MTG Modern General

>>51540806
OP is shit. Last threads was just fine. kys

Quick question. I'm going to FNM for the first time tonight. Does my deck/sideboard need to be in a box separate from any other cards? I ask this because I have a tower box I normally use which has a few decks in it.

>>51540806
Nothing will happen to terminate. Fatal push is good, but overhyped.

Mardu is shit because it has no clock. It really is just poor man's jund/k. Good luck using removal on valakut and ad nauseum

>>51541203
Why would it need to be?

>>51541512
I've seen bigger tournaments where that's the case. Didn't know if FNM was that way as well

>>51541991
It is. I was just hoping you would figure it out in your own

>>51542107
Nope, too cautious to form a solid answer on my own. Appreciated anon

File: Captura de pantalla 2017-02-03 a la(s) 13.55.09.png (265KB, 447x311px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 447x311px

in which deck can I play this handsome lumberjack that is not jund?

>>51543237
None, really.

So I haven't played magic since i lost all my cards back in middle school, and Im looking to get back in.
Ive always liked Red thematically, so what are the pros and cons of each color combo with red?

>>51543237
RUG delve is about the only other deck it plays in

>>51543365
RW - Boros Charm
RG - Cheap
RU - Uh.. nothing?
RB - idfk

This is a competitive thread, modern refers to the format, not "modern cards". If you want to start with modern be aware that decks go for like $800+, and random homebrews are next to unplayable, especially when made by new players.

Fatal push hits everything that isn't tron, scape shift/breach, and half of Grixis? Seems better than terminate, nothing really regenerates in modern anyway

>>51543443
Ok, wasn't sure which MtG thread to ask this in

>>51543443
RU is snap bolt you ignoramus. There's a reason scalding tarn is expensive.

>>51543479
doesn't hit half of the threats in the eldrazi decks either

>>51543365
red is almost always about being aggressive. but it depends on the format, really.

r/w could swarm you with tokens but also has the ability to destroy your lands and creatures and lock you out of the game.

r/u usually wins in a single turn by chaining spells and hitting you with them or doing an infinite damage combo or playing a tempo game

r/b is also aggressive and it has good removal and discard options.

r/g also has some land destruction. cannot swarm as much as r/w but the creatures are bigger

>>51543715
But there's no fucking UR deck outside of like suicide bloo (which doesn't run snap)? If you want to go over every 3 color combo with red in it be my guest.

>>51543508
You'd probably be best asking in a standard thread, that's the format with all of the newest cards in it and is the cheapest widely played format (though it's still pretty pricey).

>>51543479
Someone a while ago did a break down of every modern relevant creature that Push hits. It's something like, 50% without revolt, and close to 65% with. Which, I think, is worth some slots in certain decks. Same reason to run Spell Snare.

File: purest waifu.jpg (387KB, 1728x972px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1728x972px

>>51540806
>>What removal spell should see more play in modern, but doesn't.
magma spray is the most efficient answer to melira podless outside of anger, but that isn't a deck right now.

>>How does your deck play around removal?
mana denial, taxing and flicker effects. selfless spirit and redundancy. smuggler's copter!

>>Why does Mardu see zero play even though it has all the best removal?
it has the least efficient everything-else.

What MtG cards (or related things in general) would you guys want as a birthday present?

I have a friend who pretty much only plays modern MtG and X-Wing, and we're having a tough time figuring out what to get him. We were thinking at first that he would like getting a booster box and then having a draft or two with it, but I feel like he wouldn't get much he would actually use unless we went for Modern Masters or an older set (which all seem to be above our $100 budget).

Then I thought we should just get him some good individual cards, but I'm not even sure what all he already has. The only deck I've personally seen him use was a Demigod of Revenge deck. Is there anything you guys just can't have too many of for modern?

>>51544217
Find out what decks he plays and get him some cards he doesn't already have from another list.
Everyone always needs fetchlands, you can get him a couple of those.
Find out what deck he WANTS to build and get him some staples for that.
Or just ask him what he wants/needs.

