Banned and Restricted - Jan 9th 2017
General forum
Posted on Jan. 9, 2017, 2:08 p.m. by Bovine073
That's a lot of bannings. What does everyone think about this?
Effective Date: January 20, 2017
Magic Online Effective Date: January 11, 2017
Standard:
Emrakul, the Promised End is banned.
Smuggler's Copter is banned.
Reflector Mage is banned.
Modern:
Gitaxian Probe is banned.
Golgari Grave-Troll is banned.
Next B&R Announcement: March 13, 2017
When was the last time three cards have been banned in Standard? How will these bannings affect standard and modern?
For Standard, bye-bye, Vehicles (maybe it will still be psuedo-playable?)! U/W flash receives a huge hit. GB Delirium and Marvel have suffered huge losses as well.
For Modern, Gitaxian Probe banning affects infect, delver, suicide bloo/zoo, pyro ascension, and more. GGT Ban cripples Dredge (again).
You can't really just sub Ulamog for Emmy in most cases I wouldn't think. My deck, and others I have seen run her, make an effort to cast her with 7 or 8 mana. There is a world of difference between getting 7 mana and getting 10. Also, if you are working to cast her that fast, you likely have some delirium users or enablers that lose value when your big hitter doesn't play with them.
The two aren't close enough to just replace and call it a day. Instead I have been looking at other 7ish mana cost creatures and thinking "Not as good but maybe; well then I should take out X, and then Y isn't really as reliable, and then....."
It was a cornerstone card; exactly as it was designed to be. It wasn't an "Oops, we didn't realize Time Walk was that good." It was a "Let's generate mechanics, write stories/references, and make art around this card for a year and then get rid of it mid rotation."
January 28, 2017 6:39 a.m.
awphutt Emrakul is female.
Those of us who play Vehicles have endured the loss of Smuggler's Copter by tweaking our builds significantly to use Aethersphere Harvester or Heart of Kiran.
Some have even turned to Sky Skiff.
I think what's made Emrakul players so salty is that your almost guaranteed Win Con is gone.
Like Smuggler's Copter, you got to enjoy it for a while, now it's time to get back to the business of building a new brew for this Season.
January 28, 2017 6:50 a.m.
Argeaux you are right that it sucks to lose a main wincon. But it also sucks that I have read how much Wizards say they are trying to appeal to players by use of story and then they say "Eff that story, it didn't really matter." Smuggler's Copter was just a card, Emrakul was a long built up theme.
I wanted to make a deck with her for a long time before I actually settled on one that mechanically worked like I wanted it to. I am sure it took me a little longer than others to come to my conclusion, the "for a while" I enjoyed it was one FNM.
Which also leads to another point, why not give some lead time on bans? That way people might still enjoy it for a bit. I bought some pricy cards before the last rotation that were only usable for a little over a month, but then I knew what I was getting into. To buy cards and then find out "Surprise you get to play them once" just seems unnecessary.
January 28, 2017 7:11 a.m.
My most sincere apologies on misgendering a qasi-genderless, alien monstrosity from beyond space and time.
On the vehicles front, it didn't get hit all that hard by the Copter bannings. One top 8d SCG Columbus, and another 3 hit top 32. Mardu Vehicles is still definitely a thing.
And I specifically didn't say Ulamog, because you're absolutely right, you can't just swap the 2 in and call it a day. You need to tweak the deck, and adding Ulamog isn't even generally the right answer. Like, take a look at the SCG Columbus winning decklist: He changed what was one of the biggest Emrakul decks in the format, and made it work really well without the Emrakul. Is the deck significantly different? Absolutely, but it's made of the same pieces and so won't cost an arm and a leg.
(And just to be clear, I'm not defending or endorsing the bans in any way. Just pointing out that it doesn't have to be a huge financial loss.)
January 28, 2017 8:04 a.m.
If you bought the cards to play with Emrakul you've still got the basis to make one of the decks that are currently doing well on the Pro circuit.
Older cards aren't as much of a waste these days with the prominence of Frontier.
January 28, 2017 8:23 a.m.
EpicFreddi says... #7
I have to agree with Argy regarding the frontier part. If you bought Aetherworks, you can enjoy the unbelievable feeling of casting Ugin, the Spirit Dragon for free if you like.
January 28, 2017 9:07 a.m.
awphutt there was another comment after yours citing Ulamog as a basically even swap.
