The State of Modern and Banning's?
Modern forum
Posted on Nov. 11, 2014, 1:20 p.m. by WovenNebula
These cards have been very influential in Modern, some over a short time and some much much longer, these cards have been contreversial and have been talked about to be given the ban hammer at some point in the game, do these cards really require such an action and what really puts cards in the abyss called Banned?
Other card to mention is Dig Through Time, which is similar to Brainstorm, although personally I think digs is a balanced card, besides it being used in top tier decks to accelerate them to greater heights.
In your opinion below please state why you think a card should and should not be banned. You can not use this deck was tier 1 and now is not as an argument because of any decks using the above cards, since this happens over time throughout modern as a part of evolution of the format, unless it is so "oppressive" in its nature.
Also your thoughts on the "shake up" in modern. Keep in mind that its not good for a format to have the same top decks over the years. They come and go from tier 1 to other tiers but can still be very competitive and come back when a new set is released to aid their conquest.
I have felt this has been a heated topic as of late and some of us may need to vent, but please do so in a civil manner.
So, by your logic, Cruise isn't the problem, Delver is the problem. You just said SB to deal with Cruise isn't worth it. So if it isn't worth SB for, it isn't worth banning. And 2 months really isn't that long, especially if you're only looking at competitive events. I hate to keep going back to DRS, but he was around for almost a year and a half before they banned him.
November 11, 2014 5:47 p.m.
Here's a relevant podcast that anyone following this thread should (listen to)[http://www.crcast.com/podcasts/constructed-resources-8-ban-treasure-cruise/]. It's by Marshall Sutcliffe and Jon Loucks, both hosts and former hosts of Limited Resources, talking about Treasure Cruise in older formats. The most relevant part though is when Jon Loucks goes card-by-card through the Modern ban-list and about kindof "why" they are banned.
November 11, 2014 5:48 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #5
I think you're starting to hate on me rather than attack my arguments. I'd prefer this be about the cards in question.
The cost of Vision is four turns, which is a hell of a lot more than delving seven cards out of your graveyard. Remand is a common card that is much better against Vision than against Cruise. I would venture that it's rather obvious that Cruise is better than Vision.
The reasoning behind unbanning Vision is to keep people happy, as all those who invested in Scalding Tarns and whatnot may be turned off to the format. That said, I may have to reconsider my assertion.
November 11, 2014 5:49 p.m.
@WovenNebula: unban all the things! Haha unbanning Stoneforge would be... Interesting.
November 11, 2014 5:51 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #7
What I was getting at was that you just can't sideboard cards specifically to hate out one specific card, because Modern sideboards need to be versatile enough to answer everything. It will be difficult to adjust to Cruise specifically, which is why I don't feel it's safe to have it around.
November 11, 2014 5:54 p.m.
Yeh you dont hate on the card, you just shut down the deck the card is played in. Thankfully delver isn't overly hard to shut down.
November 11, 2014 5:58 p.m.
GlistenerAgent - If you thought that I was making an ad hominem attack, I apologize. I really am just looking at your arguments and debating them, that is all.
That said, in order to cast a Treasure Cruise you need at least 3-4 turns worth of spells to Delve out a one-mana Cruise. While a T1 suspended Ancestral Vision is much easier to attain. Plus you'll know exactly when you'll get those 3 cards, in 4 turns. Whereas for Treasure Cruise, you don't know if you'll even get the chance to cast it for one mana.
I also agree with kmcree that we haven't had that much time nor that many major Modern events. Has there even been a Modern GP since Khans of Tarkir has come out? Wizards has already said there won't be any emergency bannings until after Fate Reforged. And they will probably wait until after PT FRF before making any other moves to the banned list for Modern (as well as Legacy/Vintage).
November 11, 2014 5:58 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #10
Waiting four turns is a lot, and having your Ancestral Vision eat a Remand is not where you want to be at all. In addition, your opponent also knows exactly when they need to leave up countermagic, whereas with Cruise you can catch them when they tap out for some spell.
There hasn't been a really large event, but MTGO results tell me that the card is dominating. I do agree that we'd have to see a large event to be sure.
November 11, 2014 6:17 p.m.
