to if/what they should ban. +p234 +aVFrom what Tom LaPille was saying in his interview on Modern, I think you're significantly overestimating how much thought goes into what is banned. What he said indicated that generally some designated person (he mentioned Aaron Forscythe, but of course Tom LaPille himself was in this role at one point, see the Mystical Tutor debacle for more on why he no longer is) basically goes off, thinks about what to ban, and they ban that card or those cards.\u000a\u000aFrankly, everyone knows that Eye of Ugin will be banned in April. Everyone knows it. Now there are plenty of Tron players saying 'ban Temple instead!!!' but everyone that isn't emotionally and financially invested in Eye of Ugin remaining unbanned (i.e. everyone that isn't playing RG Tron or Eldrazi) knows that it should be banned, I think.\u000a\u000aSo why not just ban it now? Nobody is going to come up with a way to deal with Eldrazi before April. +p235 +aVYou don't ban it now because that sets a bad precedent. You ban at the normal cycle which isn't that far away. I used to play Eldrazi but just sold out of it because I agree, Eye is going to get the ax (even though I played the fair BW variant that was midrangy and grindy). Just let it run it's course and after the issue is resolved, we will see where Modern is at. +p236 +aVDid you read /u/LinkMaster111's point at all? Banning it now sets a bad precedent. Think of it like a court case. Everyone knows that this person committed a murder - he was caught in the process, it was shown on national TV, etc. But still, we can't say 'put him in jail for life immediately' - he still needs to have a fair trial and receive due process. The rules are there for a reason. +p237 +aVSo the "killer" should remain at large for 2 months? I guess your LGS doesn't run modern events because these things have actual implications for shop owners. My LGS started running FNM drafts because modern attendance is gone. +p238 +aVYou missed their analogy completely. +p239 +aVExactly. +p240 +aV> If they ban now we're going to have people crying for a ban every time a new deck breaks out at a tournament.\u000a\u000aThis already happens, Bloom ate a ban thanks to community overreactions. Modern shouldn't remain a garbage format until April. People would like to see a post-twin meta with decks other than Eldrazi and linear aggro. If it's a forgone conclusion, then let's just speed up the process.\u000a\u000aThere's a difference between format-warping and clearly broken. Eldrazi break the cardinal rule of magic (fast mana) and there's no reasonable workaround. I played during original Mirrodin and this is far, far worse than affinity ever was. +p241 +aVEchoing Eternities 1C Instant Exile target colorless creature and all creatures with the same name as that one. +p242 +aVThank god. Maybe now people will stop comparing the deck to Memory Jar. +p243 +aVSo, I'm going to have to ask if you played during combo winter? If you did, you'd know that it pretty much is as bad as that, to be completely honest. \u000a\u000aThe exodus of people losing interest in modern is great but the player base is hundreds of times larger now so it isn't felt as much. It's honestly a tad upsetting to watch the attendance at my weekly drop because 2-3 Dr. Moneybags who didn't care about losing hundreds of dollars when it gets banned can play it. \u000a\u000aIt's a deck that has no natural predators, has more inevitability than the field, relies on a completely broken set of cards, relies on fast mana... stop me when this starts sounding eerily similar to something you referenced. +p244 +aV2-3 Dr. Moneybags... Lol\u000a\u000aMaybe they actually enjoy playing the deck? People like shops decks and mid-range non green decks as mind-blowing as that is. For everyone 2-3 people that lose interest 2-3 gained\u000a\u000aIn no way am I saying eldrazi shouldn't be banned rho, but your post is really whiney about players playing what they want to plau +p245 +aVTranslation: "We love money, so until Shadows is out, deal with it." +p246 +aVThis just in! Corporation wants to make money! In other news, sky still blue, war between dogs and cats continues. Back to you, Jim. +p247 +aVITT: people who for some unfathomable reason cannot find something else to occupy their time for the 30 ish days until the B&R announcement. +p248 +aVThis is a hilarious endorsement for waiting until April. \u000a\u000a'Gosh, all these people correctly identify that the format is fucked until something happens, what a bunch of idiots. They should just be abandoning the format entirely' +p249 +aVmore like "Gosh, these people correctly identify that Wizards is going to be banning something in a month, they should take a quick break from Modern until that happens if they're so upset about it."\u000a\u000athe sky is always falling somewhere in the Magic-verse, and if it's not fixed *oh my god right now RIGHT NOW wizards what are you even DOING*, everything is awful FOREVER, IMMEDIATELY.\u000a\u000apeople could use a healthy dose of patience and perspective. +p250 +aVMy biggest complaint is that I had a local scg event ruined (Louisville), and three of the limited amount of Modern GPs are going to be completely fucked because of it. Events that should have been highlights of the year for me are instead going to be a fuck fest. +p251 +aVI think you mean GPs but yes I agree. +p252 +aVI did, thank you. +p253 +aVThat's fair. +p254 +aVwhy don't we as a community just start our own format of pre BFZ modern. I would play that and ignore everything that hasbro does from this point on and be very happy with it. +p255 +aVyou could also play legacy +p256 +aVSure. Ill just dig up 2k from my back pocket +p257 +aVAfter this past weekend, I just don't get how some people are still saying the deck is fine or that the meta will adjust. Thankfully a vast majority have come to the conclusion that the deck is absolutely broken and that the format is warped to the point where a ban is necessary. The people that are still saying the deck is fine or the meta will adjust, I have to think those people are either on Eldrazi or they're just trolling. +p258 +aVI will say this: I think the Eldrazi deck has been blown way out of proportion. This deck has some serious problems and has definite answers. So have faith that the community can find answers to this deck or series of decks, because there are three other top tier Eldrazi decks.\u000aI would say that we are not acting very mature here. I can confess that I was very negative towards he eldrazi decks, but now that I had time to settle down. It isn't that big of a deal. It is similar to all other aggro decks that play big things quickly. +p259 +aVWhat "other aggro decks that play big things quickly" are there? Just curious +p260 +aVMerfolk, Knights, and some Zoo. While they do use lords, but the creatures can and often are bigger. +p261 +aVNo disrespect or anything but i find those comparisons impossible to make. Comparing eldrazi aggro to any other creature-deck in modern is just ridiculous. +p262 +aVPossibly true. The problem with the Eldrazi deck is the ability to tap lands for more mana then one. However, I do not think of the deck any more then an aggressive aggro deck that could kill you faster then you can react. Something like infect could kill faster, or something like burn can be more consistent. Aside from the land mana problem, I do not think there are any other legitimate accusations that can be made. +p263 +aVoh boy...\u000a +p264 +aVI find that Echoing Truth and Stubborn Denial are both good against any hate card. Stubborn Denial is great against any sort of combo and is very versatile, so I'd bring that in for sure. +p265 +aVYes. Zoo has pretty good game against all the non-eldrazi decks in the format, it just doesn't even come close to beating eldrazi. Cards like Wild Nacatl and Tarmogoyf don't line up too well against 4/4s on turn 2 and 5/5s on turn 3 +p266 +aVIt was lookin' good for ol' Zoo when Twin got banned... And then Eldrazi happened :( +p267 +aV...until the the Eldrazi nation attacked +p268 +aVevery deck in the format gets better if eldrazi gets the banhammer. That's why it needs the banhammer :) +p269 +aVI have had a lot of success moving towards wilt leaf liege in my Naya zoo deck, Elspeth, knight errant also does a lot of work. +p270 +aVHave a list? I love wilt-leaf actually! +p271 +aVI am not playing goyf due to budgetary concerns but this is my current list:\u000a4 Noble Hierarch\u000a1 Birds of Paradise\u000a4 Lightning Bolt\u000a4 Path to exile\u000a4 Wild Nacatl \u000a1 Oath of Nissa\u000a1 Dromokas command\u000a2 Scavenging ooze\u000a3 Voice of resurgence\u000a3 Loxodon Smiter\u000a2 Kitchen Finks\u000a3 Knight of the reliquary\u000a3 Wilt-leaf liege\u000a2 Elspeth, knight errant\u000a\u000a4 Windswept Heath\u000a4 Wooded Foothills\u000a2 Forest\u000a2 Plains\u000a1 Gavony To wnship\u000a3 Stomping ground\u000a4 Temple Garden\u000a2 Sacred Foundry\u000a1 Kessig Wolf-run\u000a +p272 +aVYou can add 2 spaces at the end of each line to make a newline: \u000a4 Noble Hierarch \u000a1 Birds of Paradise \u000a4 Lightning Bolt \u000a4 Path to exile \u000a4 Wild Nacatl \u000a1 Oath of Nissa \u000a1 Dromokas command \u000a2 Scavenging ooze \u000a3 Voice of resurgence \u000a3 Loxodon Smiter \u000a2 Kitchen Finks \u000a3 Knight of the reliquary \u000a3 Wilt-leaf liege \u000a2 Elspeth, knight errant \u000a\u000a4 Windswept Heath \u000a4 Wooded Foothills \u000a2 Forest \u000a2 Plains \u000a1 Gavony To wnship \u000a3 Stomping ground \u000a4 Temple Garden \u000a2 Sacred Foundry \u000a1 Kessig Wolf-run +p273 +aVWell, everything gets better after Eldrazi goes away. Maybe Lantern Control gets a little worse but that's it.\u000a\u000aThat said, it's hard to say what's going to get banned. If they ban just one of the lands, the deck is probably still alive, just not as broken as it is. So maybe it's not vanishing, just getting actually balanced. Or, the worst case scenario, they ban one of the lands and the thing still is a little too good.\u000a\u000aWe also have no idea how a metagame without Twin and with a potentially viable-but-not-broken Eldrazi deck would look like, so it's impossible to say whether Zoo is going to be good or not. +p274 +aVBushwhacker zoo is really good I won a FNM 5 - 0 without eldrazis. \u000a\u000aAbzan 2-1\u000aTemur Prowess 2-0\u000aTemur Control 2- 1\u000aElves 2 - 0\u000aUSA 2 - 0 +p275 +aVA friend plays bushwhacker zoo as well and has blown me out a couple times now with that gobliny bastard. I play a grishoalbrand deck, but I like to call it Shoal Train. If I'm fast enough I can beat him before he gets enough threats on the table, but if I have to spend any significant amount of time digging for combo pieces the bushwhacker shows up and ends the game. +p276 +aVI started playing Zoo again thanks to bushwacker. in the past 4 events, I have gone 4-0, 4-0, 3-0-1 and 2-2. Its a great deck.\u000a\u000aAlso, I played against eldrazi twice last night and beat both. Going wide got the games for me. +p277 +aVsame man I got bored playing kiki chord then started owning with zoo +p278 +aVFellow Bushzoo player here, could you send me your decklist please? +p279 +aVsearch for michael majors zoo. He has a good build +p280 +aVWhat version of zoo +p281 +aVNaya midrange. With loxodon Smiters, kotr, goyf, birds of paradise, voice of res and a couple collected company. +p282 +aVNaya Company is great in a meta of linear decks since you go over the top and have all the sideboard tools to fight them due to being a GW deck, alongside blood moon to make your tron matchup unlosable if it resolves. \u000a\u000athe only times you'll really struggle are against decks like Jund or Grixis Delve, whose creatures are very good blockers and have large amounts of removal to drag out the game to the point where they can overwhelm you with card advantage. You'll also struggle against some of the faster combo decks since you end up being a turn too slow to race them and lack the tools to disrupt many of them efficiently (only 8 removal spells, no discard) +p283 +aVAh ok so big zoo. It's kinda hard to say how good it will be. It lost one of its better matchup that being twin. The deck has solid game against most aggro and midrange decks but struggles against fast combo. If I had to make a prediction of how good the deck will be post eldrazi i would say it would be a solid tier 2 deck. The deck has a great sideboard and is hard to hate out +p284 +aVThe worst thing about the Twin ban and Eldrazi is that we still don't really have a true tier 0 to beat. We know roughly what things were starting to look like before the PT (more linear decks, Affinity and Infect on the rise, Tron hysteria), but until we know what's going to happen to Eldrazi, we don't really know anything about the Modern Meta. +p285 +aVLittle zoo has a great eldrazi match up. +p286 +aVhow is this better than ghostly prison and sphere of safety based nykthos prison decks +p287 +aV> The only glaring weakness is grave hate\u000a\u000aSaid Chalice on 1... +p288 +aV##### \u000a\u000a###### \u000a\u000a#### \u000a \u000a[Awe Strike](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Awe Strike&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Awe Strike) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Awe Strike) \u000a[Wrath of God](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Wrath of God&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Wrath of God) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Wrath of God) \u000a[Dawn Charm](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Dawn Charm&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dawn Charm) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Dawn Charm) \u000a[Leyline of Sanctity](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Leyline of Sanctity&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Leyline of Sanctity) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Leyline of Sanctity) \u000a[Ghost Quarter](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Ghost Quarter&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ghost Quarter) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Ghost Quarter) \u000a[Path to Exile](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Path to Exile&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Path to Exile) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Path to Exile) \u000a[Return to the Ranks](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Return to the Ranks&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Return to the Ranks) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Return to the Ranks) \u000a[Squadron Hawk](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Squadron Hawk&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Squadron Hawk) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Squadron Hawk) \u000a[Emeria](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=emeria, the sky ruin&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=emeria, the sky ruin) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!emeria, the sky ruin) \u000a[Azor's Elocutors](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Azor's Elocutors&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Azor's Elocutors) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Azor's Elocutors) \u000a[Proclamation of Rebirth](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Proclamation of Rebirth&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Proclamation of Rebirth) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Proclamation of Rebirth) \u000a[Chancellor of the Annex](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Chancellor of the Annex&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chancellor of the Annex) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Chancellor of the Annex) \u000a[Serra Ascendant](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Serra Ascendant&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Serra Ascendant) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Serra Ascendant) \u000a[Martyr of Sands](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Martyr of Sands&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Martyr of Sands) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Martyr of Sands) \u000a[Kami of False Hope](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Kami of False Hope&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Kami of False Hope) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Kami of False Hope) \u000a[Ranger of Eos](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Ranger of Eos&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ranger of Eos) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Ranger of Eos) \u000a[Children of Korlis](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Children of Korlis&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Children of Korlis) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Children of Korlis) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p289 +aVWhere's the turbo? +p290 +aVThat doesn't make sense, everyone on /r/modernmagic says they have a positive matchup vs eldrazi decks. +p291 +aVMaybe we're reading different posts, but I've only people saying "once the eldrazi menace is done" or ignoring them all together. All the anti-eldrazi brews have been pretty subpar. +p292 +aVProbably cuz half of them are playtesting on Cockatrice +p293 +aVWhen even the anti-eldrazi decks are still not favored against Eldrazi, you know something is very very wrong. +p294 +aVThat is how it always works out in broken formats. There are always some people stubborn enough not to just play the best deck. +p295 +aVAbout half, as it turns out. +p296 +aVBruh, we just gotta give the meta time to sort itself out or something +p297 +aVLet's just say that we don't have the finest minds in Modern on the case here. +p298 +aVCause all the finest minds in modern are figuring out which eldrazi variant to play +p299 +aVYes. Pending breakthroughs, it seems to be incorrect not to be playing Eldrazi at the moment. +p300 +aVgiven you are a spike. +p301 +aVModern is in essence a Johnny Format. Modern is played by Spikes, of course, but as far as a competitive format goes, you need to have your masochist Johnny in the driver-seat if you want to tackle a format that is so full of variance. +p302 +aVIt's been funny how much of the discussion on deckbuilding in this meta has been focused on finding the anti-Eldrazi deck, versus building the best Eldrazi deck. It's not about winning; it's about people trying to prove to themselves that the meta isn't broken. +p303 +aVIt's a Johnny thing - invent the bullet to the Eldrazi menace plaguing the format.\u000a\u000aSpikes just use an Eldrazi variant which works in their meta-game. Eldrazi 2 good (from what I hear at least). +p304 +aVIf Eldrazi weren't obviously getting banned in April I think you'd see a lot more people trying to build the best Eldrazi deck. Given the situation, though, why would you invest in Eldrazi? +p305 +aVI don't think it's about proving anything at all. We already know that Eldrazi variants are good. What we don't know is what decks are good against the current builds. \u000a\u000aIt makes sense that a larger amount of discussion goes on about the thing we want to find out.\u000a\u000aPlus, people want to find a way to make their $1000 deck competitive in the current metagame. +p306 +aVLet's face it. This deck is bonkers. It's like Affinity in its resilience and speed but without its drawbacks: It does not fold to pointed hate (because there is no real pointed hate) and it does not fold to efficient sweepers (Pyroclasm). Also, they have the benefit of manlands AND haste creatures to come back after a sweeper out of nowhere. +p307 +aVI've seen absolute beginners to the deck mull to three and pull off wins against tier 1 decks. +p308 +aVThere's only 1 tier 1 deck now +p309 +aVI think Eldrazi is considered a Tier 0 deck for how dominating it is. It's performance and resilience breaks Tier 1 and moves into Cawblade, Academy level. Play it or the dedicated hate deck, or lose.\u000a\u000a(Not saying Cawblade and Academy are at all on the same power level, just the same relative dominance). +p310 +aV>It's performance and resilience breaks Tier 1 and moves into Cawblade\u000a\u000aOk maybe\u000a\u000a>Academy level.