>>51544217

get him a box of Conspiracy 2 and draft with him, there's enough modern legal cards in there to make it interesting and drafts are a blast

File: stand aside pleb.jpg (176KB, 1024x748px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1024x748px

>>51544268
>everyone always needs fetchlands

>>51544295
I was actually considering Conspiracy, but figured most cards would be pretty self-contained and only useful in the draft and then Commander. If there's a decent chance of him getting some pretty good Modern cards out of a booster box, then I think that's what I'll go with. Conspiracy seemed like the most fun to draft.

>>51544268
I guess it should have been obvious to just ask, but I always feel weird asking people about what to get them for their birthday, and I don't know a way to ask without making it extremely obvious that I'm asking for his birthday. Fetchlands are a good idea, though.

>>51544646


https://scryfall.com/search?order=usd&q=s%3Acn2%20f%3Amodern

>>51544675
Yeah, I've been looking over them and this seems like the best bet. Thanks!

>>51540806
>what removal spell should see more play in modern
only plebians need creature removal
>How does your deck play around removal
By drawing the entire library at instant speed in response to lethal damage and killing you
>Why does Mardu blah blah blah
who gives a sweet flying fuck

>>51546865
Thanks for your valued post

>>51546903
Fuck you fat mother's cunt

>>51547029
You must be 18 to post here

>>51547068
Fuck your


come on man don't make say things twice.

>>51547101
Oh. I'm sorry. I didn't know you were mentally impaired.

>>51547213
I am not, just fuck your fat mother's cunt man, what's so difficult to understand? You must be one of those grixis control or zoo or some shitty braindead midrange deck player.

FUCK

YOUR

FAT


MOTHER's


CUNT


.

>>51547390
Lad. Ad naus is for drooling idiots.

so /modern/ guys, are you following the aether revolt pro-tour? any cool stuff detected for the modern format?

>>51540806
>>Why does Mardu see zero play even though it has all the best removal?
It has all the best creature removal, but it lacks a maindeckable way to remove resolved artifacts, enchantments, and 'walkers. That's why Jund/k and even blue midrange/control strategies will always be better.

>>51547514
Don't call me lad, m8

Are you ready for improvise to take over modern? You thought dig through time was bad?

>>51547607
t. desolator

Buy your cryptolith rites now guys they're going to break every format

>>51541349
This, the rhino should have been 1WBR and the stupid demon should have been the Abzan one.

DAILY REMINDER THAT IF YOUR "COMBO" "DECK" INVOLVES CREATURES YOU ARE SCUM AND SHOULD DIE.

>>51548238
Another quality post.

>>51547525
Kolaghan's Command and Mortify are both perfectly fine.
Mardu isn't played because it can't run Goyf,Delver or Snapcaster, and there's no comparable threat in it's colors.

>>51548238
Already buttblasted about Cheerios' Revenge?
Shit's getting banned, Modern is the no fun league and they'll use "the deck can consistlently win turn 3 if the oponent is retarded" as an excuse.

File: 1482597928904.jpg (104KB, 872x685px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 872x685px

>>51548287
>mfw they finally ban opal because of cheerios
I'm going to be so glad when that disgusting use of a card is banned. Modern shouldn't have a mox that's strictly better than the vintage ones and only restrict it to artifact strategies, it's not fair to everyone else playing by the rules.

>>51548331
Shut up scrub. Mox opal is hardly oppressive
Inb4 hilarious t. Affinity player meme
Kys

>>51548376
>d-d-don't ban my precious opal my deck can't function without a broken vintage level card
>implying I said it was oppressive
The card is a mistake and disgustingly broken, it needs a ban.

oh almost forgot
>t. affinity player

>>51548423
Go back to kitchen table. Not everyone wants to play midrange here, kid

>>51548287
nah cheerios is still ok, even though it has disgusting creatures its only to facilitate winning by storm which makes it objectively better than 95% of the other decks in modern.

File: 195.jpg (59KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 312x445px

>>51543237
Be a try-hard and brew ware-wolves with moonmist RUG

huntmaster
delver
Mayor of Avabruck
Duskwatch Recruiter

make it happen

>>51543365
Izzet has bolt snap bolt, electrolize, and counters
Rakdos has kommand, surgical extraction, "fulminator mage" and tasigur
Gruul has valakut, ramp and atarkas command
Boros has boros charm, lightining helix, and path. Also you can sun titan if you decide to play ld

>>51548621
This is the competitive general

Who's going to gp vancouver?