GlistenerAgent - While that may be the case, you're forgetting about the Cascade problem. There are playable Cascade cards in Modern, and I can imagine that cascading into an Ancestral Vision is quite good. And having a Treasure Cruise get Remand'ed is also very bad, especially after you Delve out your graveyard. You have the same "time" commitment to recast your Cruise as with Vision, it just takes a different form.
November 11, 2014 6:24 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #12
Recasting Treasure Cruise after Remand is considerably easier than doing so with Ancestral Vision, especially in Delver.
There are very few cascade spells that even hit the permissible CMC for Modern, let alone are playable. I don't think people will be playing these cards just to maximize the Vision. There also isn't Brainstorm, making cascade even less guaranteed to be powerful.
Four turns and 7 cards in your graveyard are vastly different resources, and the latter is a great deal easier to achieve and really only takes another turn or two in practice.
November 11, 2014 6:30 p.m.
JexInfinite says... #13
The reason that Ancestral Vision is a better card to have in modern than Treasure Cruise is that not every deck can play Vision. Any deck could splash blue for Cruise, but basically only Cascade decks will play Vision. Even so, it's waiting in exile for 4 turns, allowing your opponent to play around it, and drawing into Vision off of a Vision is terrible, whereas Cruise is great.
November 11, 2014 6:35 p.m.
Is it easier to recast Treasure Cruise? Yes, but there still is a "turn" requirement, especially if you're low on cards and are attempting to refill. I'd still like to see Treasure Cruise to get a little more play before we talk about the sky falling again.
And hey, at least we aren't talking about banning Birthing Pod or Tarmogoyf. Because it's not like either of those cards made up 20+% of the meta and/or splashed in decks that don't need them (coughTarmoffinitycough).
November 11, 2014 6:39 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #15
Let's just ban all the cards that need to be in the format for stability reasons. :)
November 11, 2014 6:43 p.m.
I would just like to point out, that it is incredibly easy to SB against Cruise. A couple Rest in Peace and your problem is solved. And RIP can also help in plenty of other matchups, like against Goyf, DRS, Scooze, Snapcaster Mage, and even Reanimator if we decide to unban Grave Troll and that becomes a thing. RIP is an extremely versatile SB card, and one that, IMO, isn't seeing as much play as it should. If Cruise continues to see this much play, cards like RIP, Bojuka Bog, and the like will begin to find their way into SBs.
November 11, 2014 7 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #17
Again, Rest in Peace only beats Treasure Cruise, not the decks it's played in. You can play a RiP on turn 2 and still lose horribly to Delver, because their aggressive plan is still very strong.
Graveyard hate should only really exist if there is a dedicated graveyard-based deck in the format. That's just how sideboarding in Modern works. Since there is no deck you can completely hose, that Rest in Peace is probably better served as a Pyroclasm or Celestial Purge.
November 11, 2014 7:04 p.m.
I would also like to go back to what Ohthenoises said about there being a lack of a true "control" deck in the Meta. Most UWR I've seen are more midrange decks. 8Rack and other hand disruption decks aren't really control either. If you look at the current Meta, there really is no strong control option. There's tons of aggro and midrange, but I'd love to see if Cruise can help a control deck become t1 again.
November 11, 2014 7:05 p.m.
But if you beat Cruise, then Delver is essentially back to where it was before the new set came out, which is essentially a fringe t2 deck that folds to almost every t1 deck in the meta.
November 11, 2014 7:07 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #20
Scapeshift is a control deck. There are versions of UWR that are dedicated to control, with only five or so creatures (4 Snapcaster Mage, 1 Keranos, God of Storms). U Tron is a control deck that sees less play than others.
November 11, 2014 7:12 p.m.
Nigeltastic says... #21
I think it's really not so unreasonable to play Rest in Peace to hose Snapcaster Mage, Tarmogoyf, Treasure Cruise, Birthing Pod, Dig Through Time, and any sort of Mindslaver lock. Turns out a decent amount of really good modern cards use the 'yard.
I also wouldn't say looking at Treasure Cruise's statistical popularity (5th) and then saying that that popularity is unrelated to it being the the same deck as the 4 above it (UR Delver) is a very strong argument.
November 11, 2014 7:15 p.m.