\u000a\u000aLol not even close. +p311 +aVIn all fairness there are two. Robots is still a tier one deck. +p312 +aVHow many day 1 decks were Eldrazi? +p313 +aVNo one knows. That data doesn't get collected. +p314 +aVSomeone said it was about ~20%-25%. I don't know how accurate that was, but any numbers are better than no numbers. +p315 +aVAnyone? +p316 +aVThey don't analyze day 1 decks. Nobody wants to go through 700+ entries. +p317 +aVWhich makes the day 2 results statistically worthless. If it is performing within the margin of error (let's say +/-10% of field - so somewhere between 30-50% of the field in this case), then it isn't a "dominant" deck so much as one that is dominating the number of decks played. If it performs well outside it - say, 25% of D1 but 50% of D2 - then it is an issue... +p318 +aVsure you don't know the conversion rate, but we can also examine historical data to identify outliers. 40% + in day 2 is a statistical outlier. We can safely assume one of two things, both of which are bad. 1. the day 1 % was very high, which lead to a high day 2 %. 2. The day 1 % was not very high, but it had a high day 2 conversion rate.\u000a\u000aBoth scenarios point to problems with the eldrazi deck. Decks don't generally represent much more than 10-15% of day two unless they are overwhelmingly powerful in the format. Past event history shows this holds to be true. +p319 +aVIn an open - I'm not going to claim that the decks aren't a problem (there are 4 competitive Eldrazi decks that, while sharing ~28 cards, all play differently - compare to Delver/Twin/Scapeshift, where there is even more commonality between decks), but I am going to say that this is not exactly unprecedented in a format. \u000a\u000a\u000aIt reminds me most of DDT days in the last gasp of old extended. It was also a deck that saw a great deal of play, with an over-performing conversion rate - with the caveat that it was ONE deck, with ONE build (~70/75). Yes, it was eventually banned, and that ban (well, 2 bans) eventually carried into Modern - but that deck was far more powerful than Eldrazi, and far less interesting.\u000a\u000a> Decks don't generally represent much more than 10-15% of day two unless they are overwhelmingly powerful in the format. Past event history shows this holds to be true.\u000a\u000aThis is only true when each deck only makes up 10-15% of the starting decks - it all depends on prevalence and sample rate *within the subgroup of players who have the highest probability of making day 2 in the first place*. If, say, 75% of the players with previous high finishes in similar events were all on Eldrazi, and they made up ~20% of the field, that throws conversion rate numbers all to hell...\u000a\u000aBasically, I still think the format is evolving to fight the menace. Is the menace real? Sure, yes, it is. Is it unbeatable? Far from it. There isn't even a consensus "best version" - UW was most popular, but has a bad RG matchup, and RG other weaknesses as a tradeoff, and so on. The format **may** still adjust.\u000a\u000aAnecdotally, I don't see much local adaptation, in spite of the power. Modern is the most popular constructed format in the city in which I live - Madrid, Spain. People are slowly adapting, but very few are actually playing the spaghetti monsters at the moment - and those of us who are (personally play RG) are actually the players who historically had high win rates in the first place!\u000a\u000aI guess my overall point was that I think that these early events aren't saying much, given the threat of the format. Competent players are playing scared, either slamming Eldrazi or Affinity and unwilling to commit to unknown solutions. I mean, we have no conversion numbers for Abzan, Merfolk, Blue Moon, or any other deck that made day 2 any more than we do for Eldrazi. We don't even have effective day 1 standings to corroborate the Top 32 conversion rate, which may be inflated by exceedingly good day 1 performance... +p320 +aV> This is only true when each deck only makes up 10-15% of the starting decks\u000a\u000aHow do you know that? WOTC never releases day 1 metagame numbers and neither does SCG. You have no data to back this conclusion up.\u000a\u000aThe information we do have, what percentages make day 2. We can look at events where the meta wasn't considered 'broken' and events that were, cawblade, mirrodin and see what the percentages were. Numbers based on historical analysis point much more toward the eldrazi is to good than not. +p321 +aVVery relevant question. +p322 +aVits simple, wizards just have to print hate a la konami. "The exilammer, mythic, 1C, instant: exile all eldrazi permanents. \u000aflavor text: please dont go, buy this set, we want ur money" +p323 +aVThat is kind of surprising there isn't a Back to Nature or Crux of Fate for Eldrazi. Any other time there's been a stopgap, even tho I know it might be a flavor fail +p324 +aVu want flavor? sure, "Oath of Zendikar, WUGR, instant, can only be cast if u control gideon, chandra, nissa and jace at the same time (and somehow in a losing position on board), destroy all eldrazi permanents. Through your deck onto the match next to you." +p325 +aVClosest thing is [[aligned hedron network]] but it doesn't hit em all. +p326 +aV \u000a[aligned hedron network](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=aligned hedron network&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=aligned hedron network) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!aligned hedron network) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p327 +aVAnd it costs way too much. +p328 +aV"In the interest of competitive diversity, Splinter Twin is banned from Modern." +p329 +aVEldrazi taking a huge shit on format diversity doesn't somehow remove the justification for the Splinter Twin ban. +p330 +aVI don't care how many times this comment is reposted. I'm still salty about the Twin ban and Wizards can fuck themselves. +p331 +aVYeah what a pile of crap. Ban a fun, fair card in the interest of diversity and overlook all this power that got pumped into the format. \u000a\u000aNo foresight, no testing... Wanton shakeup motivated by a lust for profit. +p332 +aVI wouldn't call Twin a fair card. It was the epitome of the broken things that should be allowed, though. I'll grant them the idea that Pod was restrictive on design space. It was. But Twin was the absolute best tempo/control wincon in Modern. Why? Because it was the only one that could win consistently and effectively. *That's what it takes to be a tempo/control wincon in this format.*\u000a\u000aThat said, I'm not sure Twin would keep the Eldrazi menace down. Eldrazi wins too fast by cheating on mana. Honestly, it's more akin to the Titan Bloom combo deck, but even faster and more consistent. +p333 +aVThis. Your last point about them failing to test is one of the main issues. Wizards is a business, they aren't our friends, we are their customers. Their sole purpose at the end of the day is for them to make money. Having a great product is a huge advantage, but when you "diversify" the meta with banning out a fair deck shit like thus happens. This reminds me of combo winter. Let call this Eldrazi Spring. +p334 +aVDude at the LGS I go to was willing to bet me a box of Eternal Masters that nothing gets banned. I didn't take him up on it because, there's always a chance they try and let the meta adjust, right?\u000a\u000aThinking I may take him up on that offer now.... +p335 +aV20 out the Top 32 decks (62.5%) were Eldrazi (including the "Eldrazi/Tron hybrid piloted by Zach Voss), showing further enrichment after the Day 2 swiss.\u000a\u000aThe format isn't broken, it's pulverized. +p336 +aVEven further than that: 11 out of 16 hit Top 16 (68.75%)\u000a\u000a[In my opinion, it's more prudent to look at Top 16 than Top 8, given that the difference between the two can be just some small tiebreakers. Look at the cut from 8th to 9th: the next non-Eldrazi deck isn't found until 16th, tiebreakers break a different way and we're looking at 5-6 Eldrazi in T8 again.] +p337 +aV6 out of top 8 (75%)\u000a\u000a3 out of top 4 (75%)\u000a\u000aBut then it goes downhill from there!\u000a\u000a1 out of top 2 (50%)\u000a\u000a0 champion (0%)\u000a\u000aMan, that's not how statistics works. +p338 +aVyou have to wait for the meta to adjust. /s +p339 +aVforget memory jar... forget that emergency bans haven't been made ever... \u000a\u000ahow about let's just use some common sense and let the players have their format back... +p340 +aVThere's nothing wrong with Modern guys, an Eldrazi deck didn't even win...\u000a\u000a +p341 +aVWhat's the Vesuva in the sideboard of UW Eldrazi for, does anyone know? +p342 +aVMirror match copy Eye +p343 +aVOr Eldrazi Temple, if you want. +p344 +aVThe mirror +p345 +aVand here my buddy built ur eldrazi and went 0-4 at fnm... +p346 +aVHe must have got overwhelmed by all the available hate in the format. +p347 +aVAt this point I think that anyone saying this deck isn't presenting itself as justifying an emergency banning is just lying to themselves. This is beyond what Memory Jar was capable of...\u000a\u000aEdit: Why are people so hung up on the memory jar comment? Quit the nitpicking and understand I'm trying to use dramatic analogies to convey that Eldrazi is busted and terrible for the format! +p348 +aVSee, I think a ban is reasonable at this point but comments like this make me second guess myself.\u000a\u000aOutside of modern, every card to get an active ban (not start banned) has been much much more warping than the drazi are. +p349 +aVYou must be pretty out of touch with modern to not consider them among the most warping cards in the *history* of magic. +p350 +aVThey don't make top 10. That isn't to say something shouldn't be banned but they still can't hold a candle cards as broken as memory jar. +p351 +aVAre you fucking joking? The deck that got jar banned is posted below, go goldfish that for a little while then rethink your comment. Memory Jar was banned after 4 months of non stop combo decks. It's been a couple weeks and although eldrazi is insane and clearly needs a ban it is no Memory Jar. Emergency bans are bad for the game.\u000a\u000aLands\u000a\u000a\u000a\u000a3 Ancient Tomb\u000a\u000a\u000a4 City of Brass\u000a\u000a\u000a2 Gemstone Mine\u000a\u000a\u000a3 Underground River\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Underground Sea\u000a\u000a\u000a\u000aArtifacts\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Defense Grid\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Lion's Eye Diamond\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Lotus Petal\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Mana Vault\u000a\u000a\u000a1 Megrim\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Memory Jar\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Mox Diamond\u000a\u000a\u000a\u000aOther\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Brainstorm\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Dark Ritual\u000a\u000a\u000a1 Mystical Tutor\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Tinker\u000a\u000a\u000a4 Vampiric Tutor\u000a\u000a\u000a2 Yawgmoth's Will\u000a\u000a\u000aEDIT: Formatting +p352 +aVYou could also very easily argue that Jar would have never needed to be banned if cards like Yawgmoth's Will, Tinker, and Mana Vault were on the ban list where they belong. Jar was the straw that broke the camel's back, but it was not sole reason that deck was busted. +p353 +aVSeems like my kind of deck! (still waiting for storm to be viable in modern again...) But unless we see massive tournament numbers drop in the next month, I dont think an emergency ban is warranted. Though I would not be surprised if tournament numbers drops a bit over the next couple months. I know I wont be going to any large tournaments until eldrazi is banned. Why bother showing up if there is no hope? +p354 +aVI know a lot of people that regret preregistering for GP Detroit. It seems like a big waste if you're not currently on the Eldrazi deck, and the matches will likely be uninteresting as players with better records will play Eldrazi over and over again. +p355 +aVWhich means that the best deck to play is the deck that is the best against all Eldrazi versions - which pretty much means GREld, UWEld, Affinity, or Abzan Company. So that is a 4-deck format. Which, honestly, is basically where modern was before - it is just that half of the best decks have 28/75 cards the same... +p356 +aV"Bad for the game" seems like a silly argument when literally half the decks in major events are the same and everyone else is wondering when to start selling their "Not-Eldrazi" modern decks.\u000a\u000aI've already stayed home from 2 major modern events waiting for the ban, and there are 2 more yet to go in my area before April 4. That's a lot of money I would have spent on vendors and magic and instead I'm spending it on steam. Everyone else I know who plays modern is doing the same. +p357 +aVCan you in all honesty not tell the difference between having 6 weeks of a bad metagame (what you're calling bad for the game) and setting precedence that Wizards should be able to ban any card whenever they want completely outside of the ban schedule (what I'm calling bad for the game)?\u000a\u000aEmergency bannings set a bad precedent, it is bad for the game as a whole. Modern will recover from a rough month and a half and there is currently no indication that tournament attendance has dropped. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't mean shit. +p358 +aVwhat precedent are we setting with an emergency ban here? that if a a deck makes up 50% of the meta that it will get banned sooner rather than later?\u000a\u000aexplain to me how that's actually a bad precedent? +p359 +aVEasy. The last 2 big surprising bans in modern were Birthing Pod and Splinter Twin. Not every ban is popular, most of them aren't. \u000a\u000a\u000aSo now here you are begging to have bans after a couple weeks of a bad format, and I do agree that it is bad. What does this say to Wizards: we the players are ok with you banning things at will, right away, no schedule needed. Don't take time to collect data, don't take time to see if the format adjusts, don't do anything except ban the cards right away.\u000a\u000aWe have already seen that Wizards will ban stuff to 'shake up' Pro Tours. What happens when next time it isn't such a popular idea to ban a card? Look at Magic like law. As players we DO NOT want Wizards banning shit after a couple weeks as they see fit because next time they do it we might not like the results. It is bad for the game, it is bad for us as players, and it is stupid. \u000a\u000aYes the format blows right now. But Modern will bounce right back, in fact no one has been able to prove tournament or sales numbers have changed. Let's give Wizards time to make a smart informed decision, backed up by good data and tournament results.\u000a\u000aThe format will survive a month and a half of being lame, but making sweeping rules changes, which an emergency ban would be, is much more far reaching. +p360 +aVnormally i would agree with you but the environment is so far out of wack that i'm sure most would agree it would be a one-time occurrence... +p361 +aVThat isn't how it works unfortunately. Magic is an ever changing game, sometimes there are going to be these rough patches, but I think drastically changing the rules just so 6 weeks of Modern will improve is a bad idea.\u000a\u000a\u000aWizards and the players have a sort of contract and people are begging them to break it. That is a bad idea for us because generally we really want them to stick to the contract. The Eldrazi invasion blows but we shouldn't change the rules over it and neither should they. +p362 +aVthe contract that wizard has with it's players is to curate an enjoyable and mostly fair experience.... an emergency ban isn't something that's knee jerk or unreasonable at this point... it's the most rational thing to do so all the players in the format can get on enjoying the game... +p363 +aVWhat contract? Why is everyone so hung up on this idea that WoTC owes them something? +p364 +aVThere is already precedent for emergency bans. If there was not, there would not be discussion of emergency bans.\u000a\u000aVendors are losing money and players are facing serious doubt and despair because wizards will not act and that is the reality of the situation. Game stores are losing players and some might not come back. Modern will face a steady decline the longer eldrazi meta as it exists remains legal. This is not arguable.\u000a\u000aThere is little reason to wait other than a boogey man precedent that has long since been broken. +p365 +aV>Vendors are losing money and players are facing serious doubt and despair because wizards will not act and that is the reality of the situation.\u000a\u000aThat is a pretty dramatic comment. Please link proof to all of these losses. A lot for people showed up to play modern this weekend. It sounds like you are making shit up to suit your narrative. Lots of people buying into the best deck seems pretty good for venders. +p366 +aVI just picked up the owner of my lgs from the airport. His take from magic is down over 50% per week over the last 2 weeks and is considering cancelling his sanctioned modern event next month due to the lack of interest in the format lately.\u000a\u000aThe glass cases are piled high with ogw eldrazi and temples that don't sell because of the imminent ban.\u000a\u000aDo you call people liars irl? I doubt you have the stones. +p367 +aVInform your LGS owner that he can sell his Eldrazi staples online. He will have no problem. Listings are ending often and fetching exactly what they are worth (the amount anyone is willing to pay.) +p368 +aVI'm opting out of GP detroit unless someone let's me borrow eldrazi. If I can't get that deck ID rather just throw rocks in the air and try to dodge them. It seems about the same as taking a non eldrazi deck to a modern GP at this point. +p369 +aVsame, there's weekly tourneys on a few LGS here but I decided to sit it out, ain't no fun when everyone you know is riding the eldrazy hype train.\u000a\u000aunless there's a ban, I'd probably be sticking on xmage for the next few months. +p370 +aVyeah I wasn't even counting FNM modern (Dead) and our usual Wed night lgs modern pods (Dead).\u000a +p371 +aVYeah, same here. modern fnm's dead. Last friday I went to my LGS to try and play Modern. there were lots of players there but apparently no one is listing up for Modern. And when some players saw that I signed up, I was immediately tagged as the "eldrazi" guy since I was the only one eager to play lol. I was not even playing anything remotely close to eldrazi. +p372 +aVI found a couple of casual modern games with friends at least last friday after work. \u000a\u000a"The eldrazi guy" showed up with that free wins twinkle in his eye and everyone finished their games and politely started talking about their draft plans and playing legacy and standard instead lol. Too bad I was starting to enjoy the post-twin meta. +p373 +aVI was enjoying the post-twin meta too. I mean it was hectic, but it was fun and filled wih all sorts of cool decks. +p374 +aVTo be fair, Jar was legal for less than a month before it was banned. +p375 +aVThis isn't beyond what memory jar was capable of, not by a long shot.\u000a\u000aThat being said, in a format like modern, without tools like wasteland and Force of Will, and with bannings such as Jace the Mind Sculptor, Bloodbraid Elf, Preordain, Stoneforge Mystic, and Splinter Twin, what are fair decks suposed to do? You live through the initial onslaught of eldrazi, and then just get buried anyways as you have no tools capable of stabilizing and recovering against them.\u000a\u000aAdditionally, unbanning those cards does basically nothing to fix the meta, because none of those strategies are fast enough to help against eldrazi's openers. Not to mention, Eldrazi hasn't been fully optimized yet, so an even more powerful build may yet surface.\u000a\u000aThe only cards that could be unbaned to fight eldrazi are themselves even more busted, such as the good rituals, blazing shoal, and hypergenesis. These would just serve to make things worse.\u000a\u000aNow consider that memory jar had the potential to secure turn two kills **Consistently**. These eldrazi decks, while being broken in modern, are nowhere near that fundamentally broken. Draw 7 cards is powerful text, discard 7 cards is powerful text, and that was all on one card.\u000a\u000aNow in conclusion, Eldrazi is broken, and needs a ban. No amount of unbannings will fix this format, and the format doesn't have the tools to fight this sort of deck. +p376 +aVDoesn't Eldrazi generally fold to a fast Blood Moon?