What are you bringing?

Dredge: is it truly desde, or just un the ok powerlevel?

File: terrance_and_phillip_by_suchanartist13-d429lwv.png (318KB, 626x700px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 626x700px

>>51547581
I'm not your m8, kiddo

File: 1415657735898.png (396KB, 515x598px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 515x598px

>>51548768
Really? Because the title says modern general. You're the kind of guy that gets pissy if his sock drawer get disorganized, aren't you?

>>51548937
What does that even mean? Fuck off retard

>>51548453
>implying I play kitchen table
>implying I play midrange
I actually play Tron and I still think it's disgusting that only affinity and lantern get a vintage level card just because wizards has been too lazy to ban it.

They even said they consider fast mana to be problematic you pleb and yet they let ssg and opal still run around. It's time for a banning to actually make this format good.

>>51548768
not since the last few OPs it hasn't

we REALLY need better OPs

>>51549087
>tron moron complains about fast mana
Lmao. It all makes sense now.

File: Ankle Shanker_KTK.jpg (68KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 312x445px

>>51548257
What about this threat?SmolGuyForYew.dec ?

File: 1482418730770.jpg (8KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 236x236px

>>51549590
>I don't have any counter arguments as to why mox should stay unbanned because I know deep down it's broken
>I'll just shitpost him instead haha
wew lad, kys desu senpai

>>51543237
try it out in r/g ponza

>>51548768
lol, without a PT we're as "competitive" as commander weenies.

>>51549648
An ideal Mardu deck would be nothing but removal and a hard to deal-with bomb. Because being the color combo that can remove absolutely everything is it's strenght.
5-mana 2/2, shove it up your ass.

The closest Mardu is to a strong finisher is Grave Titan, but that'll never shine so long as turn 4 Ugins and Oblivion Stone activations are a thing that happens.

>>51549743
What's your argument? Wah, fast decks kill my Tron?
Fuck off memer

>>51549766
So Legacy isn't competitive either?
Gotcha

>>51549803
That mox is an inherently broken card because it's strictly better than the original moxen decks that can use it. I never said anything about deck speed and currently the only two decks that use opal that are competitive are lantern and affinity, of which only one is "fast".

Artifact strategies should be allowed to exist but they shouldn't get a vintage level card just for them, it'd be like giving enchantment based strategies or other focused archetypes ancestral recall or other vintage level crap that's toxic for the game.

If you actually think Opal is balanced then you're the memer here, not me.

>>51550039
*in decks that can use it

>>51549811
No, not really.
Without company sponsored prizes, record keeping and tropies. We're just a bunch of guy playing a card game.

At least in Legacy brewing and metagaming is fun and serves to keep the other 10+ tier 1/1.5 decks guessing around the rock-pape-scissors of Miracles-Storm-Show.
In Modern brewing is a waste of time, we've solved the format multiple times and every time we've gotten our shit banned. Sometimes we got our shit banned without even solving anything, and it looks like we're getting even more shit banned just for funsies.

This format isn't worth playing anymore, WotC doesn't care, stores don't care because they're selling more shit by pandering to Frontier/Commander, "pros" and "deckbuilders" only keep brewing for this shit because they're sponsored by stores and desperately trying to move those Obliterators and Damnations as if they were really worth the price.

Acting like an elitists when you play the hobo of formats won't do it any good.

>>51550307
Neither will whining on a website for chinese cartoons.

>>51550039
>strictly better than original moxen

Not him, but the decks that use it are: affinity, cheerios, lantern control aaaand? So affinity can use it as a 0 drop turn one mana. So? You do realize you are the only one here complaining right? You do realize that other people play the game and enjoy other stuff right?

Please stop trying to get every card banned, if anything modern should have no banlist.

YES UNBAN ARTIFACT LANDS

t. Ad nauseam player

>>51550307
>brewing is a waste of time
Tell that to Lantern Control and Bant Spirits and all the other rogue decks that have done reasonably well. Modern isn't a solved format by any means.