Scapeshift is kind of a control deck. But its also heavily ramped based, and definitely not a draw go kind of control. There are UWR control decks out there (I run one myself) but they aren't super competitive. I honestly don't remember the last time I ran into U Tron. Its out there, but it seems like these days everything is RG. But, I could see UWR draw go style control decks become more powerful with Cruise available. Which is really what I've been getting at this whole time. I'd much rather give Cruise at least a year in the meta, see how things go, and then make a decision. Give it some time for decks to evolve. Maybe new decks will pop up because of it. But just auto banning 2 months in isn't really fair to the people trying to advance the meta.
November 11, 2014 7:18 p.m.
Ohthenoises says... #23
I know you don't agree but scapeshift is clearly a combo deck. It win's via combo and if you remove the combo the deck (mostly) falls apart. All of that points towards a combo goal. Now, like I said before, there is a lot of overlap with control and combo but that is ONLY because they seek to delay the game until their combo can be assembled, once that is complete boop you lose. You want to protect your combo above all else. That's why storm sometimes run counters, it's why twin is U/R not W/R (there are a lot of W creatures that do the same thing as Deceiver Exarch), and so on.
Calling Scapeshift a control deck would be the exact same thing as calling U/R delver a control deck, they have a ton of counters and disruption, they have more than a lot of decks. That doesn't make U/R a control deck, we call it what it is: a tempo deck.
Every single source online and everyone else I talk to and hear pros saying is that scapeshift is a combo deck.
Mtgtop8, SCG, TCG, and any other large tournament hosting/reporting service has scapeshift listed as combo.
Now, it PLAYS like a control deck, that's fine. Melira pod plays like a midrange deck. It's still combo according to everyone else.
November 11, 2014 7:22 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #24
As a Scapeshift player, I will tell you that playing the deck as a control deck rather than as a combo deck wins you more games. I've played the deck long enough that I think I have an inkling of what I'm doing. Most experts on the deck (I am not one of these) will tell you the same thing.
Control decks generally prefer Dig Through Time because they need to find specific answers, and they don't have the redundancy to get the most value from Treasure Cruise.
I didn't mean to say that (not even sure that I did say that). It is strongly tied to Delver, but it's also being played elsewhere.
I think the main issue with Rest in Peace in particular is that the decks it's good against (Pod, Jund, control) all have common ways to answer it, be it Abrupt Decay or counterspells. I do agree that it is playable in the right metagame.
November 11, 2014 7:25 p.m.
Ohthenoises says... #25
GlistenerAgent decks are slotted into categories, not based on their method of play, but their win conditions.
Pod is played like a midrange deck, everyone who has played pod can tell you that, but yet, it's still in the combo section of the big three. Same with scapeshift in combo.
November 11, 2014 7:30 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #26
I mean, it's not like these archetype names are set in stone. It's really up to individuals as to what they want to call decks. I think Scapeshift is a control deck.
November 11, 2014 7:32 p.m.
My point about it not being draw go still stands. No other "control" deck has ramp cards like Sakura-Tribe Elder, Search for Tomorrow, etc. And no other control deck has an insta win combo. Those decks are all considered combo. So, while you may consider Scapeshift control, most other control players would disagree with you.
November 11, 2014 7:36 p.m.
Ohthenoises says... #28
Like I said on your wall, method of play is really irrelevant, it's the win condition and how the game is ended that determines what archetype the deck falls into. (This isn't me saying your opinion is irrelevant btw, just that the method of play isn't taken into account in how a deck is slotted into the appropriate archetype.)
U/W/x midrange (as it's listed on top8) is the exception IMO, it's a deck that USED to be pure control but since it was put into the control wedge has changed into what it is now. Even top8 lists it as midrange.
November 11, 2014 7:36 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #29
OK, you can disagree with me. Shall we move on?
November 11, 2014 7:38 p.m.
Ohthenoises says... #30
Hey lol, I blame kmcree, he brought me back into this conversation. I was happily playing borderlands and killing people as jack's doppleganger.
November 11, 2014 7:42 p.m.
I guess, to sum up my position, I don't disagree with you that Delver is appearing in an unhealthily large percentage of decks. I just disagree with your urgency to ban it, and your seeming disregard for the meta's ability to correct itself. I also see potential value for Cruise beyond just Delver decks. I think it has the potential, if given a chance, to elevate a number of previously t2 decks into t1 contention. And that, after all, is what I look for out of each new set. I hate stagnant metas, where only a few decks are played. If you look at the last 6+ months, that's kind of how things have been. So if Cruise has the potential to introduce new decks to t1, and turn the meta on its head a little bit, then I'm all for that. If we're still here 6 months from, and Delver is still taking up a huge percentage of the meta, then I might be willing to revisit the idea of banning it. But at the present time, I don't feel that a ban is worthy.