\u000a\u000aR/W Death and Taxes with Moon will crush the Eldrazi menace, calling it now. +p377 +aVt3 blood moon will lose still though :/ \u000a\u000a +p378 +aVHow do you get a "fast Blood Moon"? If you play it turn 3 (hell, even if you play it turn 2!), it's probably too late. By that time, you're facing down at least one big beater, and one of them might've exiled your Blood Moon from your hand before you even got to play it! And even if you do spend turn 2 or 3 playing Blood Moon, you've just spent a turn playing a card that didn't answer their board one bit. \u000a\u000aDeath and Taxes player here, so trust me; it's just impossible to disrupt them fast enough, while still building a board presence that kills them fast enough to not let them get right back in the game. +p379 +aVT1 bloodmoon in affinity shell with 4 Simian Spirit Guides :) +p380 +aVMy god, all this time talking about how powerful the deck's mana is no one has thought of Blood Moon. We have to get the word out, NOW. +p381 +aVCall it now. You'll be the first to be wrong. +p382 +aVNo and no +p383 +aVPeople have tried and failed. +p384 +aVPlay Eldrazi or play Affinity (and pack Ensnaring Bridge). +p385 +aVSkred red top 32, i would like to applause and give a hug to that man. +p386 +aVBefore the sub goes crazy for the third consecutive week, I really want to know the meta breakdown from day one. This headline is doing a huge disservice to the community without a full story behind it. +p387 +aVI don't believe SCG has or ever will share a D1 meta game breakdown for an open, as that's a ton of information to gather. The data we do have is that:\u000a\u000a* 47.7% of the day 2 lists were Eldrazi\u000a* 62.5% of the top 32 lists were Eldrazi\u000a* 50% of the top 8 lists were Eldrazi\u000a\u000aSorry about the disservice??? +p388 +aVBy no mean was it a slight at you (sorry if it came off that way) but this headline has been making a lot of noise on this sub between yesterday and today. All the Eldrazi talk is just exhausting, and we all know that the subject needs attention. But (and you already know this) if the meta day one was 50-65% Eldrazi to begin with, there is a completely different discussion to have. If that's the case, then the discussion is "are people adapting to the new meta or are people just swapping to Eldrazi for an easy answer?" Or "are people adapting to the new meta by switching to Eldrazi?" But if we don't know the day one, we can't just make an assumption about the state of modern without a bigger picture/full story.\u000a\u000aI think time is something we don't want to accept as a necessity in this, but that's what it's going to take to see things change by either a ban or the format adapting. +p389 +aVI've cancelled my plans of going to Detroit and I'm holding off registering for LA until the ban list happens. +p390 +aVGood grief. Has anyone tried packing Ghost Quarters yet and seeing if they can blow up an accellerant or two? Blood Moon? Fulminator Mage? Heck, Avalanche Riders or Molten Rain? Anyone have the pieces for Free Win Red want to give it a go at this point? (I would give it a swing, but that's going to take a couple / six months of disposabe income. Someone without kids want to sleeve it up?) +p391 +aVA "fair" Blood Moon is usually too slow to matter. Some kind of Turbo Red (Moon, Riders, SSG, Molten Rain) could have some game... but then it loses to the other half of the format. +p392 +aVThat's why I was thinking "Free Win Red". Accelerated Moons and Bridges should shut down just about anything but Mono Burn or 8 Rack +p393 +aVThere was a Skred list in the top 32, 0 copies of Ensnaring Bridge though like most copies of Free Win Red. As a meta game call I think the deck is fine. +p394 +aVI'll have to dig up a field analysis once someone posts one. Thanks +p395 +aVGhost Quarter is garbage. You lose a land while they "lose" a broken land into a basic. They are still up on lands, and you are not. +p396 +aVMaking UW Eldrazi have an island instead of an Eye or Temple IS basically costing them a land. My usual is LoamPox, which is probably why it doesn't seem as bad to me. +p397 +aVI am too. I put a lot of effort into trying to beat the eldrazi menace through ridiculous metagaming and came to the conclusion that there simply aren't the tools to combat something as blatantly powerful as sol lands breaking what are already strong cards. It's nice seeing my effort validated with so many people trying and failing to stop the deck and I can't wait to see the event where it really is 8 eldrazi in the top 8. \u000a\u000a48 days to go. +p398 +aVYeah, I really hope this finally shuts up all the insanity going around. This deck is not okay. It is beyond question at this point, this deck is the worst thing to happen to the game since combo winter. Worse than affinity and caw blade, because this is modern, not standard. +p399 +aVI hate this subreddit.\u000a +p400 +aVThere's no one forcing you to come here. +p401 +aVI wouldn't say it's worse than Caw Blade. During that time no deck other than Caw Blade had game, at least now Affinity still has some chance. +p402 +aVKiki-chord, a deck that was already played and gaining in popularity, has gone like 6-1 against it so far +p403 +aVIsn't it objectively more dominant than Caw Blade? \u000a\u000aMaybe it's better to play against, but it wins way more. +p404 +aVDuring Caw Blade's day there were a couple decks that had some game. Caw Blade basically had to maindeck 2-3 timely reinforcements because the Goblins deck had insane starts and powerful tools (Lightning Bolt, Goblin Grenade, Goblin Guide, Goblin Bushwacker, Kuldotha Rebirth + Memnite, etc.). It was a pretty consistent turn 4 kill. \u000a\u000aMy friend also teched for caw blade by playing 4 Duress + Surgical Extraction to deal with Jace and Batterskull and used Sphinx of Jwar Isle as a win condition. \u000a\u000aWe both managed a Top 8 finish (me on goblins at 5th, him at 8th) in a format with about 16 caw blade players (the only other ones were 3 Valakut Titan and 1 Venser mill) +p405 +aVDon't forget Splinter Twin and Valakut Ramp that both put up results as well during Caw Blade's reign. +p406 +aVWasn't caw blade still a standard deck though? I'd put modern and standard on different levels when it comes to level of brokenness that it takes to get this kind of a result. +p407 +aVEldrazi is obviously stronger than cawblade, thing is cawblade might have been the most opressive deck of all time. You played cawblade or you played another deck to be a special snowflake. The 75 to take to beat cawblade was the mirror. +p408 +aVWhich is funny, considering how many cards from Cawblade are banned in modern. +p409 +aVAll 2 of them. +p410 +aVYeah I mean it's only the core of the deck right? +p411 +aVMy point was Cawblade doesn't have that many cards on the banned list. +p412 +aVRight, but you can't go out and make a caw blade deck now. Both of the cards that made it broken are banned, in addition to preordain. +p413 +aVOkay? I wasn't saying you could... +p414 +aVHey, Dont forget Preordain lol. +p415 +aVJace, Stoneforge, Ponder, and Preordain. +p416 +aVPonder was in m12, Jace and stoneforge were banned before it was released. So 3 cards. +p417 +aVAgreed. Standard deck options are way more limited, especially competitive one's. +p418 +aVThe only deck in the format that can reliably use Moxen has a chance is saying something +p419 +aVFlash Hulk? Granted it happened right before bannings, but still. +p420 +aVRyan Overturf just made a comment: \u000a\u000a"This is a format where Wild Nacatl was banned" after Adam Cummings puked out 3 creatures on turn 1 +p421 +aVOverturf quickly becoming a really great person to have in the booth. He's quick, witty, and pretty fun. +p422 +aVWhat are you talking about? The meta did adapt. The UW Eldrazi deck has serious game against other versions of the Eldrazi deck. /s +p423 +aV There have been at least 6 different variants of eldrazi in the SCGLOU feature matches (Colorless no Tron, Colorless with tron, UW, UR, GR, and BG). If that isn't diversity I don't know what is. +p424 +aV"In the interest of competitive diversity, no more than 3 identical Eldrazi lists may be registered at DCI-sanctioned Modern events." +p425 +aVSo I'm happy for different reason as well.\u000a\u000aMost of R&D is going to say that - "ok, Eldrazi are too strong for the format, modern is unable to adapt, ban it and let's move on"\u000a\u000aI'm hoping that a couple of them are going to go a level deeper and ask \u000a\u000a1. "*why* is modern unable to adapt?" \u000a\u000a2. "What is the format missing in various colors that would otherwise allow it to interact efficiently with the problem posed by Eldrazi?"\u000a\u000aThis extraordinarily perceptive R&D member would hopefully be influential enough to push the rest of the team into considering giving modern brand NEW cards that could act as good tools to allow the format to adapt more effectively in the future. \u000a\u000aAs has been mentioned by some people, I'm very happy R&D is willing to push rather than hold-back in regards to design and development. Something that would make me happier is an R&D that acknowledges some of the format-wide weaknesses this experience exposes and doing something to address them. +p426 +aVNo, the problem isn't that the format is unable to adapt...the problem is that Wizards printed this kind of card in the first place. \u000a\u000aThe first run of Eldrazi were bad enough to drive me away from the game - such a card is absolutely UNFUN to play against. I started to get back into it, and then I found out Eldrazi were coming back...drove me away again.\u000a\u000aThe solution is not printing answers to these cards...the solution is not printing these cards in the first place. +p427 +aVI disagree. Preemptively nerfing cards means you're going to get a lower power level way into the future. Then you end up with a wet noodle set of cards. \u000a\u000aWhat is required is exploration and a quick response followed by decisive action. +p428 +aVyou give magic r&d entirely way too much credit... i'd gather that they don't spend more than 4 days out of the year devoted to the format... and that's only to type up what they want to ban.... +p429 +aVIt's funny that u think they ask these questions when printing card and pertaining to modern. If they did we wouldn't of had this problem in the first place. They are only about their cash cow standard +p430 +aVThey do print some things with the idea of seeing modern play, they just don't test for modern.\u000a\u000aRending Volley was a pretty clear plant from before they decided to ban twin. +p431 +aVI completely agree. Out of curiosity, what would you do to help fix the format? I know what I would do, but I'm always interested in hearing other opinions and thoughts on how to fix this fundamentally broken format. +p432 +aVSure. First thing for me is that I actually think the fundamentals of the format are quite strong.\u000a\u000aThere is a large, ever expanding card pool that was originally self-policing, and because of standard being the only way for cards to enter - the cards are going to come into the format "balanced". \u000a\u000aIn fact, the old cards interacting in new ways with the new cards is a much desired feature, not bug. The issue is that when old cards interact with new cards in a very degenerate and different way. The card pool can generally handle new card interactions (see: ascendency etc) but land-based decks are not within Modern's purview. \u000a\u000aThough I'm not a design expert, I think it'd be good to see some more decent land manipulation (not necessarily removal) that's available to multiple colors (not just blue), some stack interaction that is also available to multiple colors (not just blue) and creative taxing cards that are not necessarily legacy level (things like Gaddock Teeg, thalia, Eidolon of Rhetoric, Lodestone golem for creatures) +p433 +aVWhat land manipulation are you speaking of? Just curious. +p434 +aVI assume [[Spreading Seas]] and [[Sea's Claim]]. +p435 +aVOh right +p436 +aV \u000a[Sea's Claim](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Sea's Claim&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sea's Claim) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Sea's Claim) \u000a[Spreading Seas](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Spreading Seas&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Spreading Seas) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Spreading Seas) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p437 +aVVery sensible approach, I think. I definitely agree that the land issue is the issue. Ghost Quarter just doesn't cut it against Eldrazi-level fast mana. Your options are either GQ their Eye turn 1-2 and set yourself back a land drop and a card, or try to develop your board and let them do the same. Either way you're falling behind; it's just a matter of how far behind. \u000a\u000aAs a huge White fanboy, I agree that taxing/rule-setting effects are the way to go with White. It needs help, and that seems to be the area where it can find its niche. +p438 +aVI'm extremely happy, it's just more indisputable truth that the core of the deck is broken. Wizards may panic and ban both lands \u000a\u000aI do believe the eldrazi deck puts the GP in Detroit at risk for lower numbers. +p439 +aVEldrazi are pretty much the biggest reason I don't play the game anymore. +p440 +aVThey keep banning every deck I play. Soon that may be the biggest reason I don't play. I've moved to Eldrazi just BC they banned twin before that and etc etc before that +p441 +aVDude, if you bought into Eldrazi after being burned by bannings before, you're acting like that chick we all know who hates being treated badly by her boyfriend, but keeps going after the same "alpha" type jerks. \u000a\u000aEveryone knows Eldrazi is gonna get hit with a ban. You can't legitimately be angry when it is. +p442 +aVYou're an idiot if you bought into the deck after the pro tour results \u000a\u000aIf you bought into the deck before oath was released and didn't realize I apologize, that sucks \u000a\u000aStill, this was easy to see coming when oaths spoilers were released +p443 +aVI had the modern cards (eye, et, chalice, other lands), I didn't have the standard cards and I bought those. I tried infect, zoo, coco, burn and hated all those decks despite getting 2nd in a GPT two weeks ago with one. If they ban eldrazi without unbanning something I may just drop modern like I did standard and just play the formats they don't artificially or otherwise rotate with bans (vintage/legacy) +p444 +aVDo you seriously want them to keep the eldrazi deck around? I know you're invested in it, but looking at the metagame, do you really want this to continue for another 5 months at minimum? I'm genuinely curious; I have yet to meet someone who actually doesn't want eldrazi to be reined in. \u000a\u000aAlso, you picked up modern at a bad time. After the Twin ban, there became very little reason to play fair in modern and the eldrazi deck has only exacerbated it. I fully expect more support for fair strategies coming soon; though if I'm wrong, I'm also done with modern. +p445 +aVI've been playing magic since 2001 after learning in 98 and have played modern continuously for the past 3 years. So I didn't just pick it up to be clear. 3 years ago I first got into this format as extended went away. Top 4d my first GPT with Jund zombies. Then they banned DRS. Tried flavors of control, GBx, affinity, tron, living end, pod, etc etc. Found twin and fell in love. Played tarmotwin for 2 years except a period of Doran Abzan and RUG Delver with Treasure Cruise. \u000a\u000aI'm not saying I think it'll be wrong to neuter Eldrazi if Detroit looks like this too. I'm just saying no remaining modern decks make me want to play the format and I'm tired of my decks getting banned so I may just quit the format not out of protest really but disinterest. I want to like the format. I really do. But none of the remaining decks really fit my play style.\u000a\u000aDoes that answer your question clearly and respectfully? That is my intent. I can expand\u000a\u000aEdit: And I even played Twin in legacy FNM 5th Friday last month. I went off 3 times but went 1-2-1 beating burn, drawing against miracles +p446 +aVI havea friend who had the same problem. But the problem boils down to you are often taking bestdeck.net and playing it even now with eldrazi. I am suprised you didn't list pod. But when your consistently playing decks like that you put urself in that position. Whether thats right or not is another thing. But its easily avoidable. Ive felt twin was gonna get the hammer eventually for a long time. +p447 +aVIf the best deck of the format inevitably gets banned there is a problem with the format.\u000a\u000aModern finally gets to see a real broken deck, wotc played pretty loose with the banlist in modern since inception. Bbe, twin, nacatal, blossom, even pod aren't real problem cards. Problem cards dominate a format even when players are trying to beat it. I hope wotc changes policy so they don't look so stupid at handling formats other than standard. Both in better testing (seriously, make mimic cost 3 and the deck gets far more reasonable, one of the biggest issues is just how bloodly fast it is) and in using bans when it's important, not for kicks to shake a meta. It's a testament of how much players want modern to work that it is as popular as it is despite wotc's handling of it. +p448 +aVI could see twin coming back tho I understand reasons for the ban. Pod however has been a dominating force especially after its siege rhino inclusion. I really felt it needed to go for the good of the format. Which did suck because it was a great deck. Also keep in mind not every ban kills a deck. DRS is a perfect example of a degenerate card that got banned and jund was still a great deck. I am not trying to get u to agree or keep playing modern. But you should try lookinh at both sides of the coin and consider all the reasons things r done whether or not u like it is really itrelevant. +p449 +aVProblem is modern is supposed to be a non-rotating format they are articially rotating in January just to shake it up for the PT :-/ +p450 +aVI agree to an extent but if u play the not best deck ull be pretty safe +p451 +aVThat sounds like an awful limitation.Twin didn't need the ban imo Legacy and vintage it is. I like those formats..just not as many opportunities to play +p452 +aVSo give myself a lower chance to win because otherwise my deck will get banned? That's a terrible precedent to set for a competitive game. +p453 +aVMy mistake; I had read your comment as stating that you had gotten into Twin recently and then switching to Eldrazi after the ban. \u000a\u000aYes, your post does pretty perfectly answer my question. As for your deck history, I can relate pretty heavily, as my path was Jund until DRS ban, UWR/Pod until the Dig/Pod ban, and Twin until the Twin ban. \u000a\u000aCurrently, I've been experimenting with other decks and Merfolk has been closest to what I'm interested in playing (linear deck is meh, but at least it has some instant-speed play to it), but I'm spending most of my focus on Legacy until Eldrazi goes away. I can't pretend I know what you like doing in magic, but it might be worth taking a look at if all you've tried lately are members of the gauntlet of linear non-interactive decks that are doing so well these days. \u000a\u000a +p454 +aVWell, I did play mono blue devotion in standard (going 7-1 with it at the invitational standard portion) before dropping standard when they said my cards would only be legal 18 months +p455 +aVthe more success the deck has, the easier it is to shut up all the people who think we need to be patiently waiting until april for a ban - which is a ludicrous argument. as long as it continues to be dominant, it will only accelerate the inevitable ban announcement.\u000a\u000aand this only goes to show that the mtgo numbers aren't at all skewed, because the same numbers are showing up at paper events.\u000a\u000agp detroit should be the end of the road for eldrazi, but i'm quite sure that my local LGS is not particularly happy that most of the modern FNM players have decided to stop showing up entirely rather than throw their entry fees away by not playing eldrazi. +p456 +aV>I'm just glad the meta didnt adapt as well as everyone said it would.\u000a\u000aWhy? I think I would be happier if the format could exist with the eldrazi decks and they weren't as big of a problem as people were predicting. +p457 +aV"I'm happy because nobody will prove I was wrong on the internet!" +p458 +aVInterested to see what happens this April. The meta before the colorless eldrazi deck was brought to light (and then many variations since) wasn't that great either - affinity, burn and infect dominating. Better than now at least. +p459 +aVBased on what I saw at my store what was doing well before the PT was Scapeshift, Jund, and Jeskai. I mean perhaps small sample size, but it actually seemed kinda promising to me. +p460 +aVIf Wizards has some sense they'll unban some midrange and control cards along with the eldrazi ban. AV and BBE are extremely safe to unban, but I could see good arguments for SFM and Sword of the meek as well. +p461 +aVI still have to disagree with a BBE unban. I may be biased, but cascading into lili or k-mand seems far too good to me. +p462 +aVIn a format where half the decks try to kill you on or before t4 you find the value 4 drop op? +p463 +aVI feel like it would leave blue even further behind. As I mentioned in another reply, if blue is given some way to keep up, then BBE would be fine. +p464 +aVThat shouldn't be how cards get banned though, all these "balance the format bans," are stupid because they just fuck over these decks and look hypocritical when wotc accidentally breaks something.