>>51550422
That doesn't dispute the fact that the card is fucking broken nor the fact that it allows for busted things. It speeds affinity up at no cost to them and pumps ravager/cranial plating. It allows lantern mana fixing as well as the ability to get a lock in play on t2 and it enables storm degeneracy in cheerios.

>no banlist
>ad naseum
So you're retarded and don't care at all for the health of the format because it never affects you? kys kiddo some cards are too powerful which is why we have a banlist. If you don't want one then go paly freeform or some shit because this isn't the format for eternal broken shenanigans.

>>51550532
Found the standard try-hard

This thread is a prime example that shit OPs=shit threads

>>51550532
>kiddo

why are you so buttmad m80. I enjoy formats with less artificial restrictions. The banlist just confines the format for no reason other than "but of course otherwise every deck would have to play this" which basically happens anyway with mana leaks for controls and thoughtseize etc.

Fuck you and your shitty attitude, if you want to play yu ghi oh go play that.

>>51548238
So ad nauseam is a "combo" "deck?"

>>51550896
If midrange decks are playing "Magic the gathering" i suppose anything goes.

>>51550706
There's a difference between good cards that see lots of play and busted cards that see some play.
For example, glimpse of nature turns elves into a legitimate threat and enables some busted things and you can see legacy to confirm that. It was banned and for good reason, modern isn't the format for busted shit and I by no means am advocating for the bans of good, but powerful cards such as Lightning bolt, Ravager, Goyf, Thoughtseize, Mana Leak etc. but rather for the ban of a problematic card that only enables degeneracy in affinity, lantern and cheerios. All of those decks function without their vintage moxen and would still be viable without it.

The banlist is there for problematic cards that warp the format and enable degenerate shit. You can enjoy formats with less restrictions, but based on wizards attitude and ban history, Modern is not the format for that or for you. My attitude isn't shitty considering I'm not crying for emotional balance, but rather for format health and this is being met by no actual discussion just you shitposting because the very idea of a regulated format and a balnlist makes you asspained. If anything you're the one who should fuck off to another card game.

>>51550676
nice argument affinity/lantern player

>>51550440
Lantern is older than kids in high-school. It was just unplayable because good decks still existed.

Hey, didn't want to make a thread for this, but aether revolt card Embral Gear Smasher: with it's trigger on the stack if you remove the creature will the trigger fizzle? Friend is saying it fizzles because the trigger says "this creature" but I think the trigger may just represent the damage and resolve anyway. Help plz

>>51551184
>it was unplayable because good decks existed
What good decks kept lantern from being playable? I think it was more due to the fact that in the beginning lantern didn't have a lot of players, only the diehards playing and testing the deck which led to slow progress. As the deck got more popular over time more people started getting attracted to it and helped that progress and then it started putting up real results. shit I remember when it was called top control and was considered a meme deck but lantern players just kept fanatically playing the deck and here we are.

>>51550532
Dude. You play tron. How can you complain about broken mana engines?

I went 4-2 as Bant Eldrazi in a meta that consists of Bogles, 8 rack and horrible, jank brews.

the first game was against Bogles and I went 0-2.

Please tell me I'm a shitter and call me bad. I deserve it.

File: trooby.jpg (24KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 223x310px

>>51546865
>ad nauseam
strike one
>'drawing' your library with ad nauseam
strike two
>playing zero removal
strike three, you're out.

>>51552640
bogles is the new aggro

>>51552640
There's this cool card called blessed alliance and it's good against creatures that cant't be targeted and can gain you life.

You should try running it.

>>51553009
Never drew it. Kept a hand with 2 natural states and he never played an enchantment game two.

He went bogles into geist into new thalia and I couldn't recover after EEing his geist. I had a shit hand to deal with multiple creatures and didn't expect him to have 10 of his 15 sideboard cards to be creatures

>>51552760
He could also be playing Cheerios Anon don't be a dummy. He still gets 3 strikes though.

>>51553680
Either deck should run at least have one slaughter pact or something.

>>51548423
>vintage level
I don't think you even grasp what the fuck you're talking about.

>>51550039
>again vintage level
>strictly better than original moxen
I give 0 fucks about opal being banned in modern, but you legit do not even begin to understand how stupid you sound for throwing around such statements

The power of original moxes is in the fact that they are generic. Opal is extremely non-generic and legendary.