Also to the last two comments about the GP decks, while I have on occasion looked to those decks for some ideas (I don't think I have ever consciously taken any), I personally prefer looking at decks here for ideas, as well as putting together massive lists of cards that I think might work together and then thin them down while using the analytics provided on this site. My current deck looks nothing like the ones mentioned in this GP, but I was extremely close to going undefeated with it when I played at my FNM.
I will concede that perhaps certain cards have a more warping influence on the format than others and therefore my view of the banning could be myopic.*
This is all to say, some cards and synergies are objectively better than others and that conclusion could be reached repeatedly and independantly, but I would like to feel that my deck is mine at the end of the day, not 5 time world champion Johnny Doeson's.
*As in my original statement, shame on wizards for this. If there design lets the meta get warped so bad that they can't fix it with future cards, that seems like their responsibility.
January 28, 2017 9:34 a.m.
Just looked up frontier; would have a hard time finding games for it in my area.
January 28, 2017 9:37 a.m.
EpicFreddi says... #10
sitri_ that's the case for nearly every store atm. We just have to push it as good as we can so people see that it exists and that it's hella fun.
January 28, 2017 9:42 a.m.
sitri_ I hear you about the enjoyment of building your own unique devks to pilot.
It's one of the things I love most about Standard, and Magic in general.
It made me see the bannings as a challenge to figure out if I could take my Vehicles deck in a new direction.
January 28, 2017 9:58 a.m.
I likely could feel the same way too had I not spent 10,000 times more time planning my deck than getting to play it.
On a similar note, I read elsewhere about some kid that got a set of copters for Christmas, presumably a really big deal for him, only to be crushed by learning he now can't use them.
I am not upset wizards felt they couldn't right things with forward momentum, sometimes people screw up and the best way out is back, but I do like to think I would attempt to ease my customers into it if I were in their position.
January 28, 2017 1:47 p.m.
emrakulinsmugglers says... #13
U/W flash still has Spell Queller and Archangel Avacyn Flip , they should be fine.
r/w vehicles lost copter and modifications don't work as well in constructed, but they have new things like Peacewalker Colossus to instant speed autocrew Consulate Dreadnought and also Heart of Kiran, making Gideon, Ally of Zendikar all the more useful.
temur aetherworks might be dead, having only Ulamogs and Ishkanah greatly weakens the deck because of the Legend Rule "704.5k If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners graveyards. This is called the 'legend rule.'" They can't use Kozilek, the Great Distortion because of the card draw it comes with, and you don't want to be drawing cards in aetherworks.
b/g delirium just needs a different finisher that's still fast enough, emrakul was just the obvious choice because of the pseudo-delirium it has. Maybe Ormendahl, Profane Prince Flip ? The sacrifice 5 creatures could mean ishkanah 1/2 spider tokens being sacrificed. Or they could focus more on Liliana, the Last Hope and try for the ultimate.
January 30, 2017 12:52 p.m.
Gandolfini says... #14
We're a week and a half into the WOTC bans and they are working out very nicely (especially Probe ban), you see it at the LGS, you see it all over.
January 31, 2017 2:35 p.m.
Mister_Smithy says... #15
I understand their banning of reflector mage as it's a pain in your side that almost turns the deck into old control levels of obnoxiousness, and Smuggler's Copter wasn't an entirely necessary ban but it does allow for MORE creativity, but the Emrakul ban was kind of stupid. Why didnt they just ban aetherworks marvel? in Delerium you could get Emmy fairly early but not consistently on turn 4 and 5 with little that others can do. I feel that WotC is kind of realizing some of the mistakes they are making in standard.
February 3, 2017 2:11 p.m.
Emrakul, the Promised End and not Aetherworks Marvel was banned because she was hitting the field too fast, even without the Marvel.
Basically if you were playing Delerium and had Emmy in your deck, then your Opponent may as well scoop.
It was oppressive.
I've tried to explain this to people quite a few times. Here I go again.
Reflector Mage is too powerful with all the blink cards that are in AER to facilitate Revolt.
Basically you would be able to play Reflector Mage then blink it a couple of times. If you had two on the boil ...
Once again, oppressive.
February 3, 2017 4:27 p.m. Edited.
In my opinion Dredge was always viable, I've played against them where most (in my experience, maybe I'm lucky, maybe i'm not) of my games, I hardly see the other player use GGT to dredge. I.M. Skewed O.