\u000a\u000aBBE was never a problem, it was very good but it wasn't oppressive. It got banned because deathrite broke jund and wotc didn't want to ban their new toy. Which was a moot point because deathrite was broke and ended up getting banned anyway.\u000a\u000aI am worried of BBE's powerlevel with things like kolghan's command but my problem is the reason for BBE's ban was unfounded. I'm a minimalist, if the reason for its ban is unfounded it should at least come off to be given a chance. +p465 +aVI agree that at the time it was banned it was perhaps not the best decision, but at this point in time GBx is already outperforming UWx, so I still would be opposed to BBE coming off unless something similar in power level came off for U as well. +p466 +aVI think BBE is more problematic for modern as it stands than SFM. (Particularly with Eldrazi neutered.) +p467 +aVEverytime my Coco opponent gets a Finks and Ewitt get back Coco I just sit there thinking "Yea, BBE would be way too strong /s" +p468 +aV> I may be biased, but cascading into lili or k-mand seems far too good to me.\u000a\u000aSo what? It's supposed to be powerful, *that's the point*. What's the point of playing a fair deck if you don't get to make powerful plays like that? +p469 +aVI guess I see your point. I'm alright with it if blue gets something similar in power level, but as it stands I can't imagine how blue decks are supposed to compete with that. +p470 +aVAncestral Vision would give blue decks a pretty amazing tool against the Jund decks playing BBE. A 3-for-1 that requires no tempo loss is crazy good against attrition-based midrange decks that are trying to 1 for 1 you and eventually pull ahead with 2-for-1s (like BBE).\u000a\u000aThe only "loser" in this would possibly be Abzan, but Lingering Souls gives players enough reason to play Abzan in a field with other fair midrange and control decks. +p471 +aVBut then you just play Temur with BBE and Ancestral Vision. Cascading into Vision is already a great legacy play, doing so in modern would certainly not increase the diversity of the format. +p472 +aVUmm, if it enabled Temur midrange to be a deck, how would that not be increasing diversity?\u000a\u000aAgain, if fair decks don't get the chance to make powerful plays during the midgame, why play a fair deck? +p473 +aVBecause Temur midrange would take the place of every other fair deck. No more jund, Abzan, Jeskai control, Grixis Control, Mardu midrange. +p474 +aVThat's extremely unlikely. Temur would not suddenly outclass all of those decks. Not playing either black or white means you don't have very good creature removal, and are also going to have a pretty bad time against combo without either hand disruption or good white sideboard cards. +p475 +aVIt is powerful, certainly, but there's also a big difference between casting two spells immediately versus casting a spell four turns later, once you get into any sort of late-game situation. +p476 +aVOr you just play RUG and cascades into Ancestral Visions and start loving life. +p477 +aVHell yeah. Play 4 Cryptics too. +p478 +aVJund already has a lot of amazing tools, and blue has nothing. That's why jund is a tier 1 deck and UW is just a fun idea with the occasional success. You could unban just AV, and jund would probably still be better.\u000a\u000a +p479 +aVI don't disagree, but my point is that fair decks in general need all the help they can get. This includes both blue and non-blue decks. Both are pretty underpowered compared to the linear strategies in the meta.\u000a\u000aJund is only still tier 1 because a lot of players have invested in the deck and love playing it. Even before the Eldrazi takeover it was fairly weak compared to the rest of the tier 1 decks. I say this as someone who loves Jund to death, btw. +p480 +aVBBE would make jund so good that it's unlikely another midrange strategy like grixis or junk or bg Rock ever becomes worth playing. \u000a\u000a\u000aI think we need to wait and see what an actual meta looks like without twin. Now that 3 drops are a thing I think midrange will be able to handle aggro in a non eldrazi format, it's too early to say they need a boost in the new meta IMO. I think jund is going to be very strong once we start seeing Kalitas and bolt paired together +p481 +aVI think it's dangerous, but worth trying out.\u000a\u000aThe danger is that it's just the best midrange card available by a lot.\u000a\u000aThe upside is that Bloodbraid probably died for Deathrite's sins so it's worth trying out again. +p482 +aVBloodbraid died for lilis sins, tbh.\u000a\u000aBut Lili's too iconic and splashy for it to matter, honestly. +p483 +aVLili is the kind of interesting very non-linear engine card that stops the format from degenerating into creatures vs removal though. It would be a shame to take it out of the format even if it is quite strong. +p484 +aVI'm not saying she should be banned, and even if I thought that (I really don't - I'd prefer to just unban more things) I still maintain that she's the real reason that DRS and BBE were too strong in jund - Ramping or cascading into her with other upside was just absolutely backbreaking, far moreso than any other play enabled off the pair. +p485 +aVCompletely agree with those unbans, except sfm. Tutor+manacheat is exactly what eye does, and Forsythe has said there is a special hell for sfm and jtms. I don't know whether they'd be safe or not but they'll not be coming back as long as he's working there it sounds. +p486 +aVI think the meta *could* actually adapt to the pre-eldrazi post-twin state though. +p487 +aVI think we'll see a swing back towards midrange. +p488 +aVYea, me too. Hope so. +p489 +aVCompletely agreed. It still was ugly in its state. I scrapped two of my modern decks within the past month from how bad modern has gotten - BW Eldrazi (processor versions are just bad now, and something will get banned to make it worse), and RG Tron (meta is far too aggressive and Tron could also get worse if Eye is banned). All I have left right now is Bogles which is fun once in a while but gets old quick. +p490 +aVI hope Eye gets banned and Temple stays around; I have BW too, and I think the deck can still work well without Eye. Thoughtseize, Lingering Souls and Path are all still good cards +p491 +aVEye getting banned would leave Tron with a worse control matchup and a pretty much unaffected midrange matchup for what that's worth. +p492 +aVI don't really get the sentiment--if the meta did adapt, we get a new deck archetype, nothing wrong with that. Instead we get this dumb vacation to legacy/BDSM intro course. +p493 +aVThe Sol lands and Eye aren't the issue. The fact that OGW printed Eldrazi creatures at less than 7-8 mana are what's the issue. When 8 of your creatures can be cast for free, it's not the land's fault. It's been around for years not causing issues like this. Now that a modern (and now legacy too) deck is 80% standard playable is when the issue arises, how is that the land's fault?\u000a\u000aEdit: I'm saying ban Mimic in modern. +p494 +aVSo are you suggesting the cards to get rid of are all the bfz and oath eldrazi cards? That seems extreme when there is 1-2 cards cause all of those others to be as good as they are. +p495 +aVNo, I'm thinking just Mimic in modern. Without them you're not dumping multiple free creatures turn one then swinging for 10-20 on turn two with only two lands. +p496 +aVThe deck still runs well above everyone else with openers that don't include the mimic. +p497 +aVThe new Eldrazi are actually interesting, fair cards for their cost. The lands are the broken pieces in the deck. +p498 +aVA 4/4 with a thoughtseize attached is pushing the limits of broken in its own right. Same with a 5/5 trampler with haste and pseudo-hexproof for 5 +p499 +aVExcept in previously normal decks they would be very hard to cast because of the colourless requirement. You can't feasibly splash C because you can't fetch for it. The payoff for going C with a splash of colour is the sol lands; if this payoff didn't exist then the downsides (lack of good interaction) would be less attractive. +p500 +aVInvesting 4-5 mana on those guys is quite a bit for Modern. It is getting them out on turn 2/3 respectively that is the problem. Tron, Scapeshift, Affinity, Burn, Infect, Zoo... They're all getting ready to kill you by then if you had to tap 4/5 lands for those. +p501 +aVYeah, it's quite clear that the deck is much less powerful when the pilot doesn't draw a Sol land. It's forced to play a fair game with cards that, while powerful, are toward the high end of viability in Modern. The number one mistake people make consistently with Eldrazi is being too conservative about mulliganning. Just mull to five if you don't find a Sol land in the first two hands. +p502 +aVBecause the land is the enabler. Lion's eye diamond was considered a junk card for years until the right cards came out to abuse it. Now it's one of the linch pins of Legacy's best combo deck. Cards don't exist in a vacuum and you have to look at what card is generating the most degeneracy, and fast mana is probably the most degenerate thing in the game. +p503 +aV6 years and BFZ show that it's ridiculously easy to design around eye and temple. And it didn't take much genius to see how insane TKS and RS were. As soon as they were spoiled, everyone at my LGS knew bad things were going to happen. +p504 +aVAnother post like this? Jesus. +p505 +aVI don't see what else there is to discuss about this format right now. \u000a\u000aHowever tired you are of hearing about it, people are far more tired of playing against it. +p506 +aVToo many posts about how dominate eldrazi is. Just too many. They don't need to make another post, just go find another post about it and post your thoughts there. +p507 +aVThere are too many posts about how there are too many posts about how dominant eldrazi is. Just too many. They don't need to make another post, just go find another post about it and post your thoughts there. +p508 +aVToo meta for me. +p509 +aVThis comment almost certainly took more time to post than it would have taken you to just scroll past every Eldrazi thread from now until the deck got banned. +p510 +aVYeah but I'd like actual content on the subreddit. :^) +p511 +aVThis is actual content as much as anything else. +p512 +aVAnother comment like this? Jesus. \u000a +p513 +aV:^) +p514 +aVI'm happy, but for different reasons. I really like seeing how people are metagaming and how the Eldrazi decks as well as Abzan coco, merfolk, Kiki chord, etc are all adapting as well. It's similarly interesting as caw-blade was, when each week gerry t and others had new innovations for the tourneys. \u000a\u000aNow, none of the above means that I can't think the format is unhealthy! I do, and hope wotc prints something or bans something to balance it out. With that said, though, I'm enjoying watching how big name players deal with it, whether they succeed or not, mirroring the story of the Zendikari versus the Eldrazi itself. +p515 +aVWith Affinity winning does this dampen the chances for an Eldrazi ban? +p516 +aVI doubt it. Sure, it didn't "win", but the archetype is over represented(and has been in paper and online tournaments), and "hate" cards don't exist. That's enough of a reason for a ban. +p517 +aV[deleted] +p518 +aVBecause needing more than that much "modification" is a clear indicator of a potentially healthy format. +p519 +aVNothing but a bunch of whiney little girls. My god +p520 +aVQuit crying and play lantern control. +p521 +aVLantern is not a pure deck with enough interaction\u2122 . This is the wrong subreddit for you. +p522 +aVYes, because lantern control players really and truly want to see the mirror happen more often and go 0-0-3 at FNM. +p523 +aVThe mirror isn't that bad. Played it on Friday. Finished with 25 minutes left in the round. +p524 +aVI mean, Matter Reshaper seems like literally the best possible card in this deck, I feel like not having 4 of them is just wrong. +p525 +aVNo matter reshaper seems very wrong +p526 +aVPlease read the sidebar\u000a\u000a>When posting deck lists, it is generally preferred that you link to a deck building site such as tappedout.net or something similar. Please, make sure you include a description of what your deck is, what it intends to do, and specific questions that stimulate conversation. People are not here to critique the brew you slapped together with zero thought. Try to do some metagame testing to get a feel for your deck so you can talk about it better. +p527 +aVNo rational people were calling for a TNN ban in Legacy. +p528 +aVAnd i will never understand their logic. At the end of the day tnn is just 3 mana hard to kill creature +p529 +aVReally? Their train of thought seemed pretty transparent to me. The one time they played against it with their deck that hadn't adjusted to TNN they couldn't kill it, and therefore it's too good for Legacy and needs to be banned. +p530 +aV'No RATIONAL people' needs to be stated twice and probably twice again. \u000a\u000aAnyone who actually played legacy in paper just boarded in a few different cards and keep on trucking on. Others on the TNN train sided them out often when they were bad. Apparently this news didn't make it to the internet crowd.\u000a\u000a +p531 +aVExactly. You need that filter to be on when you read about Magic on Reddit. If you're not just assuming that most of what you read is unfounded and reactionary, you're just going to get flooded with nonsense. +p532 +aV^ +p533 +aV/r/MTGLegacy is this way, if that happens. +p534 +aVToo bad the spike from eternal masters announcement made a ton of staples even more expensive. +p535 +aV/r/edh then?\u000a\u000a:D +p536 +aVSad part is people are already trying to make eldrazi work in legacy too. Idk about other match ups but it's really good against D&T +p537 +aVWhat? I - What? Really?\u000a\u000aI've been playtesting it, and man, it hardly feels like a "bad" matchup from my side as a DnT player. Between dodging spheres with Vial, and keeping their lands on lock with wasteland/port, it feels way more in my favor than it does against it.\u000a\u000aThe only downside is you don't get the free protection from mom, so you just side her out for more relevant cards. +p538 +aVIt's probably fine in Legacy. It's a bit different than the (more popular) Modern versions, since it needs to run Chalice of the Void and Trinisphere to not get demolished by Storm combo, and the fast mana is a little less busted due to the popularity of Wasteland. It is comparable to a deck that has existed for years, MUD, and that deck was never broken. So I think it will be fine in Legacy.\u000a\u000aModern, though? Well, historically, Legacy decks have done very well in Modern... +p539 +aVIt's basically a better aggro mud/stompy style deck, something the format could honestly use. It still losses to most unfair matchups since it can't play force. The deck exists in legacy but it will probably not every be oppressive there. +p540 +aVPlaying chalice means your unfair MUs aren't the worst, they do sometimes kill you turn 1 but otherwise, it's rough for them to actually play magic. +p541 +aVYep, seems to be fitting in well power-level wise so far +p542 +aVStop playing Modern. +p543 +aVno rational people were calling for TNN or Twin to be banned. \u000aEldrazi is getting close to being 50% of the meta. This SCG tournament going on right now is proof that the deck needs something banned (Eye) +p544 +aVThe format will die. +p545 +aVHonestly, there's just no way they won't ban Eldrazi. I could MAYBE see them waiting for the next modern PT. They banned Twin saying that it didn't allow any other blue deck, and that it was always winning. If they banned twin to "freshen" the format, then there's just no way they'd let Eldrazi stay. +p546 +aVI could see them not banning the eldrazi, but unbanning *a lot* of stuff in the hope that something could keep up and people wouldn't be too grumpy about their decks being banned. +p547 +aVPeople will probably stop playing Modern for a while. +p548 +aVPlay it or lose most of the time. +p549 +aVIt tells me it's time to sell out of modern entirely. +p550 +aVThe format will most likely die as players stop playing it +p551 +aVIf they don't ban the Eldrazi, Eternal may really become a thing +p552 +aVInstead they print things like [[engineered plague]], [[wasteland]], [[innocent blood]], [[chainer's edict]], and/ or [[damnation]] in SO I along with unbanning 80% of the b/r list in order to "shake things up" at next modern pt event and see what happens. +p553 +aVChainer's Edict would be an interesting reprint. I'm not sure if any deck would play it though. Also, it would be tough to actually reprint since it references an old character. +p554 +aVI would prefer diabolic edict but think the flashback is too flavorful for soi to not choose over diabolic\u000a\u000aAlso chainer was in the block that introduced madness +p555 +aV##### \u000a\u000a###### \u000a\u000a#### \u000a \u000a[wasteland](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=wasteland&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=wasteland) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!wasteland) \u000a[innocent blood](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=innocent blood&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=innocent blood) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!innocent blood) \u000a[damnation](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=damnation&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=damnation) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!damnation) \u000a[chainer's edict](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=chainer's edict&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=chainer's edict) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!chainer's edict) \u000a[engineered plague](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=engineered plague&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=engineered plague) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!engineered plague) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p556 +aVPlay more D&D +p557 +aVAlmost at the same time as the next ban list update, is the release of Eternal Masters. Coincidence? +p558 +aVThe intention of EMA is NOT to get a bunch of people into modern. There's going to be a limited set run of EMA and wizards is going to sell 100% of it because the cards are going to be valuable whether more people start playing legacy or not. Wizards isn't going to make huge profits with EMA that are worth destroying a popular format for. +p559 +aVNext banlist update is in April when SOI hits. Eternal Masters comes out in June. +p560 +aVThat's only one month. Essentially the same time. +p561 +aV2 months +p562 +aVDepends on your understanding of a month, currently only a full month of March is between now and April. +p563 +aVThey will almost certainly not emergency ban anything. The only way I see that happening is if the person organizing GP Detroit literally sends a pair of goons to break some knees over in Renton or if every Modern afficionado mails WotC an envelope full of dog shit.\u000a\u000aWhat would be nice is an acknowledgement that they screwed up and that things will be rectified come April.\u000a\u000aIn the meantime, I will be enjoying my new hobby, [Netrunner](/r/netrunner). +p564 +aV> Modern afficionado mails WotC an envelope full of dog shit.\u000a\u000asign me up get me a address +p565 +aV> or if every Modern afficionado mails WotC an envelope full of dog shit.\u000a\u000ahttp://dicksbymail.com/ +p566 +aVYou don't by any chance happen to have Aaron Forsythe's home mailing address do you?\u000a +p567 +aVPeople aren't leaving the game.\u000a\u000aThe ONLY time Wizards has done an emergency ban was when 1. Fewer people overall played the game and 2. People were leaving because the format (standard) was so degenerate. \u000a\u000aGuess what? People aren't leaving... These cards we are seeing in Modern are being printed in a standard (a format the is NOT broken) legal set and WotC is probably going to show one of the best Q1s in their history. Why in the hell would they do an emergency ban? +p568 +aVHard to compare standard to modern using the same cards. As modern has lands that break the cards like eye of ugin and eldrazi temple. If standard has those lands in the block you guys would all be playing eldrazi or bitching that it's too strong +p569 +aVIt is hard, because WotC makes more money off of Standard. People too often WotC isn't here to make the format better immediately after there is a problem. WotC is here to make money. Packs are flying off the shelves and people aren't leaving the game.