A non-generic card in vintage has to be broken enough to have a game-winning strategy around it or in itself.

Btw yes, opal is balanced, even if it might be close to broken in very specific modern decks, but outside those and even more so outside modern it is shit.

>>51553911
No sideboard creatures that see actual play both stop cheeri0s from killing you but not from drawing thier deck.

Can you guys have a look at this mono u wizard list for me.

http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/just-play-merfolk/

>>51555659
>http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/just-play-merfolk/
wtf you're even trying to do with this list? What's the point of wizard sub-type if there's no interaction between them?

>>51555659
>>51555752
https://www.cardhoarder.com/scientific-brewing-process

Wizards were sweet during the drazi winter

>>51540806
>What will happen to terminate now that fatal push is pushing shit in?
Nothing.

>What removal spell should see more play in modern, but doesn't.
Magma Spray.

>How does your deck play around removal?
I hope you enjoy removing 1/4 of a card.

>Why does Mardu see zero play even though it has all the best removal?
It doesn't have any great creatures like goyf/delver/snappy. It doesn't have as much burn as a full burn deck. Even Nahiri is better used in Jeskai. Removal is all its really good at, and that doesn't win games by itself.

>>51548176
siege rhino wouldn't really improve mardu. A clock is good when it comes down on T2, siege rhino is 4 cmc.

>>51551414
let's not pretend lantarn is tier now, it hasn't put up any results in a while

>>51551010
>bans of good, but powerful cards
>mana leak

>>51557663
Dude calls Opal better than original moxen are - his understanding of what's good, busted or even viable/playable equals the "/tg/ is bad at magic" meme made real.

I have a large event happening at my store today and am going to bring BG tron. I am a little unsure about what to put in for side board but because i just started playing the deck. My meta is two other tron decks, one jund, one patriot control, one grixix, one bant coco combo, one infect, two affinity two nya burn,one mono blue turns, one scapeshift, two Cheerios storm, and one pyromaster ascendancy storm. My list is
4x Karn
4x sylvan scrying
4x Ancient stirrings
4x chromatic star
4x chromatic sphere
4x expedition map
4x oblivion stone
3x collective brutality
3x fatal push
2x Ulamog, the ceaseless hunger
2x world breacker
2x wurmcoil engine
1x Ugin
Lands
Full tron
1x Llanwar Waste
3x Blooming marsh
1x ghost quater
1x forest
1x Sanctum of ugin
sideboard
3x warpng wail
2x Relic of Progenitus
2x spellskite
2x Natures claim
2x ghost quarter
2x thragtusk
1x wurmcoil engine
1x witchbane orb
I normally play b/g infect so I am still get used to the differences and feel like I need lot of help with the sideboard more than anything else.

>>51557635
>one topdeck away from winning world magic cup
>worst matchups got nerfed
>surely the deck isn't good im a huge retard who doesnt know tier represents usage and not "power level"

>>51558990
>It is a total coincidence power level and tiers/competitive scene usage match
Skred red won a competitive tourney, all that's earned some money for people who unloaded some snow mountains.

>>51551010
Oh i see you think you are actually smart. I will then reply in autistic way you might be able to comprehend.

Mox opal is a legendary artifact that requires you to have ANOTHER 2 ARTIFACTS, in order to be able to tap it for mana. Even then its legendary. If you do not understand how a 3 card requirement and 1-only is NOT strictly better, I urge you to reconsider your life and existence.

Secondly, degeneracy is a term you seem to throw around a a lot. What do you actually mean? You mean decks that do not play as midrange creature or control decks right? I have news for you, the game is called magic, and people have different playstyles to yours. There is nothing about a completely midrange format that is more "healthy" than a format with many different strategies some of which are difficult to deal with. If anything Wizards should unban stuff and reprint counterspells.
The game we have chosen to play is Magic the Gathering, not "Creatures: the tappening". If that is the strategy that you want to go with fair play to you, may you enjoy it but why should I be forced to play 10 turns of creature combat in a game called magic.

Wizards understand that the format gets solved very fast and in order to keep the game alive the ban stupid shit, like gitaxian probe. If affinity is too strong, instead of banning their cards, print an actual useful card that helps control them.