February 8, 2017 4:09 p.m.
Argeaux"Basically if you were playing Delerium and had Emmy in your deck, then your Opponent may as well scoop.
It was oppressive."
Either I'm reading this wrong, or you played an entirely different standard to me. Emrakul decks, while highly played, weren't even close to unbeatable.
February 8, 2017 6:07 p.m.
Since I don't know you from a bar of soap we most certainly DID play in a different standard.
I don't know how aggressive or proficient your play group is, but mine is ruthless.
I am not alone in my view of Emrakul, hence the ban.
February 8, 2017 9:05 p.m.
The issue here is you're just provably wrong. Like, exaggeration for emphasis is fine, it's whatever, but you're quite literally saying that the card cannot be beaten if it's in the deck, which is just obviously insanity.
And if none of the decks in your play group could beat an Emrakul being in the deck, I'm not sure you can really call it "ruthless".
February 9, 2017 3:14 a.m.
I'll say it one more time and then I'm done.
Emrakul, the Promised End was banned because a lot of people found it oppressive to play against.
Trying to shame me doesn't change that fact.
February 9, 2017 6:32 a.m.
My issue was with how strong you were acting like it was. What you're saying now is entirely different to your first statement.
And I don't recall at any point "shaming" you.
February 9, 2017 8:19 a.m.
Hamster2558 says... #23
Why have any issue. People have different opinions on cards.
February 9, 2017 9:46 a.m.
AwezomePozzum says... #24
I echo Hamster2558, we're turning a discussion about thinly sliced trees draped in ink and a price tag into a unnecessary argument. Let's all be entitled to our own opinions, and while I personally agree with Argeaux, awphutt can have their own opinions.
Let's just have a healthy discussion about the banned and restricted list changes. How about Reflector Mage or Smuggler's Copter instead of Emmy?
February 9, 2017 10:19 a.m.
Harashiohorn says... #25
Copter was a ubiquitous artifact that did things involving card advantage, and those have a history of getting banned in standard. As to Reflector Mage, as previously stated, its not something thats fun to play against when blink effects are abound. Equally important though, was that two of the three most powerful decks at the time both took a huge blow, and if WOTC has learned anything from banning things in modern, if you ban the only decks that can compete with a certain deck, that deck tends to do very well. Reflector Mage was generally viewed as a less-fun card due to its slowing down of the game, and was dirt cheap, so banning it allowed WOTC to keep the decks that ran it in check, without unnecessarily hurting their value or viability.
February 9, 2017 4:26 p.m.
I dislike them as a whole, because it shows a shift in philosophy for Wizards's ban criteria, this being moreso for Smuggler's Copter and Emrakul, the Promised End, and less for Reflector Mage.
So, last time something got banned in standard was June of 2011 when Stoneforge Mystic and Jace, the Mind Sculptor were banned. At the 2 SCG Opens immediately previous the bannings, the top 8 consisted of 5 Caw-Blade decks in one, and 7 in the other (each of which ran 4 of each JTMS and SFM). The GP previous had 4 Caw Blade decks (Again with 4 of each card) and 4 RUG decks (featuring 4x Jace, the Mind Sculptor) as it's top 8.
Compare this to the last 2 GPs before this set of bannings: There were 6 different deck types (counting all Vehicles and Marvel variants as the same deck, with those decks being 6x GR/Temur Marvel, 2x BR Aggro, 4x UW Flash, 2x Mardu/RW Vehicles, and 1 each of UR Emerge and UW Panharmonicon). Of these decks, Copter features in 9, Emrakul in 6, and Mage in 5.
So, from this we can take, as far as I can tell, that WotC's line on bannings is that they aren't to ensure a healthy format, but rather to lead the format in the direction they want it to go, and for me that's dangerous territory. It means standard, which has always been the most expensive format, is going to become even pricier as wizards become more aggressive with bannings, and from both a personal perspective and a health of magic perspective, I think it's a bad move. People are already mistrusting wizards to handle Modern's banlist with any real care, and now they're taking a more heavy-handed approach to standard in a similar way, I worry faith in their ability to keep formats worth players's money might be shaken even further.
The reason I'm more accepting of Reflector Mage's banning is that I can see the reasoning of trying to limit Copy-Cat's power. The PT shows it's not powerful enough to require banning (at least not yet), but with Reflector Mage, it's entirely possibly (and probably quite likely) it was far more dominant. Whether that would have been counteracted with Copter and Emmy, I don't know, but I understand their concern there.