\u000a\u000aEmergency bans don't make money, the ONLY emergency ban in history was done to get people to invest in the game again. If I remember correctly, you could actually mail in your memory jars to WotC and they would send you a brand new sealed booster. That's how badly they wanted people to come back.\u000a\u000aThey will wait until April. If anyone left, they will most likely come back once the format has been corrected. +p570 +aVAn emergency ban to fix a non-Standard format would take even more broken-ness. That and it would hurt player confidence in Modern (which's not exactly good) even more. +p571 +aVEither way people lose confidence. Emergency bans tell players their cards can be banned at any moment; not banning obviously broken cards is neglecting the format. People who bought Eldrazi to spike the GPs will be annoyed if it's killed; people who didn't will be annoyed if they have to play against it. There's no course of action now that keeps everyone happy. The solution is not making catastrophic development mistakes. It's hard to get that toothpaste back in the tube though. \u000a\u000aPersonally, I think the Modern playerbase is sophisticated enough to understand that we're in a unique situation. An emergency ban on Eye doesn't mean players need to fear a snap-ban of their Platings, for example. Modern players are also invested enough that they're motivated to stay long-term. As such, I don't think either course of action dooms the format. I would prefer to see them save the March GPs. If even if they don't, I won't be leaving the format. I'm guessing most others won't either. +p572 +aVI fully agree. Both options are going to hurt player confidence, but my impression from following people like Aaron Forsythe, Sam Stoddard and Mark Rosewater on social media is that they think an emergency ban would be the worse option.\u000a\u000aPersonally I'd rather see these cards go before the GPs, but that's very unlikely to happen.\u000a\u000aI also agree that the appeal and demand for a format like Modern is so big that it will still grow even as WotC screws up managing it all the time. +p573 +aVI say they wait at the very least until the next Modern Grand Prix. No need for an emergency ban at the moment. Mirrodin Standard was more degenerate. Combo Winter was more degenerate. This meta is bad don't get me wrong, but nowhere near the other two metas I mentioned. +p574 +aVThis is far more degenerate than combo winter or mirrodin standard. +p575 +aVI suspect that's only because in Modern it's very cost-prohibitive to switch decks. Otherwise 50% or more of the field would play some variant. +p576 +aVIsn't nearly 50% already playing it? I could be wrong, but I seem to remember a stat that said 47% somewhere.\u000a\u000a\u000a\u000aI agree with it being cost prohibitive to switch. I just went to standard for a while until things calm down. +p577 +aV47% of the people in day 2 of the last SCG open were on eldarzi +p578 +aVThat was the Day Two meta breakdown at the most recent SCG Open +p579 +aVThe problem with emergency bans is that it tells players that their cards can be effectively be taken away from them at any time. This shakes peoples confidence in the game, and the feel-bads of a ban out of nowhere when people have just bought in to a deck can cause them to quit entirely. One of the keys to keeping people involved in something is to have as few exit points as possible - and in Magic, a banning is an exit point because it means someone no longer gets to play the way they want to.\u000a\u000aAlso, by only banning things at predetermined times throughout the year, players can acquire cards and know what the minimum amount of time they'll have to play them is. Of course, unexpected bannings produce a similar result. No one worried for very long about the health of the format when Birthing Pod got banned, because people were starting to believe the deck might be too powerful. But this year, Splinter Twin got banned and people got scared because it seemed to be from out of nowhere. The simultaneous Summer Bloom ban is never the meat of their evidence for why they worry, and that's because part of Amulet Bloom was *expected* to be banned. \u000a\u000aAnd imagine if you were a Twin player who bought in to Eldrazi only to see it another unexpected banning - who could blame you for your faith in Modern being destroyed, or if you walked away from Magic entirely?\u000a\u000aWizards of the Coast knows those things. The emergency ban of [[Memory Jar]] came about because the game was in such bad shape that the ban *increased* confidence in the game rather than decreased it. For context: they had tons of people leave the game during Combo Winter when if your deck didn't have a turn two kill, it was too slow. (Heck, I was one of them; I didn't come back for years). Urza's Saga came out in October 1998; [[Tolarian Academy]] and [[Windfall]] were banned in December because there were a ton of cheap artifacts and fast mana; 6 mana available turn one was no big deal and Windfall just meant you could draw 7 cards because your opponent hadn't had a turn yet but you'd just played out your entire hand. Those bans weren't enough, and March saw the [[Dream Halls]], [[Earthcraft]], [[Fluctuator]], [[Lotus Petal]], [[Recurring Nightmare]], and [[Time Spiral]] get banned and power level errata for creatures like [[Cloud of Faeries]] (which were revoked in 2006), and Standard was finally in decent shape. The only time Wizards has banned more cards at once was when they defanged affinity - and three quarters of those cards were the artifact lands. Just after the March 1999 regular bannings, the Memory Jar (from the just relased Urza's Legacy) / [[Megrim]] combo emerged and it was just as fast as the other combos thanks to things like [[Tinker]]. A new combo threatened to undo the work the bans were starting to do to restore confidence in the game, so it had to go. Modern isn't in good shape at the moment but it's nowhere near that bad, and the Banned and Restricted list update coming April 4 means the Eldrazi menace will have only lasted for two months rather than the 5-6 that Combo Winter lasted. If they only ban one of the two Eldrazi lands and Eldrazi decks are just as oppressive, *then* we may see an emergency ban. +p580 +aV##### \u000a\u000a###### \u000a\u000a#### \u000a \u000a[Earthcraft](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Earthcraft&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Earthcraft) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Earthcraft) \u000a[Fluctuator](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Fluctuator&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Fluctuator) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Fluctuator) \u000a[Dream Halls](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Dream Halls&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dream Halls) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Dream Halls) \u000a[Time Spiral](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Time Spiral&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Time Spiral) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Time Spiral) \u000a[Cloud of Faeries](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Cloud of Faeries&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Cloud of Faeries) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Cloud of Faeries) \u000a[Memory Jar](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Memory Jar&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Memory Jar) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Memory Jar) \u000a[Windfall](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Windfall&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Windfall) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Windfall) \u000a[Tinker](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Tinker&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Tinker) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Tinker) \u000a[Tolarian Academy](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Tolarian Academy&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Tolarian Academy) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Tolarian Academy) \u000a[Recurring Nightmare](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Recurring Nightmare&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Recurring Nightmare) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Recurring Nightmare) \u000a[Lotus Petal](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Lotus Petal&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Lotus Petal) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Lotus Petal) \u000a[Megrim](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Megrim&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Megrim) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Megrim) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p581 +aVhttp://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/extended-thoughts-2003-11-14\u000a\u000aI want you to read that entire article before you respond to me (if ever you do).\u000a\u000aNow to answer your question, the reason Eldrazi hasn't caused an emergency banning is threefold:\u000a\u000a* It isn't dominant in Standard, Modern, Legacy, **AND** Vintage. Only modern is being plagued by the deck.\u000a\u000a* Magic: the Gathering is **NOT** fresh off of a game wide broken Era such as combo winter. Before now, all formats were healthy.\u000a\u000a* Failing to emergency ban Eldrazi right this instant does **NOT** threaten to kill the game off. Magic as a game was in a really shaky place when [[Memory Jar]] was printed. Another couple months of that type of degenerate game play threatened to cause players to quit the game, across all formats, in a time when the game had little chance to recover from such a blow to fan base confidence.\u000a\u000aTo conclude my statement, while Eldrazi is a degenerate deck, and certainly warrants a ban of some sort **AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME** , Wizards wisely understands that an itchy trigger finger on the ban hammer would do much more harm than good with regard to restoring customer confidence in the game. People are already salty enough about misguided bannings in modern and forcefully retiring their favorite decks, showing the community that cards could be banned at any moment would just rub more salt in that already open, weeping wound. +p582 +aV \u000a[Memory Jar](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Memory Jar&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Memory Jar) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Memory Jar) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p583 +aVBecause it sets a bad precedent.\u000a\u000aBreaking the B&R schedule only fuels this talk the next time something broken comes out. We'll be in the exact same spot except there's 2 cards to point to when calling for emergency bans. \u000a\u000a*Even if*, these numbers are combo winter levels of degeneracy, MtG is much bigger now. WotC is not going to kill the MtG brand by waiting a month and a half. \u000a\u000aThis also isn't standard; it's not an on ramp for MtG so they're not too worried about losing new players. Despite your frustration; it sounds like you're still going to Detroit. Not only are you not leaving magic, you're not even leaving the format.\u000a\u000aJust be patient; it'll blow over. +p584 +aVIf something breaks to the same extent I'd want it emergency banned as well. What is wrong with recognizing degeneracy in the format and attempting to fix it as problems arise? +p585 +aVIf only there were some sort of system in place to deal with degenerate decks... +p586 +aVIt's not a degenerate deck. Amulet was degenerate. Storm was a bit degenerate.\u000a\u000aThis is broken. +p587 +aVFor context: [This is jar](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2IZ5OOJx0M). You may disagree, but eldrazi is no jar. I'm far more comfortable comparing it to TC delver, storm and amulet than jar. \u000a\u000aBroken? Degenerate? Is there a scale I'm not aware of? Was twin *imba* but not quite degenerate-tier? How do you measure the difference? How does this translate to other games? This raises so many questions.\u000a\u000aThe most important difference is that worst case scenario, eldrazi kills modern. Compared to, worst case scenario, jar kills mtg. +p588 +aVUpcoming modern gp weekend. +p589 +aVThe only reason to do an emergency banning is if they are legitimately scared for the health of the game. Sure, Modern sucks right now, but the attendance at SCG Louisville was pretty high, and we'll see how the attendance is at the modern GPs soon. April isn't that far away, and if the game's health isn't in danger, they will (and should) wait until then. +p590 +aVThere has only ever been one emergency ban in the history of Magic. It's not clear what will make them do it again. This isn't the most broken a format has been since Urza's Legacy, and those more broken formats didn't cause emergency bans. \u000a\u000a"The format is unhealthy" isn't good enough for an emergency ban, because again, formats have been much more unhealthy than this and not caused them. +p591 +aV>This isn't the most broken a format has been since Urza's Legacy, and those more broken formats didn't cause emergency bans.\u000a\u000aYes it is. Since Urza's Legacy. +p592 +aVYea, they have, and that's a problem. So I'm asking why not take the steps to correct the problem? Why not make the ban now so people will have more fun and player confidence in wizards ability to actually recognize what is broken and what isn't (ala twin) is established. Why is an emergency ban such hollowed ground when the format is clearly broken? +p593 +aVBecause if they do it once, people will ask/fear for an emergency ban every time a deck does well. +p594 +aVAnd if that deck does as well as this it should also be banned off-schedule. If it isn't then they just won't do it. They're not slaves to our will or the reserved list would never have existed. +p595 +aVThey didn´t even emergency ban caw blade when it was 80% of the meta. So there is no reason to emergency ban this. Yes it´s strong, but april isn´t that long of a wait. +p596 +aVThat's because Caw-Blade was fun and skill-intensive even if it got a bit boring after a while. And it wasn't 80% of the meta. +p597 +aVhttp://modernnexus.com/on-banning-and-beating-eldrazi/ Says it better than I do. Wizards has to identify the problem cards, and a few months of horrible meta game isn't really the end of the world +p598 +aVThe problem card is Eye of Ugin. +p599 +aVWizards probably have already identified the problem cards through MTGO. MTGO provides more actionable data for them than watching the few matches from GP/Open coverage. MTGO has hundreds(if not more) of Modern matches each day. They've probably collected more data from the Modern league in the weeks since the pro tour than there will be collectively at the three GPs in March. +p600 +aVWhat do think the chances are that something in the deck doesn't get banned. If it does, at what point do you see people already losing all the value from the deck? I have already seen 2 stores in my area, that won't trade or buy for Eye or Temple unless they have someone waiting to buy it. I know most of the rest will still maintain some value, as they are decent in standard. I personally think, at this point if you have the deck for the up coming GP, unless you win it or cash well, you are pretty much in the same boat as if they banned it today. What do you think? +p601 +aVIf something in the deck doesn't get banned then the format dies. +p602 +aVBasically wizards dons't want to admit they are stupid and fucked up. So we have to wait on the usual timeline. +p603 +aVSelling OTG packs. +p604 +aVEmergency Bans are only for things that the Meta cannot adjust to. Clearly the meta can adjust, we just need to wait. Until April. When the bans come. And the list will include: Cranial Plating and Simian Spirit Guide. That's it. Nothing Else. Meta will continue to adjust. +p605 +aVSimian Spirit Guide is good for Magic. It helps combo decks. Combo decks are a good thing, because they punish the linear aggro decks that dominate Modern. +p606 +aV'Twas a joke. But yeah I completely agree. The combo decks took the place of Twin in the "don't just tap out now, I might go off next turn". +p607 +aVThe issue with the enchantment decks typically is you can't get enough card selection to win consistently without giving up too much tempo to win consistently. Matchups hinge on cards like ghostly prison or suppression field, but if you don't hit the key card on curve you just get annihilated. \u000a\u000aThe only way you're beating eldrazi is RW prison in my opinion, with blood moons, chained to the rocks and journey to nowhere. You need to reliably be killing stuff or shutting them down every game. \u000a\u000aI had some really, really good luck with the RW version with Starfield+Journey+outpost siege combo back when I was working on this archetype, and being able to interact early with chained and journey was the key to success. +p608 +aVI've run my Mono-White and Boros Enchantment Control decks a few times at my LGS, which has been swarming with Eldrazi players since the Pro Tour.\u000a\u000aIt's just...okay. Porphyry Nodes is often too slow when the Eldrazi player is able to smash you for 8-12 damage on turn two, and it takes time to whittle away their creatures. By the time you do, you might be nearly dead. Ghostly Prison is fine, but you can't hide behind it forever; eventually the Eldrazi player is just going to draw enough lands to pay the tax and attack you. Since Stax-type builds struggle to close out the game quickly anyway, it's not as favourable as you'd think. \u000a\u000a Really the only surefire way of winning is if you manage to stick a Sphere of Safety or an Ensnaring Bridge, but post-sideboard the Eldrazi player is going to have ways to deal with them. And if you don't draw them, you're just going to eventually get smashed. You basically have to get lucky draws and a good opening hand to carry the day.\u000a\u000aThe plus side is that Chalice of the Void is often dead against a deck like Enchantment Control, as most relevant targets cost three mana. Additionally, main deck Leyline of Sanctity can shut off Thought-Knot Seer, and Runed Halo is an incredibly versatile card. For the most part, though, you're completely at the mercy of variance. They either kill you before you can set up or you draw well and stall long enough to field threats.\u000a\u000aPersonally, I've had much more success with Martyr-Proc than with any kind of Stax build. You have a ton of life gain, main deck wraths to deal with threats, and an endless stream of chump-blockers by recurring Squadron Hawks. Plus, there are very few ways an Eldrazi player can deal with a 6/6 Serra Ascendant on the battlefield. Even if they Chalice for one, you can just Proc your one-drops from the graveyard to the battlefield without casting them. +p609 +a. diff --git a/miracles_comments.pickle b/miracles_comments.pickle new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c32ac48 --- /dev/null +++ b/miracles_comments.pickle @@ -0,0 +1,186 @@ +(lp0 +V-1. There's not a stock list as much as say, RUG delver. The consensus is, don't start with the legends build as you'll have clunkier opening hands. [Here's my list](http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=94584), for reference, which isn't very far off what most everyone seems to be on. \u000a\u000a-2. Lately, the variants have been two mentors main, legendary miracles, or the classic jace/entreat-only as win-conditions. The community is also split it seems on how many predicts is currently right.\u000a\u000a-3a. We'll start bad matchups: 12-Post, MUD, Shardless BUG are the most common ones you'd face in tournament that aren't super favored. 12-Post is probably a 90-10 matchup, and that could be generous. Goblins is also bad, but I wouldn't care too much about that, it's not worth a dedicated sideboard slot in a large tournament.\u000a\u000a-3b. Good matchups, you're likely favored against a good number of decks you'd expect to play, if only slightly. Miracles doesn't have many times you'll sit down and have a practical bye. I've found Elves to be my easiest matchup as far as common decks you'd play.