Your understanding of the game is obviously very limited as is your mental capacity, so I will try to make this even more simple. Even the fact that you thought mentioning Mana Leak shows that you need to play the game for at least another decade to begin to comprehend how it works.

Here is a link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

So is eldrazi tron the best tron variant now? Do people finally realize banning eye of ugin over eldrazi temple was a worse choice for control?

>>51552760
Laboratory Maniac exists. That card is garbage against ad nauseam.

>>51559059
>Mox opal is a legendary artifact that requires you to have ANOTHER 2 ARTIFACTS
>implying it's some kind of challenging feat, as though affinity and Lantern don't have plenty of 0/1 drop colorless artifacts to satisfy this condition.
Meanwhile green mana dorks cost a whole mana and don't have haste. And green's supposed to have the best ramp.
You're caught up on the whole strictly-better than other moxes comment the guy made - though understand it sure can feel that way in the context of vintage where satisfying metalcraft is even more trivial.

I could see Mox Opal getting banned in Modern and limited in Vintage. Dunno about Legacy, maybe it'll stay for prestige, where it's comparable to Mox Diamond.

>>51559403
I wish people stopped calling it Eldrazi Tron and just baptized it as That Bad Modern Version of Legacy Eldrazi Stompy. It doesn't play anything like Gx Tron and thus isn't comparable. It's an inconsistent version of Bant Eldrazi that trades good interaction and sideboard bullets for explosive TKS->Smasher->Endbringer starts while trying to clown free wins vs 1drops with Chalice. Uxx control should have no problems vs the deck, it literally cannot beat a Wrath.

>>51558990
>one topdeck away from winning world magic cup
?

>>51559437
>Mox Opal limited in vintage
>Played in 3 decks total as a must
>Affinity (lol), tezzerator, Paradoxical Storm
>none of which are tier 1, let alone meta defining
>3rd deck appeared less than half a year ago (Paradoxical Storm)
>sometimes tech'ed in a few others
>Played as a full play-set in only paradoxical storm and affinity(again, lol).
>No decks with it put up sufficient results online or in paper (there's much more side-events of Vintage than you imagine) to warrant even a slight worry about card being limit-worthy
What the fuck is with modern folks constantly bringing up vintage when they have absolutely no knowledge of the damn format? All just to justify their personal opinion about something?

Fucking original moxen aren't even played as a whole 5 in majority of blue meta decks.

Please shut the fuck up about things you have no knowledge of at all and just continue rambling about how unfair are any decks that are jund, junk or grixis.

>>51559534
Pispa's Jund opponent in the quarterfinals had 1 draw step to hit 2-of Pulse in g1 before being locked out, anything else and he would've lost and Lantern would have been favored to win at least one of the remaning two games. Dredge+Bant+UR Fiend would have been the best setup in the top4.

>>51559630
aren't jud, junk or grixis*

>>51559644
Dredge+Lantern+UR Fiend*

Mox Opal is strictly better than original moxen and should be banned in Modern and limited in Legacy

t. /tg/

Never change, /tg/, never change. I enjoy reading such bullshit far too much.

>>51559805
>t. /tg/
What are you on about it's clearly one retard nobody else agrees with.

>>51559644
>my deck is tier 1, my opponents draws were just bullshit!

>>51560002
>lose to [insert statistically unlikely thing here]
>lol nope your deck is just bad
Scrub alert.

>>51560039
He had to never draw a piece to escape the lock prior though. It appears statistically unlikely if you assume all his other draws are already bad, but that's not true in a real game. When lantern starts 1 turn away from the lock every game it can be tier 1, but in a real game the opponent has many chances to disrupt them, and any 1 of them counts, not just the last.

>>51543915
Come on man, splinter twin may have been banned but we can still rejoice in our memories

>>51559059
You seem to forego the fact that it is piss easy to turn on opal in artifact decks, coupled with the fact that it gives said decks a fucking rainbow moxen.

>Calling me an idiot and saying I don't comprehend how the game works because I mentioned mana leak
In the context of modern it's probably in the 5 counterspells in the format which is why I brought it up. It's obviously no FoW, counterspell or mana drain but in the context of the format I think it fits the bill along with the other cards I mentioned.