TL;DR: More bannings is bad news because it costs people more money and leads to less faith in WotC.
February 9, 2017 5:25 p.m.
That's very interesting awphutt as I find that the direction taken by these bannings to be rather encouraging. Yes you do lose individual card value, and even whole decks sometimes, but having a healthy and effective ban list is usually better for a format as whole in my experience. Ban lists are extremely important as they are one of the few ways to interact with a format outside of printing cards into it, and allows one to remove cards that are oppressive, and effectively choking out other options from seeing play. Yes overuse of this technique is undesirable as it warps formats and can lead to player burnout. However not utilizing it can be equally detrimental as small missteps in power judgement while printing cards can adversely affect format diversity and health for large periods of time. Personally I found Wizards so far to be almost too reluctant to use the ban list, and as such the hyper-dominance of decks such as Bant company and yes even BG Delerium have made made recent standard formats disappointing. Altogether bans are simply another tool for Wizards to utilize in order to make this game as fun as possible, as long as they are used carefully and responsibly.
February 11, 2017 6:54 p.m.
Rabid_Wombat says... #28
The banning have killed Standard in my area- two of my LGS' failed to get the 8 peeps required for Game Day playmat to be given as prize ...and they were pulling in crowds of 20-25 this time last year.
In fact, everyone was playing budget decks at the one store to have a top 8- And the guys who had the $250+ Emrakul & Scooter Looter decks who got burned by the bans are playing Hearthstone now.
If Wizards think that players are going are going to buy into new MTG decks after losing hundreds of dollars they have no idea of how much competition is out there!
I predict that the next set will have two Rare slots....
February 12, 2017 2:54 a.m.
Rabid_Wombat why would you suggest that the next set would have 2 rare slots? That would be changing the entire format of booster packs that has persisted for over a decade.
February 12, 2017 3:06 a.m.
Bovine073 I absolutely agree that banlists are extremely important to having healthy formats, and I even think there's definitely an argument for Bant Company having required a ban. But my issue with these sets of bannings is nothing was dominant. There was no "best deck" in the format before the bannings happened. The field was generally open, and nothing was being stifled by any of the cards banned.
February 12, 2017 4:55 a.m.
Rabid_Wombat says... #31
Bovine073 the past decade is history- Standard is under pressure from four fronts: Modern/EDH/Frontier & Hearthstone. If the current ccg model is truly going to survive a major change is needed.
An extra Rare slot would add the increased value and hype that Standard needs right now.
February 12, 2017 11:03 p.m.
@Rothon - The problem with standard in general when you say "healthy format" or "diversity" - there are 3 decks in standard. Mardu Vehichles, Sahili Combo, BG Delirium.
High level standard decks gravitate towards the best decks. Banning entire decks by taking out cards can sometimes be the right call if something is truly oppressive and you aren't willing to print good answers for the mechanics they represent, but we went from seeing the same 3 decks, to a different 3 decks, anything different is fringe design to beat the 3 predominant decks that dominate the format.
Which is the inherent problem when your main competitive format has a limited selection of cards and answers. When you're a grinder and trying to earn money from tournaments you aren't going to spend all of that money to travel and invest in decks to lose to 50% of the meta, and even down to casual FNM play, no one wants to invest in a format where you have a 2-300 dollar deck that can get banned due to oppressive tournament representation that they don't even participate in.
February 13, 2017 10:37 a.m.
JerichoDarkstar says... #33
I agree wholeheartedly with Jhed1.
Basically, that is the very reason I quit playing Yu-Gi-Oh! competitively. It got so bad at one point that Konami was printing cards only to ban them a few months later. Look up the "Dragon Ruler" fiasco sometime.
I'm not mad that cards got banned. Slip ups happen, but printing Aetherworks Marvel knowing good and well you also printed Emrakul, the Promised End is not a slip up. If Marvel would have said "put it on the battlefield instead," that combo wouldn't have been as broken, and maybe Emrakul wouldn't have been banned.
Same thing with Looter Scooter. Vehicles did not have time for proper testing, in my opinion, but a 3/3 flyer with card draw on Turn 2 or 3 is a bad idea.
On top of all those problems, Wizards changed the Standard rotation... again. We shouldn't still have Gideon, Ally of Zendikar in Standard. What's worse is that he will still be here when Amonhket drops. To me, Standard become very unhealthy as a format.