\u000a\u000a-4. The deck luckily contains many pieces for many other decks. It'd be quite easy to transition to most stoneblade/delver decks/the esper mentor lists running around.\u000a\u000a-5. If you prefer control, Miracles is the answer. It's the most dedicated control deck in the format. I've found myself liking Tezzerator as well though, if I really have to list an alternate control deck.\u000a\u000aHope this helps. :) +p1 +aV1/2- The most popular variants are the 4 ponder lists from the EU pros and Lossett's Karakas Legends builds. The legends build tends to have a better Sneak and Show match up but the Ponder build has better consistency. Lists- http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=11557&d=265766&f=LE\u000a\u000ahttp://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=98922\u000a\u000a\u000a3- For the most part Miracles has fair game against most of the field. 12 post is by far the worst match up and there's really not too much you can do about it, and MUD can be difficult at times as well. Shardless can be fairly grindy because they can keep up with your card advantage and kill your balances with decay.\u000a\u000a4- I don't feel like Wizards cares about Legacy enough to ban anything from the deck, but if they did it would most likely be Terminus. It doesn't cripple the deck by any means but it wouldn't be the undisputed top deck. Honestly Legacy's in a good place so I doubt a banning on Terminus but don't quote me on that because Wizards will do what they want. You can pretty easily build a UWR stoneblade or Delver shell from most of the staples from the deck.\u000a\u000a5- If you haven't tried it before, you could try to play a Delver tempo shell. You play the beat down but you've also got control elements similar to what modern UWR's trying to do. If that's not your cup of tea a Stoneblade shell might be for you if you want to be a little more grindy. +p2 +aVTiny trick about balance that took me a disturbingly long time to see: if they use decay and you have a fetch, still use the counterbalance trigger. You might not want to draw that card. +p3 +aVAnother subtle trick, to keep that train rolling: If your opponent is on Abrupt Decay, and you plan to fetch and then spin the top, you should spin first-hold priority-fetch. \u000a\u000aThis way, if they destroy your top in response to the fetchland, you will still get a look at the fresh 3 cards. +p4 +aVOf course you should still do this, but now that I'm thinking about it I feel like the players online might have gotten better at playing against miracles over the past year. It's been a long time since anyone tried to decay my top in response to a fetch or force of will my turn 1 divining top. The latter used to happen all the time. +p5 +aV1. [This](http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=11557&d=265766&f=LE) is pretty close to stock, though some prefer the 4th terminus to the 3rd Jace, 2nd Counterspell, or 3rd Snapcaster.\u000a\u000a2. The most popular variant is the Legends version with Karakas, Venser, and Vendilion cliques main; spearheaded by Joe Losset, afaik. It's a strong take on the deck, but it mostly adds a sizable chunk of cash to the cost to raise the skill ceiling a little higher. There have also been lists in the past capitalizing on other cards, but we haven't seen major Miracles placings with any of them in a long while. \u000a\u000a3. Miracles is great against most of the unfair decks and has some trouble against most of the creature decks. There are some exceptions, but that's how most of it's matchups work. 12-post will slaughter you.\u000a\u000a4. The deck is already very close to stoneblade. Whether stoneblade's lack of showings recently is because the deck isn't strong enough for the meta or because Miracles is stronger and simply cannibalized most of Stoneblade's meta share is hard to say without actually seeing the results of the ban.\u000a\u000a5. I built miracles and got bored. If you played Twin before the ban and are looking for something like it, I've been loving Lands for it's ability to go long game when I want it to and to combo out when I want it to. If you have been on UWR for a while and you are looking to durdle it up, miracles could be right up your ally. +p6 +aV> Miracles is great against most of the unfair decks and has some trouble against most of the creature decks.\u000a\u000aUh... it's closer to the opposite, actually. +p7 +aVUnfavorable matchups: most delver variants, D&T, Shardless, 12-Post, Lands, Merfolk, and most Stompy decks.\u000a\u000aFavorable matchups: ANT/TES, Elves, Dredge, S&T/S&S, Reanimator, Stoneblade, and Burn. \u000a\u000aThat was my experience with the deck; is that different from what you experienced? +p8 +aVDnt here. It's in favor of miracles if I don't have a resolved vial. If I resolve vial it's slightly in my favor. At least in my experience +p9 +aVWhether or not Merfolk is a good or bad matchup for Miracles depends on if Merfolk is running Chalice. If Merfolk are using Chalice, that tips it a little in favor of Merfolk. If Merfolk isn't running chalice, it's pretty favorable for Miracles. +p10 +aVTotally true. I was under the impression that Chalice was just a given in Merfolk these days, but I could see it being a real metagame choice. +p11 +aVThis is how I would rank things: \u000a\u000a\u000a(hardest) \u000a\u000a12-post, goblins \u000aSnS, reanimator, enchantress, eldrazi \u000amud, jund, aggro-loam, 4c lands, burn, \u000ashardless, merfolk, \u000a\u000a-- miracles, DnT, infect \u000a\u000agrixis, rug, ur, rg lands, esper stoneblade, deathblade \u000aant, bug (hymn) \u000auwr, elves, \u000anic fit, maverick \u000a\u000a(easiest) \u000a\u000a\u000a-------\u000a\u000a(Blue color combinations with nothing else indicate the appropriate delver deck. e.g. "grixis" = grixis delver, "rug" = rug delver, etc.)\u000a\u000aI would guess most people will disagree with me on the placement of shardless and infect (saying they should be ranked as more difficult), but I've found that with practice and the correct sideboarding strategy, they are really not very hard. +p12 +aVVery different. \u000a\u000aDelver decks are generally easy, and our good matchups vs. them are a big part of why miracles is such a good metagame choice. The fact that you list them in the "unfavorable" category seriously makes me doubt the validity of your experience/skill piloting the deck. \u000a\u000aYou also have SnS, reanimator, and burn in the "favorable" category, when in my experience they are unfavorable. RG lands is a good matchup. I feel favored against most stompy decks, except for sylvan plug, though this is probably depend on sideboards (I run 2 council's between main and sb, so chalice decks are less of a problem for me). +p13 +aVLands is nowhere near favored vs miracles unless the miracles player is bad. Storm vs miracles is also closer to 50/50. +p14 +aVSnS is most definitely not a favorable matchup for miracles. Burn isn't anymore either, with firecraft in the mix. +p15 +aVRead all Phillipschoneggers stuff. +p16 +aV1.\u000a\u000aCore Miracles Pieces\u000a\u000a* 3-4 Swords to Plowshares\u000a* 4 Sensei's Divining Top\u000a* 3-4 Counterbalance\u000a* 4 Brainstorm\u000a* 4 Force of Will\u000a* 1-2 Counterspell\u000a* 0-4 Ponder\u000a* 3-4 Terminus\u000a* 2-3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor\u000a* 0-2 Entreat the Angels\u000a* 0-2 Vendilion Clique\u000a* 0-4 Snapcaster Mage\u000a* 8 blue fetches\u000a* 1-2 white//red fetches\u000a* 2-3 Tundra\u000a* 0-3 Volcanic Island\u000a* 0-1 Mountain\u000a* 1-2 Plains\u000a* 3-5 Island\u000a\u000aJust off the top of my head. +p17 +aVcore of the deck:\u000a\u000a 8 blue fetches\u000a 2 Arid Mesa\u000a 3 Tundra\u000a 2 Volcanic Island\u000a 4 Island\u000a 2 Plains\u000a \u000a 4 Ponder\u000a 4 Brainstorm\u000a 4 Sensei's Divining Top\u000a \u000a 4 Swords to Plowshares\u000a 4 Terminus\u000a \u000a 4 Force of Will\u000a 4 Counterbalance\u000a 1 Counterspell\u000a \u000a 3 Snapcaster Mage\u000a 3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor\u000a\u000a flex slots: (choose 4) \u000a 1-2 of: \u000a 1 Counterspell\u000a 1 Council's Judgment\u000a\u000a 2-3 of: \u000a 1-2 Entreat the Angels\u000a 1-2 Monastery Mentor\u000a 1 Predict\u000a\u000a ------- \u000a sideboard (essential): \u000a 3 Pyroblast\u000a 2 Vendilion Clique\u000a 2 Flusterstorm\u000a \u000a 2 Disenchant\u000a 1 Rest in Peace\u000a\u000a sideboard (flex slots, non-comprehensive):\u000a 1 Council's Judgment (essential if the 1st in the 75, flex otherwise) \u000a 1 Monastery Mentor\u000a 1 Blood Moon\u000a 1 Izzet Staticaster\u000a 1 Flusterstorm\u000a 1 Vendillion Clique\u000a 2 extra gy hate\u000a\u000aThis is the core of the 4 ponder build, which is the most popular version (probably about 85% of miracles builds). There are other builds, including a predict-heavy build (removes the white win conditions for more controlling elements), legends-karakas, and rip-helm (don't play this), but worry about those later. 4 ponder is the best one to start with if you're new to the deck. +p18 +aVMiracles isn't actually oppressive at all, and occupies a MUCH smaller size of the meta when you remove MTGO results.\u000a\u000aMiracles is by far the cheapest tier one deck on MTGO, so it's played left and right.\u000aThis is not the case when it comes to paper. (For example: a set of Rishadan Ports are more expensive than 2 sets of power 9)\u000a\u000a\u000aThe honest truth is that the deck isn't overpowered, but many people don't like control so they'd rather see it banned.\u000a\u000aWill it get banned? I hope not, the meta is fine as it is. If Modern has taught us anything it is that if it isn't broken, you shouldn't try to fix it. +p19 +aVDepends on the local meta as well, in oslo we have something like 5-6 miracles players and the problem is round times and slow toppers. +p20 +aVYou shouldn't take more than 5 seconds to rearrange your top 3 cards, anything over 15 seconds is grounds for slow play in my opinion. +p21 +aVThe honest answere is if they are going to ban something in Legacy the highest chance is that it is something from Miracles, i personly think it will not be top but terminus. \u000a\u000aBut there are rearly bans in legacy and after the modern ban debacle, i don't think the next ban will heave any changes, besides maybe unbans. \u000a\u000aSo Miracles is the deck with the highest risk in the format but still the % is realy low. +p22 +aVHonestly I've always seen the problem to be counterbalance. It's a chalice of the void but only for your opponent. Which is quiet broken. \u000a\u000a\u000aBut regards to the question at hand. I can't see them banning out anything from miracles. Its great to have a real control deck. There's nothing really wrong with it. And if we do ban miracles everyone better get ready for our ANT overlords. +p23 +aVI think that's a poor estimation of it. Counterbalance is what makes the deck, but terminus is what pushes it over the top. There are other CB lock decks, and none of them are oppressive. It's a two card combo that dies to one of the most prevalent removal spells in the format. \u000a\u000a\u000aLegacy seems like a format where, when bans are appropriate, they don't aim to kill, or even maim decks, they just clip their fingernails enough to put them back in line.\u000a\u000a\u000aAdditionally, I'll admit a little bias. this is kind of a ban that I want to see happen because terminus is what takes that deck and makes it I fun to play against. 1 mana boardwipes too easily push fair decks out of the format. Maverick, for instance would jump at least a tier if miracles had to resort to supreme verdict. +p24 +aVAs someone who has played it for years i agree with digitalpsycho it will not be tops that will get banned from miracles (because tops are needed in other decks that are in a good place 12 post, high tide, Painter's Servant) it would be terminus. because a 1 white tuck all creatures is good. +p25 +aV>So Miracles is the deck with the highest risk in the format but still the % is realy low.\u000a\u000aAgreed. The only way I see something getting banned is if they first print something new that's super strong in miracles and pushes it over the edge +p26 +aVWell, with a new return to Innistrad coming out soon, if any new miracles were to be printed, the time would be "soon". +p27 +aVMiracles is kind of a feel-bad mechanic though and I don't expect them to make more miracle cards in the new sets. +p28 +aVOh look, here's the Bonfire I just topdecked. Have fun! +p29 +aVMiracles' stock in the format hasn't much changed since the DTT ban, and it's just more-or-less back to where it was before Cruise/Dig were printed. As /u/Digitalpsycho said it's probably the highest-risk deck in the format, but if they were gonna ban something from it I suspect they would have by now. +p30 +aVI'd be shocked if they banned something from miracles. Yeah, it's a good deck, but you can't just pick it up and clean up a SCG or a GP. It's a lot of practice to play well, and if you sequence even a little bit wrong, you can just get killed. \u000a\u000aIf they ban something (Top) it's not going to be because of power, but because of logistics. Miracles usually puts 0-1 people into T8 of big events, which is par for a deck that's 8-12% of the meta, so power level is par. The real problem is slow players taking too much time at tournaments. But SeaTac went off mostly without hitches, so I can't see them doing it in the future unless a whole bunch of people pick up miracles and start playing very slowly at big events. \u000a\u000aWhich, incidentally, could be solved by calling slow play on your opponents. If someone looks at a top for longer than 15 seconds, and they knew two cards already, I start nudging them. +p31 +aVI think a lot of the discussion about banning miracles pieces comes from how WotC handles modern. They've never really banned cards in legacy because a few too many people were playing a deck, they ban because cards are broken. Banning a piece of miracles would be a major shift in legacy ban philosophy. +p32 +aVTop's only issue in the format is how it slows matches down drastically. The complaint is it causes slow play, and I personally have joined that train. I haven't run Top in the past 2 years. Sure, my decks aren't as consistent as they could be, but I don't enjoy playing Top for Top's sake. But I don't think it's overpowered, and I'm completely fine with people running it in a CounterTop package. +p33 +aVIf Top is causing slowplay, prompt your opponent to player faster. If that doesn't work, call a judge. Problem solved. +p34 +aVI have numerous times. In my experience judges seems very hesitant to actually punish for slowplay. The worst was when I went up against a D&T player who showed up late to a game 1 loss, and then obviously tried to drag game 2 out to a draw. 3 times I called a judge, but it wasn't until we went to turns until they actually did anything about his 3 minute EoT Top activations staring at 3 lands. +p35 +aVThat sucks, and sounds like the judge wasn't doing a very good job, but it is nowhere near to being a good reason to ban top. +p36 +aVTop is only as slow as the player. So if a player is not good with the deck, or topping (which we have seen a lot of since the influx of miracles players that were attracted during the DTT meta), then they top slower. Otherwise,imo, it's no slower than a brainstorm in response to something or a ponder. A good miracles player should be able to quickly assess what is or is not needed on the top of the library at that time. +p37 +aVRight. And the more you know your deck and the matchup, the less time you spend looking at 3 cards. The problem with Top is it can fit in anywhere being colorless, and the fact that you can look whenever you can pay 1, where as Brainstorm requires blue and you can only play 4 copies. +p38 +aVAren't we talking about SDT in the context of Miracles though? And considering SDT is only heavily played in Miracles as well... +p39 +aVI went off on a general format rant. Top sees lots of play in rogue lists, and slows decks down. It's become less of a problem IMO over the last 2 years. All I'm saying is if they ban a piece from Miracles (which I don't think they will), Top is a top candidate (no pun intended) if they want to deal with a long held, albeit somewhat quiet, complaint about Top's slowing the format down. Additionally, Top going away instead of Terminus or Entreat allows the deck to exist without the same consistency, which is a WotC-like move. +p40 +aV>Additionally, Top going away instead of Terminus or Entreat allows the deck to exist without the same consistency, which is a WotC-like move. \u000a\u000aThe core card that holds the entire deck together is SDT. Take that away, and you've made the deck unplayable. +p41 +aV>Otherwise,imo, it's no slower than a brainstorm in response to something or a ponder.\u000a\u000aDifference being that you generally don't cast brainstorm 30 times in a game. Whether or not it is too slow or not is debatable but denying that top does, in fact, extend the time a match takes to complete is nonsense. Personally, I'm of the opinion that terminus is the real problem card of the deck if we are discussing time issues. +p42 +aV> Personally, I'm of the opinion that terminus is the real problem card of the deck if we are discussing time issues.\u000a\u000aAhh, so wrath of god should be banned because it slows down games too much. Gotcha. +p43 +aVIf wrath of god was a cmc 1 instant that you couldn't interact with via hand disruption. +p44 +aVLast I checked, wrath of god didn't have to be miracled from the top of your library... +p45 +aVIf that were a serious issue miracles would not be the premier counterbalance deck 4 years running. Are you really trying to suggest that wrath of god and terminus with top in your deck are even comparable? \u000a\u000aGet real. The simple fact of the matter is that the hyper efficient nature of terminus and the way that the miracle mechanic naturally functions means that the soft counter magic that is dominant in legacy is fairly ineffective against terminus and hand disruption is nearly moot against it. With that in mind the only two truly effective methods off counterplay is to play extremely conservatively with your threats and have hard counterspells (barring, of course, repeatable tutors and non-creature threats). With this the ability to get in underneath the soft lock off countertop is eliminated (which was one of the best ways to beat counterbalance decks if yore) and the game is forced to go long. With fair games forced to go long the counterbalance deck can afford to minimize threats and lean hard on the counterbalance lock which will cause the games to take even longer.\u000a\u000aEliminating terminus from the equation means that the countertop player can no longer depend in the game to go long and they will need to take a much more proactive role. With the control player in a more proactive role the length off games is reduced.\u000a\u000aWhile it is certainly debatable whether or not the problem presented by the miracles deck is significant enough to warrant action it is nonsense to deny that it does present a logistics issue. If the conclusion of that debate is that the issues presented by the miracles deck do warrant action terminus is the first card I would go after for the reasons outlined above combined with the fact that eliminating terminus does not necessarily eliminate countertop while eliminating countertop does eliminate decks from running terminus. +p46 +aVI'm not denying it slows down games, but it's an element of what is effectively a draw go control deck strategy, regardless of top being there control strategies will make games go longer. I agree that terminus is the most problematic card in the deck, but I don't think anything deserves the ban hammer. The format is healthy. +p47 +aVI remember distinctly LSV saying something to the effect of "I should get to use Top, it isn't *my* fault that everyone else doesn't know what they are doing..." when talking about Top being banned in modern. Just a quick little fun fact. +p48 +aVit does feel bad when cards have to be banned because of bad players though. just give slow play warnings more readily and actually give a game loss for it once in a while. give people who play slowly a reason to play quicker. +p49 +aVIf Wizards want to ban Miracles, they would have done it already. Just get the cards and join the bandwagon. +p50 +aVBecause legacy isn't a PT format they generally just let the metagame sort itself out. Miracles isn't without weakness. Shardless has a decent matchup vs it for instance. +p51 +aVThe deck is incredibly strong, but ultimately fair. It is good at countering spells, but quite weak to resolved noncreature permanents, with only Pyroblast and REB as answers to a Jace, and next to nothing to get rid of a Liliana. The worst strike against it is the fact that new/poor players draw rounds in paper because they don't know what they're doing/don't know what they're doing, respectively. It doesn't hold any decks out of the format (at least, no decks trying to do anything "fair"). It doesn't place a ridiculous amount of players into the top of tournaments, but you will usually see at least one in the top 16 at least. I love Miracles, and I would recommend playing it if you like it. However, before you take it to a major tournament, get good with it so you don't take forever and a day playing it. +p52 +aVNothing's getting banned. \u000a\u000aThe deck's been around for 4 years now and top is still around. People (bitches) dislike the deck for various reasons, so they label the deck "oppressive" and call for a ban. (reasons include: they don't know how to play against it, they dislike playing against control, unskilled miracles pilots that take too much time with top, etc.)