November 11, 2014 7:47 p.m.
Out with TC, in with Vision. Vision could be an awesome addition as maybe a 2-of in UWR control decks, it would be a sick turn 1 play for that deck. There's not much broken about it, I could live with it despite not having any decks it could be added to.
November 11, 2014 8:57 p.m.
I skipped some of this thread as I came in late. However:
Treasure Cruise has had a mere 2 months with very few pro events to affect the meta. A large format like modern takes time (and guidance from pros) to adjust to new and powerful cards.
As someone who is playing UR delver on MTGO, I NEVER cast it turn 2, RARELY cast it turn 3, and quite often cast on turn 4/5. Delver usually has better things to do before drawing 3 random cards on turn 2; You cant just dump cantrips and use all your mana/life to draw cards on turn 2, you need to cast delver,swiftspear and leave up counter magic.
Honestly the deck is good, but very few people are hating on it right now, the focus is oddly still on pod and twin. Calling Treasure Cruise oppressive is an overstatement at this juncture, it's powerful but it's not the most played card, its not in one deck that exceeds Pod's previous popularity, and it's brand new!
Treasure Cruise belongs in burn, it WORKS. What makes a slightly Izzet brew for burn bad? The coolest part of magic is how all the colors interact in different ways with each other (i think).
I vote Cruise gets time to let the meta (and deck builders) play around with it and react to it. MTGO is not the ultimate indicator. Keep in mind also that UR delver is a relatively affordable tier 1 deck now too which will attract more people to play it.
November 12, 2014 1:18 a.m.
JexInfinite says... #34
kmcree I guess that until we see 3 copies of Delver in the Top 8 of a PT or GP, banning it is questionable.
I still think it should be banned. When a legal card is better than a banned card the majority of the time, and can be played in any deck, then there is a problem. If Ancestral Vision was legal, hardly anyone would play it, but Cascade may actually become a deck. It doesn't hose anything, or destroy particular decks with its existence like Cruise does.
November 12, 2014 1:20 a.m.
Also if you refuse to sideboard against cruise because you won't board for one card, you might as well not side for any powerful cards (that make up poweful decks like Birthing Pod Splinter Twin Tarmogoyf) Plus Rest in Peace hoses snappy...
November 12, 2014 1:22 a.m.
http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=8468&f=MO
There were 16 copies of Treasure Cruise in this Top 8. Decks that run it run 4 of it as well, because it's that powerful. I believe that was more than any non-land in the Top 8. It's banworthy, for the time being.
November 12, 2014 9 a.m.
wnorris17 boarding graveyard hate only for Treasure Cruise against Delver is something completely different than boarding stuff like Torpor Orb against Twin. If you resolve Orb, Twin basically can't won anymore but even with a Rest in Peace on the field that shuts down their Cruises, Delver can still just kill you.
November 12, 2014 9:06 a.m.
vishnarg - but there were 3 versions of the same deck......
November 12, 2014 9:59 a.m.
CanadianShinobi says... #39
I'm going to point out that just a few months ago people were speculating (and some demanding) that Birthing Pod get the ban hammer. I don't see Treasure Cruise in the same light like I do Deathrite Shaman. Now, granted, Treasure Cruise is popping up in strange places, which it shouldn't be. But, is it too powerful for Modern? Well, that's the question I suppose. I say no. I see Treasure Cruise as an enabler more than a hindrance to the current meta. MTGO can be useful as a rough indicator, but it is wise to wait and see at this point. 2 months isn't long enough to make a definitive call on a card like Treasure Cruise.
November 12, 2014 11:58 a.m.
Dalektable says... #40
I've spoke at lengths about Treasure Cruise and banning a few times at length both irl and on here. I play the card, and let me tell you it's not gamebreaking. There are times drawing a cruise is terrible. Cruise is a card that needs to be built around or fit into a deck to work. A primarily creature based aggro deck doesn't want this card. You have to be packing a decent amount of instants and sorceries to make it worth it. The card is not oppressive. The format is not format worping. The card can and is beaten, quite easily. Yes, it makes some decks better. So let those decks have their time in the spotlight before crying for a ban so you don't have to deal with them.