>I want a midrange and control format
I never said I wanted anything to dominate the format nor did I want to exclude any type of deck. I simply said I want all decks on an even playing field, and that's not possible when artifact decks get a rainbow moxen. Nice projection though faggot, call anybody who disagrees with you a fan of creatures the tappening and insult them, that'll make you look real smart.

Here are some links you should read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

http://www.wikihow.com/Improve-Your-Reading-Comprehension

>>51547607
Kek

>>51540806
>implying you would ever waste a terminate on a shitty 2 cmc, or even a 4 cmc creature
>can regenerate

why even compare, they fill very different roles.

>>51560129
I just assume you are a midrange fan because of the decks you seem to hate. Which are not even proper tier 1 decks anymore. I mean you are hating on lantern control? Jesus christ man.

Second Affinity? Really? Have you seen infect play? Affinity is even more volnurable to hate.

I don't know what arguments to bring to a conversation where you have literally 0.

>>51560266
He plays tron. He has no right to complain about broken mana enablers

>>51557635
Doesn't answer the question in the post and it got 4th in an invitational qualifier recently, not to mention the fact that it 5-0's Mtgo leagues regularly as well as the past results when it was the hot new thing. It's only ~1 or 2% of the meta right now so that's also a factor. The deck is tier 2 senpai baka

>>51560266
>y-y-you have no arguments
I've stated several times why Opal is broken but another won't hurt. Opal is a strictly better moxen in decks that can run it such as Lantern and affinity. Before you bring up the fact that it is legendary, the moxen are restricted in vintage so it's very similar. Now for metalvraft, In affinity they play memnites and ornithopters as other zero drops+ draksteel citadel+ artifact one drops to turn it on. In lantern depending on the build it can allow for a turn 2 bridge following a turn 1 opal+0 cost artifac+lantern+millrock which is as close to lockout before t3 that deck is going to get.

I never said anything about hating lantern or affinity, they are strategies that should be allowed to exist, but they should not get a rainbow moxen just for shits and giggles.

>>51560291
tron doesn't start with 2 mana just because it runs artifact and can be disrupted to prevent tron from coming online. It's not even worth the time or resources to disrupt a rainbow moxen because those decks can function without it. Tron has a much more difficult time if you disrupt it so the two aren't comparable, but nice try anon.

I expect the replies to this post won't address the points that I've constantly made and will instead opt to call me a retard because that's much easier than having a discussion.

>>51560489
>It's not even worth the time or resources to disrupt a rainbow moxen because those decks can function without it.
So it clearly is a non issue

>>51560292
>5-0's Mtgo leagues
>mtgo
>mattering

>>51560538
No it is an issue because those deck get a free rainbow mox, just because it's not worth the time or resources to disrupt them in game doesn't mean it's not an issue. Learn to read

>>51560671

Reprint all the Moxes

Then it's fair because everyone gets free fast mana

Make Magic Great Again.

>>51560671
Free?
So they get to draw 7 then place from their deck onto the field? Interesting

File: CvU6_BVWYAEnicG.jpg (23KB, 355x369px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 355x369px

>>51560489
>>51560671
The card does not make the decks broken or unfair, a good card being useful to only a narrow range of decks is one of the worst justifications for a ban I have ever heard.

>>51560631
>ignoring the other things and focusing on mtgo
The fact that it 5-0's regularly was just justification that it's not some meme deck that occasionally puts up results, but ok fampai.

>>51561044
>brings up 5-0s on mtgo like they matter
May as well bring up your locals, buddy

>>51561073
There's a difference between consistent 5-0's and 5-0's occasionally though senpai

>>51561116
mtgo literally doesn't matter, pal

>>51561149
Stay retarded mate.

>>51561149
This
Especially since most scrubs concede when they see you're on lantern

>>51561183

Friendo, I can't be the retarded one. I didn't bring up modo results like they mattered

>>51561186
In a fucking league they paid money for?

>>51560097
I really am not sure how long this fragile combo will remain tier 2. The novelty is going to wear off soon I imagine.

>>51561186
not in competitive leagues they don't

>>51561203
>>51561244
You severely underestimate the butthurt of modern babies

>>51560129
Nigga you not only compared Opal to original moxen, you said it's strictly better than them.