\u000a\u000aIn reality, the deck will consistently put 2-3 people into the t16 of tournaments, which is solid results, but a far cry from "oppressive". +p53 +aVAs a Miracles player, I am always very happy when my opponent leaves Strix in postboard against me. +p54 +aVWhy? +p55 +aVBecause it's basically two mana draw a card against Miracles. Sure, sometimes Miracles was leaning on a Clique to combat Jace, and Strix would shine there. But most of the time it draws a card, and does very little until it gets swept away with a Terminus.\u000a\u000aOn top of this, you have important cards that need to come in -- specifically Needle and Null Rod. And you have to cut something. Force is your worst card, but it's a necessary evil to hedge against Entreat, Terminus, and Jace. So the 1/1 that cantrips is usually the first to go. +p56 +aVYou wasted your turn cycling at sorcery speed. +p57 +aVI play Aluren very often, and the match-up vs Miracles is incredibly positive -- in large part due to cantrip dudes like Strix and Coiling Oracle (and recruiter doing a great squadron hawk impression). I settle in for a slow attrition game, getting one damage at a time. These little dorks are a big problem for miracles if you settle into a strategy of just sitting back and slowly bleeding them. Every mode they have of answering these things is a net negative +p58 +aVAs a miracles player, this 100%. Strix may not seem impressive but a board of, say, shardless + strix will necessitate a terminus eventually, putting shardless ahead in a pretty serious way. Deathtouch is also slightly more relevant with mentor supplanting entreat. +p59 +aVIt's bad as it will never get there on it's own, but since it cantrips it's never bad... +p60 +aVWould you side more in if you feel you have cards to take out?\u000a\u000aI've been unimpressed with Hymn against Miracles as it's great in the opener but topdecking them on hellbent feels miserable. +p61 +aVHymn is AMAZING against Control decks. It's like a mini-Mind Twist. It's a great topdeck. +p62 +aVSure, but I don't believe I'd take Hymns out...they might Force Hymn but they'd never Force Strix...\u000a\u000a +p63 +aVMiracles does not have FoW postboard against Shardless. +p64 +aVIf you have more cards to take out than side in, and you're siding in Balefuls, you've constructed your sideboard and mainboard wrong. +p65 +aVSeems like one of the worst cards you can cascade in to. +p66 +aVI like it because it cantrips and they have to eventually use removal on it. That being said my local meta isn't miracles heavy so I don't have many sideboard slots designated for it. If I did I'd probably cut it +p67 +aVYou can't get value out of death touch +p68 +aVThe problem is the 1 power. You can wait an incredibly long time to kill the opponent. Or you have to extend multiple threats to speed up the clock. At that point you get Terminus'd and you lose the card advantage you gained and wasted your turn casting the thing.\u000a\u000aIt isn't a bad card since it draws, but it won't win you the game. Something like StoneForge Mystic is higher impact and technically draws a card. It can get there on its own if they don't plow it. +p69 +aVI do like this card because when it gets terminused the miracle player has not gained any card advantage (as long as it was only strix and 1 other creature). I leave mine in and bring in K Grip, Null Rod, Pithing Needle, Vendilion Clique, and Notion Thief for 3 MD forces and 2 MD Thoughtseize. +p70 +aVI always side out Strix against non-creature decks. The reason you play it is to block/eat removal spells against aggressive decks and decks that try to win with large flyers(reanimator, primarily). \u000a\u000aIt's just too slow and you have better sources of card advantage against things like Miracles. +p71 +aVIf I were to pick up a miracles list, I'd probably sleeve up the exact 75 of [Mzfroste](http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=11531&d=265607&f=LE), which runs Snapcaster as the only creature in the main. There's a slight bias here, as he's one of my buddies and I've personally watched him put up some very good results (he's the dick in our playgroup that always keeps us late at opens because he's top 8ing), and I've watched him make slight tweaks to the deck as the meta has changed with continued good results. +p72 +aVOne question I have for this list specifically is when do you bring in Mentors? Two MD Redblasts also seems like a lot, but probably fine considering that the nonblue decks should be decent matchups anyways. +p73 +aVIt's not me, but I know that he brings them in against decks like shardless bug and matchups where he needs to establish a fast clock. As a note, two redblasts is not optimal, but they're cheaper that 1 reb 1 pyroblast online. I'll shoot him a message and I'm sure he'll come in and correct my non miracles playing ass if I've gotten anything wrong. +p74 +aVYeah I'd just run Pyroblasts anyways as I already have them on my MTGO account. Also the difference is like 1 ticket on a deck I am already spending a lot on so that won't make it huge anyways. +p75 +aVI would run all pyros in any build that has mentors in the 75. Personally, I don't think the upside of burning a pyroblast for mentor triggers outweigh the fringe benefits of REBs narrow targeting and the greater resiliency to surgical extraction.\u000a\u000aThe most common relevance of REB's targeting is that it can't be Misdirected to non-blue things. This is almost never a real issue since the primary deck that plays Misdirection is Sneak and Show and they are almost always looking to misdirect your blast to Misdirection, which is already blue and thus a valid target for both red blasts. +p76 +aVIt seems to run counter the the existing sentiment in the thread, but I'd recommend a list with mentors. I'd surmise that the European group that brought us the ponder miracles deck probably puts the most testing into their lists and the most recent listing from Schonegger or Cadei is the two mentors list that they have been having some good results with since last year. Personally I like the speedier win con that mentor represents.\u000a\u000ahttp://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=11448&d=265007&f=LE\u000a\u000aThat said if you're dead set against mentors, go with the mzfroste list, he at least does well on modo rather often. +p77 +aVIf it is rather the consent that it is best to run with Mentors I am not deadset against running them. I just am not a huge fan of the card, but hey i still get to play Jaces :) I am currently mostly looking for input as I want to play Legacy on modo now that we have leagues on there +p78 +aVI am a pretty new miracles player. I play with 2 mentors in the main (pretty much the Cadei list). I find him to be very good at closing out games quickly. One advantage with him is unlike entreat, it doesn't have to be drawn off the top to play. No brainstorm or Jace is needed to get the card back on top. I've found if he survives, its pretty much game. Being new to the format, he helps shore up an ignorance of the format. I wish mentor was as good in modern as he is in legacy. +p79 +aVThere isn't really a consensus on how to build Miracles, it's just personal preference. For someone starting out with the deck online, I'd suggest more wincons main, as time will not be on your side, at least at first. +p80 +aVThe upside is... If you get into any miracles deck, the difference in cards amounts to a few bucks. I mean between Cadei and mzfroste the biggest difference is that the mentors are in the side for mz's list. That just a quick eyeing of the lists, but there might be five cards that are different in the 75 from a quick glance. So you're not tied down to any particular build. +p81 +aV[My 75](http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=97887). I dislike Mentor and prefer the classic strategy. I have never run to time, but I do play quickly. If you're just starting, miracles is a deck that's classically in the draw bracket. Remembering which what cards are on top help a lot. +p82 +aVI would personally recommend starting with a Mentor list until you are comfortable and speedy enough with the deck to not draw any rounds. I still prefer to play a Mentor list, but I can see why you would want to play Miracles instead of Miracle**~~s~~**. +p83 +aVIf you are new to the Legacy format, or just new to Miracles in general, any non-legend Miracles would work. In other words, any lists that don't run 2 Caverns would work. This includes lists from Reid Duke. The reasoning is that 2 Cavern Legend Miracles has a very clunky mana base, and every fetch-breaking decision can be magnified if you fetch for the wrong land. +p84 +aVI'm a big fan of the legends build with clique, venser, and karakas. Joe Lossett is the person whos lists I'd refer to if you were to go that route, they should be all over mtgtop8 and scg +p85 +aVIf you are not familiar enough with miracles and the legacy format to pick a list I would strongly advise picking a different deck. Miracles is probably the best deck in legacy in an open meta, but it is also one of the hardest decks to pilot and requires flawless understanding of both the deck and the format to pilot optimally. Also unlike many legacy decks a bad miracles pilot won't get very many free wins due to the decks inherent power. \u000a\u000aInstead until you know the format a lot better you should probably play something unfair and linear like sneak and show. +p86 +aVI don't fear losing with the deck and I know I will lose a lot starting out. I just want to play a dck that I have the passion for a deck I want to play and that just happens to be blue control and specifically for Jace. I also just don't have the means to switch around decks a lot. +p87 +aVYou should play what you want to play then, but I just thought it wise to warn you that you will not necessarily have a good time at first. +p88 +aVI play Jace in the following situations:\u000a\u000a1. I am very far ahead but lack a closer or have excessive spare mana despite having a closer already.\u000a\u000a2. I am ahead on board or the board is stable but there are many cards still in my opponent's hand and the game is in question still, but I have significant counterspell/counter-top backup to help land Jace. \u000a\u000a3. I am significantly behind and need to use Jace to try and stabilize (i.e., I plan to unsommon or else I expect Jace to die and that is OK with me).\u000a\u000a4. I specifically need a Brainstorm effect and I am willing to pay 4CMC at sorcery speed for it (i.e. I need to put Terminus back and then Terminus on opps. upkeep not to die). \u000a\u000a5. I specifically want to fateseal. This usually happens against Combo/Burn after Clique-ing them and finding nothing concerning in hand. +p89 +aVThis boils down to playing Jace on turn 4 only when well behind as you have little else to do that could matter and otherwise holding him until later when I can be more sure he will survive to win the game with me one way or another. +p90 +aVfor me, jace is normally played after I know I'm in control of the game, or when I need to land him in order to take over. For example, after I've established the soft lock, introducing jace is generally lights out.\u000a\u000aIf my opponent is on a stumbly start, and I know that they won't be able to deal with it, I'd be more inclined to just slam it, but I'd rather have 5-6 lands down before even trying. +p91 +aVThis was helpful thanks! +p92 +a. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/sentiment.txt b/sentiment.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a64d106 --- /dev/null +++ b/sentiment.txt @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +Average sentiment about Miracles: 0.468114394113 +Average sentiment about Shardless: 0.432950678235 +Average sentiment about Storm: 0.458152381391 +Average sentiment about Delver: 0.491417681612 +Average sentiment about Eldrazi: 0.422164683039 diff --git a/shardless_comments.pickle b/shardless_comments.pickle new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e8bb0b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/shardless_comments.pickle @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +(lp0 +VI have been playing it, I think we have faced each other before. I am always so close to 5-0 but then I get paired against RG Combo lands or something which ruins my streak.\u000a\u000aThe good news is that Eldrazi are everywhere and I feel like that mathcup is practically a bye.\u000a\u000aI streamed today going 4-0 vs Storm, Goblins, and 2x Eldrazi.\u000a\u000aI was doing fine in the daily events too, but the 5-0 has eluded me thanks to Guided Passage and other such nonsense. +p1 +aVAs a shardless player, how do you feel about the Goblins matchup? Is it essentially a bye for you? +p2 +aVIt can definitely get out of hand, but I feel pretty favored in the matchup, probably 60/40 +p3 +aVWhy do you consider the eldrazi deck a bye for shardless? +p4 +aVFuckin think about it.\u000a\u000a\u000aI cant think of a card that seems bad in that match-up +p5 +aVI would imagine [[Abrupt Decay]] isn't great? +p6 +aVWell it hits any lock pieces so I don't see it being bad +p7 +aV \u000a[Abrupt Decay](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?name=Abrupt Decay&type=card&.jpg) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Abrupt Decay) [(MC)](http://magiccards.info/query?q=!Abrupt Decay) \u000a^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call +p8 +aVIt's an answer to all the lockpieces you have to play because you're just a dumb creature deck +p9 +aVI have beaten it every time I have played against it, which is 9 times. I did lose to a different variant that ran Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger, but the typical Thought-Knot versions are very easy to beat. +p10 +aVMaybe, I've honestly only played it once and it was actually an mirror. Real back and forth where I fought through a Lili and Jace on the board, finally Hymn my opponent down to 0 cards, slam a 6/7 Goyf opponent at 6, then they hit Maelstrom Pulse into Deathrite and I lose.\u000a\u000aI've been lucky to hit my 5-0s. Honestly it was weird, I was incredibly discouraged going 0-5,0-5, then 5-0,5-0,4-1. The second time when I went 0-5 I hit Dredge 4 times (2 manaless, 2 LED), thought MTGO just hated me. +p11 +aVYeah I was that Shardless player. That game was intense. +p12 +aVWhat is your twitch name? +p13 +aVtwitch.tv/adelorenzi +p14 +aVRandom sample is random. In my three leagues, I played Shardless at least once per five matches, and often times twice. By contrast, I've never played against Miracles in a league match. +p15 +aVI play against miracles at least once per league. It's even more miserable on mtgo than in real life. +p16 +aVThe problem with using Leagues as results is that they aren't real results. Every match you play in a league is a random pairing for somebody else in the league looking to play. It has nothing to do with your record like it does in a Swiss tournament. Because of this, going 5-0 doesn't mean you're playing against other 4-0's and battling out for "first place". In a real tournament, as you move along in the rounds you're going to get paired against better competition and most of the time better decks. You're seeing a lot of nonsense decks crop up in the 5-0 because maybe that player didn't have to face such stiff competition and most likely didn't have to play against Miracles at all. League results should be taken with a big grain of salt. +p17 +aVI thought leagues matched you up with opponents with the same record. +p18 +aVThey make some attempt to, but given the smaller number of player in the Legacy one there's not many options for it to work with, and the pairing is pretty random. +p19 +aVUnfortunately, no. You can get paired with somebody of a different record. +p20 +aVHeck, I've been paired with the *same* opponent within a single 5-round league. And it was a bad matchup for me! +p21 +aVI have, too. But I think it was a new league for him, even though he was my 2nd and 4th round opponent in the same league. +p22 +aVI would enjoy seeing a bit more Shardless and a bit less Eldrazi. Actually played 4 games last night and they were two of each of those. I can check once I get home on the number of types of decks I've seen in 5 leagues so far. +p23 +a. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/storm_comments.pickle b/storm_comments.pickle new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e49ea52 --- /dev/null +++ b/storm_comments.pickle @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ +(lp0 +VPlease try and convince as many people as possible to play this archetype. \u000a\u000aSincerely, \u000aLands pilots +p1 +aVYes Lands is a rough matchup for this deck :/ I imagine the surge of Eldrazi popularity may push Storm down a bit too which will help you guys a lot. +p2 +aV12 Post doesn't have a particularly amazing time against it, but it's a lot easier for me to tune vs Eldrazi (and consequently other aggro) than it is vs Storm, so I'm pretty welcoming of this. +p3 +aVHow is the Infect and Sneak and Show matchup? Wasn't mentioned on the podcast +p4 +aVWhat are your thoughts on the fast mana (IE deck needs mox diamond/spirit guides) and Thorn of Amethyst over Trinisphere arguments? \u000a\u000aI can't listen to it at the moment, but I'll be sure to soon. +p5 +aVHey Baxter, I tested Thorn quite a bit and was not a fan. It does not help you with one of the weaknesses of this deck which is big, efficient creatures. Trinisphere acts more like a lock piece with our Wastelands, and I have really enjoyed having the 2 in our list.\u000a\u000aI tested Mox Diamond but not Simian Spirit Guide. Diamond was too "all-in" for me, and I felt like it made my turn 1 more explosive but overall made me weaker to Wasteland and made it more difficult to cast smashers and Endbringers. +p6 +aVMox Diamond seems HORRIBLE here.\u000a\u000aIt's not a ramp deck, not really. The 2, 4, and 6 Drops are really 1, 2, and 3 Drops. It's a low to the ground Tempo Deck with Wastelands, it's just the deck's color is {2}. Putting Mox Diamond in this deck is actually worse than putting it in like RUG Delver. Its effect is just as unwanted, but it gets the added bonus of only being worth half a mana and managing to be off-color. +p7 +aVI'm sure this and other Eldrazi decks will be fairly popular in Philly, and wouldn't be surprised if there is one in top 8. There are no Eldrazi decks in the top 16 of the louisville scg classic last weekend though. Even after a modern open loaded with eldrazi on day 1. +p8 +aVIn this episode, the cast talks Phil\u2019s pro tour success, Eternal Masters, and the newest ~~Tier 1~~ deck in Legacy, Eldrazi Aggro.\u000a\u000aFind The Brainstorm Show's current Eldrazi Aggro list [here](http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/22-02-16-Qpb-eldrazi-aggro/)\u000a\u000aSmall warning: Wilson\u2019s microphone was doing strange things in this episode, so please pardon any sound issues on his end.\u000a\u000aEDIT: Removed "Tier 1" because as /u/William_Dearborn pointed out the term refers to tournament finishes. +p9 +aVIt almost sounds as if he's not using a pop filter? It's killing my car speakers. :( good job on the cast though! +p10 +aVLink to decklist is broken for me :( +p11 +aVSorry about that...should work now! +p12 +aVGuys, please stop freaking out and down-voting over semantics. We have an hour and a half of content backed by dozens of hours of testing and multiple 5-0 results posted by WotC; it's demoralizing when most feedback is focused on two words Paul said while trying to advertise the episode. Thanks +p13 +aVMy issue wasn't with calling the deck 'good', just on what is the conventional definition for 'tier 1'. (And for the record, I didn't downvote, I understood it was an advertisement, and just wanted to explain why some people may have had an issue with the phrase)\u000a\u000aI think the deck is sweet, and much like MUD has a lot of really good MUs and some really bad MUs (and hands for that matter).