February 13, 2017 11:05 a.m.
Gideon, Ally of Zendikar is not a broken card. He does not oppress the number of playable decks, he does not make standard less fun any more or less than any other powerful card. Wizards are as likely to ban him as they are Thraben Inspector.
February 13, 2017 12:31 p.m.
JerichoDarkstar says... #35
I wasn't saying that Gideon, Ally of Zendikar is a broken card at all. He was just the first card that came to mind. I should have said Reflector Mage because I think he exemplifies my point better.
Reflector Mage + Eldrazi Displacer + Panharmonicon is a problem. I don't know for sure, but I think that contributed to Mage getting banned. That should not have been an issue because Zendikar was supposed to have rotated out by the time Kaladesh cards come in.
Yu-Gi-Oh! has this bad problem of older cards having incredibly good synergy with newer cards, and thus making them a problem when they wouldn't have been on their own.
The point I was trying to make was that extending the Standard rotation was a bad idea. I shouldn't have used Gideon, Ally of Zendikar as my example for that. The ultimate point was that Wizards has made several bad decisions about the Standard format and made it unhealthy. I don't want to see that trend continue.
February 13, 2017 1:34 p.m.
Oh sorry, I thought you were using him as a card u thought should be banned, not just an example. My bad!
February 13, 2017 1:55 p.m.
JerichoDarkstar says... #37
Hey, no need to apologize. I wasn't very clear on what I was talking about. That was my bad.
February 13, 2017 2:43 p.m.
I would say that Gideon, Ally of Zendikar is actually an awesome example of the Yu-gi-oh issue.
He is an awesome walker because he makes guys to protect himself, can hit people by himself, and has a built in anthem effect. he has always been a solid card.
The problem lies with printing a card like Heart of Kiran. It is pretty ok. Not a stellar card on its own. But good.
The problem lies with both of them existing together. Plus gideon, remove a counter to turn on Heart, swing with both. On your turn, remove a counter to also block with heart. It is a small price to pay to always have up a 4/4 blocker with flying that punches people and can work in tandem with the only walker in the deck. Not truly oppressive, but very, very strong synergy that really should have been viewed over beforehand.
February 13, 2017 3:54 p.m.
NotoriousB.S.T. says... #39
Does anyone think some kind of amnesty could work for Wizards in serious ban situations, such that you could turn in cards that got a standard ban for a WotC product voucher? They could use some sort of 'official' secondary market value or more likely have a standard nominal amount like 5c for commons, 20c for uncommons $1 for rares and $3 for mythics.
That way if you wanted to sub stuff that you could no longer play you'd end up with a bit of perceived value - people who wanted to keep one or all of something for other formats could choose to. If it was regulated in a few ways: only people with a membership, only within 30 days of the ban announcement, only a max of 4 of a card... Wizards could potentially recycle the materials too.
I'm sure I'll see plenty of reasons this is a bad idea or wouldn't work logistically but I am just 'thinking out loud' for a salt-less or diluted solution
February 14, 2017 9:58 a.m.
While I didn't make an active choice to boycott Magic since the bans, I haven't played a single time since then and I was a FNM regular. I wanted to make an Emmy deck before it was even spoiled, but never settled on one until one week prior to ban notice when I bought all the missing pieces, including several Emmys.
I haven't felt inclined to play my old deck or build a new one since that time. In games that require commitment, I like to do extensive planning. Curve balls in rules are not just annoying, they actually disrupt my MO in approach to gaming.
February 14, 2017 1:10 p.m.
Rabid_Wombat says... #41
Lol
sitri_ I'm the same, no FNM's since the bannings either...and Commander is turnng out to be much more fun and sociable :D - thanks Wizards!
Seriously though..Wizards need to unban Emrakul so I don't keep lending out my dual lands to hot chicks playing EDH, I'm starting to lose track of who has what! Standard was so much less complicated sigh
February 18, 2017 9:53 p.m.
Answer: Don't lend stuff. Lend while obtaining things of equivalent value. For example, take her wallet if they want to borrow it for the night, But never let people leave with your stuff unless you get a written record.
EpicFreddi says... #1
You still have ulamog, so instead of winning on the same turn (or rather: on the extra turn). With ulamog you have to actually attack to seal the deal.
January 28, 2017 6:18 a.m.