November 12, 2014 12:14 p.m.
Treasure Cruise makes UR aggro and RDW the best decks in modern, which makes the format really hard to play in. It also made Jeskai Ascendancy prevelant too. The fact that 3 of those decks were the same and made Top 8 lead behind Cruise shows that it's a power creep and pushes those decks over the edge. It should be banned to restore balance to the format.
November 12, 2014 12:18 p.m.
By "restore balance" you mean go back to when Pod, Twin, and Affinity made up 70% of the meta? Doesn't sound real balanced to me.
I really don't understand why people are getting so up in arms because a couple previously t2 decks have placed well in a couple of events. More competitive archetypes=more variety=healthier meta. It's that simple.
As Dalektable said, the card is not back breaking, and it's certainly not format warping. It's just an excellent enabler that has allowed a couple t2 decks to become more competitive. This is a good thing.
November 12, 2014 12:29 p.m.
vishnarg see the above post from kmcree
Before there was a ton of twin and pod. Now there's a large amount of UR delver and burn. So what?
Besides. Linking to one top 8 isn't representative.
There are plenty of times when UR aggro and burn either aren't doing so well or just feature a grand total of 1 time in the entire top 8, like here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here
Look at all those examples where burn or UR delver places once and the rest of the top 8 is (shock horror!) decks NOT RUNNING TREASURE CRUISE.
When we start regularly seeing top 8s that have more than one delver deck and more than one burn deck and there are 16 copies of the card in the top 8 (so half of the top 8 is cruising) then things will be bad. As it stands thats happened maybe one time? There's this ridiculous case of selective sourcing where people are taking like one single top 8 on its own and saying 'oh shit treasure cruise is so broken' when really you need to be looking at 10 or more to see what's happening overall. Likewise to say it's being splashed into all kinds of decks and then provide a link that demonstrates it in one deck, at one time really isn't convincing. If we suddenly saw like 10 RUG or 10 4c junk w/TCruise decks doing well then it would be a cause for concern. But we havent.......
November 12, 2014 12:50 p.m.
I think out of those 8 links two of them feature placements where NEITHER burn nor delver made it the top. Small sample, but from that you could (validly) argue that 25% of events do not see decks playing Treasure Cruise place in the top 4.
November 12, 2014 12:54 p.m.
Sure there were 16 copies of Treasure Cruise in that Top-8...
But there were 24 copies of Lightning Bolt in the same top-8...
20 copies of Gitaxian Probe...
16 copies of Serum Visions...
16 copies of Monastery Swiftspear...
So I guess they all need to be banned as well?
November 12, 2014 12:56 p.m.
Jesus Christ guys, I was just making a point. They don't need to ban Lightning Bolt, Gitaxian Probe, Serum Visions or Monastery Swiftspear, because they are essential parts of the decks they are used in. The difference is, Treasure Cruise is the card that has warped the format, and puts all of the decks it's in into the highest tier. When Deathrite was banned, it was hitting only 16 copies or so in Top 8's, but it made Pod decks far and away the strongest in the format. I see TC as being on par with Deathrite in that regard.
November 12, 2014 2:29 p.m.
You still think that despite the fact that I provided 8 recent top 8s where burn and delver haven't dominated?
November 12, 2014 2:53 p.m.
I hadn't seen that top8 was updated recently, but yes, I do.
November 12, 2014 3:03 p.m.
I wouldn't say DRS made Pod the best deck. At the time that he was banned, Jund was by far the most widespread deck in the format. If anything, Pod has become MORE prevalent since the ban. Jund, on the other hand, has dropped off considerably.
November 12, 2014 3:13 p.m.
So. I provide references showing that delver and burn are't dominating. But you still think that delver and burn are dominating. Huh.
This does seem to be becoming a common conversation around here-
"Treasure Cruise is too strong. Delver and Burn decks are doing too well in events!"
"But look at all these recent events where delver and burn haven't done that well. They actually outnumber the events where those decks DID do well."
"Yeh but Treasure Cruise is still too strong".
WovenNebula says... #1
Stoneforge Mystic would be an interesting unbanning, making death and taxes more of a thing. Albeit I was on a hiatus from mtg during its time being legal.
November 11, 2014 5:45 p.m.