\u000a\u000aOne of the biggest issues with the current feedback is that most people did not test the same list you guys did. So, if you pair that fact with variance (sometimes you go 10-0 against a list and sometimes you get smashed in a set of similar length) it is no great wonder to me how people have such different feelings about the matchups.\u000a\u000aI did enjoy the podcast, thank you for being one of the few Legacy focused ones. =] +p14 +aV> Guys, please stop freaking out and down-voting over semantics.\u000a\u000aThen it wouldn't be Reddit.\u000a\u000aGreat podcast, and I always appreciate your content. Although I disagree with 3ball in the shell, I think your overall list is extremely solid. Let's see what happens at the SCG Open! +p15 +aVIt doesn't have any large event finishes so it can't really be called Tier 1 +p16 +aVOh technicalities! Give it a few events! Play it yourself, you'll see what we mean. +p17 +aVSo I have played a couple Eldrazi (both Stompy, and big mana) decks a few times.\u000a\u000aI really like the podcast, but one thing really stuck with me... The mention that Wasteland isn't a problem for this deck.\u000a\u000aI have found that Wasteland can be a *very* big problem. Strange that you guys feel differently. You mentioned going 10/0 against Delver, and I've also played many games. One Wasteland isn't always game over, but it is often painful. A second Wasteland can be backbreaking. With the Delver decks packing 8 cantrips and 8ish Fetches, it isn't hard for them to find a second if they detect that your mana is vulnerable (ie, stopping on two lands, or Wasting a non-City land).\u000a\u000aI'm not saying you are undoubtedly wrong, but it's interesting we've come to polar opposite conclusions on Wasteland. +p18 +aVHey Krond,\u000aI definitely used some hyperbole saying that Wasteland doesn't matter. Delver decks can create some issues for you with Dazes and multiple Wastelands on the play. That being said, this is worlds apart from something like MUD or a Cloudpost-based deck where a single Wasteland is always fantastic. From my testing Wasteland is likely worse against this Eldrazi deck than most decks in the format. Look at it as the creatures costing half of what they actually cost, yet many of our lands are twice as good against Daze protection or even make creatures immune (Cavern). We can power out our 2-mana guys, Endless Ones, and Thought-Knots pretty effectively through Wasteland. +p19 +aVThe deck is a flash in the pan. It's nowhere even NEAR tier 1. +p20 +aVGiven I tested 10 matches against them with Grixis and went 8-2 I kinda have to agree. Especially the loss of lifelink compared to MUD makes it "just" a good creature deck with some prison elements. Their threats have problems with Tarmogoyf, Gurmag Angler, Monastery Mentor and Young Pyromancer, not really having something to push through besides a few removal spells. \u000a\u000aAlso Wasting them is really an option, I won more than once through a turn 1 Chalice since Wasteland, Daze, Force of Will, YP and Angler are still great cards, not to speak of a turn 1 delver/shaman you might have played when you're on the play. \u000a\u000aDon't get me wrong, I still think it's a better deck than MUD (less powerfull, but more consistent) and it seems to have pretty good matchups against Storm and Miracles, but against BUG, Grixis, Death & Taxes, Sneak&Show, Lands, heck, even fringe decks like Cloudpost and Stompy it seems just unfavorable... +p21 +aVI must say that I tested against Mengucci's list he 4-0ed a daily with: \u000a\u000ahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B10P8JY_peg\u000a\u000aYours seems to be more refined, still I have the feeling that when sticking to simple principles (only counter removals when no other threats in hand, waste and counter their big stuff) it seems just a really solid matchup from the Delver side, sometimes even around a Chalice. Cavern-hands often times seem pretty slow while noncavern-hands get out-tempoed by Delver, Pyromancer and Angler. \u000a\u000aJust my experience here, I definitely like the deck due to its consistency,I'll give it more tests in the future. I just can't understand how your guy won 10 out of 10 games against Grixis. \u000a\u000aOn a side note it seems to me that this matchup isn't as skill-intensive from both sides as other Legacy matches, so it doesn't matter as much how good your grixis player was but rather what opening hands both players had. +p22 +aVI agree with your points; I don't think the Grixis Delver matchup is anywhere near "10-0" quality in reality, but I have only lost a single match to Grixis Delver after testing against it many times online. Even if I agree with some of the theory that you guys are saying, it's hard to be swayed from my experience against Delver. +p23 +aVI agree with your points; I don't think the Grixis Delver matchup is anywhere near "10-0" quality in reality, but I have only lost a single match to Grixis Delver after testing against it many times online. Even if I agree with some of the theory that you guys are saying, it's hard to be swayed from my experience against Delver. +p24 +aVJust from a definition standpoint, it's generally accepted that "tier" refers to metashare, not how good a deck is. (Despite those two having a high correlation) +p25 +aVThe high highs and the low lows. Man, a lot of that hits close to home. I played nothing but storm after getting into legacy but eventually got burnt out from playing behind too many counter-top locks. Now being on the other side of the matchup I don't mind losing to a storm opponent. I get caught up in thinking about what they could have or how they sequence their lines, it turns out being a good learning experience.\u000a\u000aI enjoyed your previous series so definitely looking forward to this one too. +p26 +aVThanks for the kind words! Playing storm is definitely challenging, especially versus hard control, but it's a learning process. One thing I didn't mention in my piece is that I also originally learned storm to understand how to play against it. Over time, though, I've grown to love the deck more and more.\u000a\u000aI'll be releasing more samples soon. Hope you enjoy those, as well as the completed book. +p27 +aVI think Storm is one of those decks that only specific players will enjoy playing. I primarily play Affinity in Modern and have found that they have a similar thought process. Both decks are extremely powerful, require being able to read the situation, do the math, and sometimes be willing to go for it knowing that if they have the answer you just lose. \u000a\u000aFor me there is nothing better than hitting exactly 10 storm count with zero mana left or figuring out how to sequence everything to fight through something like Top/CB + counter. +p28 +aVPardon my intrusion, but I think you're wrong in the history of storm as a mechanic and of decks based around it. \u000a\u000aIt didn't take time for storm to become competitive, nor did it need additional cards. Mind's desire was legal and tier 1/tier1.5 in standard. UW desire was absolutely tier 1 in extended immediately as well. A short time later, before legacy even existed and all we had was t1.5, twiddle desire was winning on the first turn in extended. In vintage, the fabled long.dec started winning uncontrolably in the summer of 2003, a mere three months after Scourge (where the mechanic was launched) released. Not only that, but in October 2004, when legacy became the format it was meant to be until today, there were already storm decks being tested in the dojo, source, articles on SCG about storm, the very week after the announcement.\u000a\u000aIt is not a testament to ingenuity (well, long.dec was, without a doubt, but the major innovation there was the usage of burning wish to get 4 virtual copies of yawgmoth's will instead of the actual storm mechanic). This wasn't the case of a deck slowly built over years. As soon as the mechanic was released, it was EVERYWHERE.\u000a\u000aSome facts to back this up:\u000a\u000aStandard: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/event-coverage/2003-european-championship-all-standard-decks-2003-07-08 (I'd give you the top 16 but the page is 404ing) where both kai budde, dirk baberowski, marco blume, etc, played the deck. This is a mere two months after the expansion released, and the deck got top 16.\u000a\u000aExtended: http://forcespike.altervista.org/_magic/desire.htm shows a large amount of players including several hall of famers that used the deck in the extended portion of the worlds, which happened a mere month later (three months after scourge). It was everywhere. [[Sunscape familiar]], [[Nightscape familiar]] and [[sapphire medallion]] powered the deck into absurdity.\u000a\u000aVintage: The first decklists showed up before the cards were even legal, and mind's desire was restricted one month and a half after scourge became legal (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dci/announce/dci20030529a). Four weeks later long.dec first showed up on the scene and by mid August was considered the strongest deck in the format, a title it still holds to this day (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/5820_Burning_Through_Type_One_With_The_Fastest_Deck_In_Magic.html). \u000a\u000aLegacy: Legacy was revamped as a format in October 2004. The first competitive storm decks in the format were seen in November I think, but it is hard to find information about early legacy, as there were not serious tournaments until later.\u000a\u000aDoes this seem like something that took time, required cards and ingenuity to achieve? :P If anything, current storm decks are MUCH WEAKER than they were in the past...\u000a\u000aI hope you keep writing, but these small bits kind of paint a totally different picture than what really happened. +p29 +aVThank you for the detailed background. I might have to change things up a little in the book, but that's totally great to understand the context.\u000a\u000aI'd be curious to know whether cards like Mind's Desire were designed to be insanely good, or whether it was an unexpected design scenario like Memory Jar?\u000a\u000aI stand by Maro's storm scale -- it made it sound as if the power level was a mistake. +p30 +a. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/textmining.py b/textmining.py new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8819097 --- /dev/null +++ b/textmining.py @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +import praw +import pickle +from constants import API_KEY + +def write_comments(subreddit, archetype): + r = praw.Reddit('Text analysis on r/{}'.format(subreddit)) + subreddit = r.get_subreddit(subreddit) + posts = subreddit.get_hot(limit=100) + + deck_posts = [] + print 'Posts about {}:'.format(archetype) + + for post in posts: + if archetype.lower() in str(post).lower(): + print str(post).lstrip('0123456789').lstrip(': ') + deck_posts.append(post) + + all_comments = [] + + for post in deck_posts: + for comment in praw.helpers.flatten_tree(post.comments): + if not hasattr(comment, 'body'): + continue + all_comments.append(comment.body) + + f = open('{}_comments.pickle'.format(archetype.lower()), 'w') + pickle.dump(all_comments, f) + f.close() + +decks = ['Miracles', 'Shardless', 'Storm', 'Delver'] +if __name__ == '__main__': + for deck in decks: + write_comments('mtglegacy', deck) + write_comments('modernmagic', 'Eldrazi') From 816422f59e6f23522e7aa7cd8fc4c7392b816969 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sam Myers Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:46:31 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] started readme --- .sentiment.txt.swp | Bin 0 -> 12288 bytes .textmining.py.swp | Bin 0 -> 12288 bytes README.md | 20 +++++++++++++++++++- analysis.py | 4 +++- textmining.py | 4 +++- 5 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) create mode 100644 .sentiment.txt.swp create mode 100644 .textmining.py.swp diff --git a/.sentiment.txt.swp b/.sentiment.txt.swp new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2f9d5150ce45656b4a2e3144f318ca8e40b35f2d GIT binary patch literal 12288 zcmeI&%}T>S5C`z7;881j@fbhOZT2H+A_$6l@K6M+y>IQ(2AWoqtyB+s^DTTOeFcww z45zVr5K_Tg<-aglmYo@f-z_8^zkS~H8Z}M4Hi)LruWfs{P1Aj%JiWJBKD$`FS|-&e z7ngQ%7SZEp!+I}q{c)#$Whbtg43lB6p4*{IQhwCj#QoL=_Yi=vZe#!e literal 0 HcmV?d00001 diff --git a/.textmining.py.swp b/.textmining.py.swp new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..dfee9409d6cbbb39f95858a8de2617ce46e78403 GIT binary patch literal 12288 zcmeI2zi$*r6vxMOD{#V(h6ZWkMA|*ctj}N|xyUq03P-YtY@k7CHMcu=H}dYxYG%%t zi)B!hK5hPqbSa}G1@taa{s5;6R1}naXV13=TOtxlgY-uF-p-Hr-n{wDOtHG{ckgd( z@>}T|LpjgbtKSapU%7pm{qh-Ou9`~g!oa)Bwy4&=y0azUZN=E5S-_Q{@}qHo<*xkR zZz`?yaK)oqHPy79{#O_pCjvy^y$CF_>(^Gh!S&OnPxz&a_ueZCIS~OOKm>>Y5g-CY zfCvx)BJg1n@bv>Y5g-CYfCzkm z1Vq7@Jj>XHb4VWl|Igq5Uw+KkKhPocJM;+p7TSOop~H_D`wRL5`W5;SdJOGAx1k7n zvB=oJ(BIHA=uhY;D1)}3tI#s^9CIH)PoXE!&ya&M=u0T%b{?Wa1c(3;AOb{y2oM1x zKm>@u|4bm7SmkAwo2ru9yCkkmA+4^&Q04J5kH0AkD}GRMhefAN{jiinkxyY*$b1Jj z17n*iSGsw+9#aFJWm;4+%lP^_kF%^2N@rQzW5LPsb^ajUR957rbYaTvk+22ovxYae z3cX*;a#z~;A>K6xXVCJtI|+_$nQluw7!XCvd2 zQdP>YuXej|Y)4^f8;iClX=|{v7;orrHL;R7e51~V7Uk3_$BpK8WpBUD?btOO4xtO~ z#IEExBiszQ6#1yxoY>8G*Ku#S-~)vty0o;!BK&O201&-HwJQN`z7Rg&+u*G|t_Z%A mhuMytPK+%$F3W(QxU8-7^6{?Vm@rk<#(F+G=xqzfjJ*a1)r5!u literal 0 HcmV?d00001 diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index d0674e5..82937e1 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -1,2 +1,20 @@ # TextMining -This is the base repo for the text mining and analysis project for Software Design, Spring 2016 at Olin College. + +## Overview + +As a player of Magic: the Gathering, I was interested in analyzing the community's opinions of different popular decks. + +## Implementation + +## Results + +``` +Average sentiment about Miracles: 0.468114394113 +Average sentiment about Shardless: 0.432950678235 +Average sentiment about Storm: 0.458152381391 +Average sentiment about Delver: 0.491417681612 +Average sentiment about Eldrazi: 0.422164683039 + +``` + +## Reflection diff --git a/analysis.py b/analysis.py index b04a2ca..24ab82a 100644 --- a/analysis.py +++ b/analysis.py @@ -3,7 +3,9 @@ from constants import API_KEY def analyze_comments(archetype): - f = open('{}_comments.pickle'.format(archetype.lower()), 'r') + """Analyze a list of comments and print the average sentiment, according to Indico.""" + + f = open('{}_comments.pickle'.format(archetype.lower()), 'r') stored_comments = pickle.load(f) indicoio.config.api_key = API_KEY #configure indico API diff --git a/textmining.py b/textmining.py index 8819097..def9e7a 100644 --- a/textmining.py +++ b/textmining.py @@ -1,8 +1,10 @@ import praw import pickle -from constants import API_KEY def write_comments(subreddit, archetype): + """Search a given subreddit for posts containing a keyword + and save all of each post's comments to a file.""" + r = praw.Reddit('Text analysis on r/{}'.format(subreddit)) subreddit = r.get_subreddit(subreddit) posts = subreddit.get_hot(limit=100) From 2b93b0a5dca4af73fc6e39deb5a66a36467f5fac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sam Myers Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:51:19 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] finished readme --- .textmining.py.swp => .analysis.py.swp | Bin 12288 -> 12288 bytes README.md | 12 ++++++++---- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) rename .textmining.py.swp => .analysis.py.swp (88%) diff --git a/.textmining.py.swp b/.analysis.py.swp similarity index 88% rename from .textmining.py.swp rename to .analysis.py.swp index dfee9409d6cbbb39f95858a8de2617ce46e78403..832c1eead6ed71585219e0d92e155db26c7fe31d 100644 GIT binary patch literal 12288 zcmeI2&x;gC6vs<1VNjEx7cb(=2KAeOtJlos+z>v z#l)NOoc|!i|G@u14;}<>-t`&}{t13-x~E-tQ9(}&ui#5{y?XD>d!Md`8K&2luCK1q z57AkH@wE`=A3nQ&{Kuo>>9<1IVycYw8y_B5WO4SViNfC(@GCcp%k025#WOkfWZ zkf{(?4+!xJ^8f$OfB(P!N{E-xW9Sj|FZ3()3-kr_@=GCJKo6k*pu5m9=-DA5oDfz)WJaXcJHPt*}z6t8S4U z#&Iyjw|%%;TBe)9nl>`Yl?@gsxH6U|#dWiAl_|XSXO;i1OmIsG!l;cd9R({e$&n(9 z61A_BA4dv}26kdOf4u#FX?-0+{FarRY1X)a^vo zZs_grIJVVypWIcx&4M6jratzq(U+~uR40|LqR#x@y4x0J9jY=>_7<}3G9qcFbEiz0 z%VIs1o;}{+9+E7lVG?O8^Li}9mP*6JI}8@)j3Qg-+J!+x!JxTQsmkd6d~u|3Hjt_9 zB&o_wk0M#?ctcH5&&s9M_`X2$ zw(fNIE^54XA3DVS0R#hd6&O4`vkLqD{)&H(eN&O7Tw6y~HgDR3Pud=EH-^K`GrmAF zNh*^96}gI5XWd3fiRURp@GNgv*tX*jJejEqd{Akf#6wNGs4L^}T|LpjgbtKSapU%7pm{qh-Ou9`~g!oa)Bwy4&=y0azUZN=E5S-_Q{@}qHo<*xkR zZz`?yaK)oqHPy79{#O_pCjvy^y$CF_>(^Gh!S&OnPxz&a_ueZCIS~OOKm>>Y5g-CY zfCvx)BJg1n@bv>Y5g-CYfCzkm z1Vq7@Jj>XHb4VWl|Igq5Uw+KkKhPocJM;+p7TSOop~H_D`wRL5`W5;SdJOGAx1k7n zvB=oJ(BIHA=uhY;D1)}3tI#s^9CIH)PoXE!&ya&M=u0T%b{?Wa1c(3;AOb{y2oM1x zKm>@u|4bm7SmkAwo2ru9yCkkmA+4^&Q04J5kH0AkD}GRMhefAN{jiinkxyY*$b1Jj z17n*iSGsw+9#aFJWm;4+%lP^_kF%^2N@rQzW5LPsb^ajUR957rbYaTvk+22ovxYae z3cX*;a#z~;A>K6xXVCJtI|+_$nQluw7!XCvd2 zQdP>YuXej|Y)4^f8;iClX=|{v7;orrHL;R7e51~V7Uk3_$BpK8WpBUD?btOO4xtO~ z#IEExBiszQ6#1yxoY>8G*Ku#S-~)vty0o;!BK&O201&-HwJQN`z7Rg&+u*G|t_Z%A mhuMytPK+%$F3W(QxU8-7^6{?Vm@rk<#(F+G=xqzfjJ*a1)r5!u diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 82937e1..4698075 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -1,20 +1,24 @@ # TextMining ## Overview - -As a player of Magic: the Gathering, I was interested in analyzing the community's opinions of different popular decks. +As a player of Magic: the Gathering, I was interested in analyzing the community's opinions of different popular decks. In particular, one very recently discovered deck (known as "Eldrazi") has been the subject of some controversydue to its sudden popularity and power level. I did aggregated sentiment analysis of comments on posts about particular decks, then compared them to comments about the Eldrazi deck. ## Implementation +###textmining.py +The first half of my code uses the Praw package to grab the most recent 100 posts in a given Magic-related subreddit, then filter those posts into a list if the title includes mention of a particular deck. The entire comment tree is then flattened into a list of strings, which is pickled and written to a file. One possible design decision that I decided not to pursue would have been to do some sorting of original comments and replies to comments. However, it would have been a difficult distinction to make with regards to the exact relevance of certain levels of comments, so I decided to just use all of them. +###analysis.py +The second module looks for a file with comments about a given deck, then unpickles it to the original list. Because sentiment analysis on particularly large strings tends to be unreliable, I split each comment into individual sentences. I then did some basic filtering to remove strings without words by checking if they contained letters. Since Indico doesn't care about non-alphabetic characters, I didn't bother to clean up the strings beyond that. Finally, I averaged the sentiments of each sentence in each comment, then averaged the comments. ## Results - +I scraped comments relating to four different classic Magic decks to use as a benchmark, then from posts about the Eldrazi deck. ``` Average sentiment about Miracles: 0.468114394113 Average sentiment about Shardless: 0.432950678235 Average sentiment about Storm: 0.458152381391 Average sentiment about Delver: 0.491417681612 Average sentiment about Eldrazi: 0.422164683039 - ``` +The number for Shardless is somewhat unreliable, since I only found one post, but the rest of the decks hover around neutral sentiment (slightly below neutral, but Magic players tend to be a salty bunch). As I had hoped, comments about the Eldrazi deck were noticeably, if not substantially, more negative on average than comments about the other decks. ## Reflection +Exchanging data with external sources worked well. The process of using the Reddit API was pretty seamless, although the restriction of only making one API call every two seconds was somewhat inhibiting, and the Indico API was even easier to implement. Since the majority of data processing was done with simple generators and filtering, I did the majority of unit testing in the command line with the APIs. The biggest challenge was in dealing with empty (deleted?) comments, which I eventually sorted out with exception handling and assigned a neutral sentiment value so as to not affect the averages. On the whole this project was definitely scoped according to the amount of time I was able to allocate to it, so it was less ambitious than it could have been. If I were to do it again I would have done more things with the data, like filtering the posts into a larger range of categories and more carefully analyzing comments in relation to each other.