I don't care wtf you try to prove, but as long as you try to back it up by comparing an extremely situational card that needs decks built around it to function and on top of that is legendary to fucking power 9 cards - you're just asking to be bashed and not taken seriously, no matter what you're trying to prove or how valid your actual statement is.

>>51561348
You severely underestimate how much I play online. No one ever concedes at the sight of lantern in leagues online.

>>51560489
>strictly better moxen in artifact decks
PLEASE STOP.

The power of moxen isn't THE FACT that it's 0 cmc, tap->get 1 X color mana. Their power is fucking fact that they are GENERIC.

Stop comparing apples to fucking oranges as your argument. Compare moxen to other Modern acceleration like fucking Noble Hierarch or Birds of Paradise and make your point the fact that mox costs 0, yet even then people could argue it doesn't have a body attached to it and you could argue back that it makes it less easy to remove, countered by people who'll argue that after sideboarding affinity/cheerios become super easy to beat and you can counter that with "muh sideboard dedication" - which is how normal discussion about Opal/Affinity/Cheerios normally does go.

Stop fucking talking about a format like Vintage of which you have 0 knowledge and let alone comparing cards of WORDLY difference to each other in terms of power level.

You're making it harder for other people who think Opal should be banned to even begin to make a point...

>>51547521
We already knew push was good. The GW revolt guy is also good. Maybe spire of industry can replace 1-2 glimmervoids in affinify. I think that's about it, but I probably forgot a couple.

How much is the initial investment fir mtgo? How many dollars to enter a league?

I know this is a long shot, but is anyone else here at SCG Regionals?

>>51561475
>the power is that they're generic
If everyone can use them it's a bit more balanced than solely giving them to artifact strategies and giving those strategies a rainbow mox on top is just the icing on the cake. It's not apples to oranges either you fucking dolt and compared to dorks, mox opal has haste and can't be removed as easily and often times isn't worth it because it doesn't really hurt lantern or affinity or cheerios gameplan. This has nothing to do with how easy affinity, lantern or cheerios are to beat postboard, it's about why opal and similar mana acceleration shouldn't be in modern and I think based upon wizards statements and the fact that chrome mox is banned supports that theory too.

>stop talking about vintage because you have zero knowledge
I merely compared the legendary clause to how the power 9 are restricted in vintage and the cards are virtually the same in an artifact deck.

>>51562600
Just fucking give it up

>>51540806
>What will happen to terminate now that fatal push is pushing shit in?
Gurmag Angler.

>>51559805
>I enjoy reading such bullshit far too much
You might get even more enjoyment out of actually learning to read.

Then see
>>51559437
>>51559805
>You're clearly caught up on the assessment that Mox Opal is contextually better than the original moxen and misses the point entirely.
It doesn't take much for Mox Opal to be potent other than 'run it in a deck with lots of artifacts.'
If you think that makes it shitty then Force of Will must also be shitty because it requires you to run it in a deck with lots of blue cards.
After the trivial setup it does serve as a better Mox, being that it provides multiple colors.
Each Mox Opal after the first is virtually a Lotus Petal. Yes Lotus Petal isn't as good as the Moxen but guess what it's restricted in Vintage while legal in Legacy.
The point is that Mox Opal has power at least comparable with the Moxen (It's in the fucking name) and the argument is that no decks in Modern should have that power.

>>51559630
>who brings up supporting evidence to prove their point? Hurr durr

>brings up blue based control decks for some reason when the problematic context being discussed for Mox Opal is combo/artifact decks. Hurr double durr

>Look guys I know so much despite my inability to reason some would call it autism but my mom calls it special.

File: 38[1].jpg (63KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 312x445px

>>51562631
>If everyone can use them it's a bit more balanced
Totally!

>>51562770
I think the dude made it pretty clear he gives 0 fucks about your reasoning for Opal or Modern and just bashed you for talking about shit you have no idea about, that is Vintage.

>>51562770
Jesus christ. How many times are you going to post this? You're a legitimate fucking idiot

>>51543365
thre exists a pretty cool mono red skred deck that kills

>>51562770
Mox opal doesn't require you to play it in a deck with a lot of artifacts, it requires you to play it in a deck with a lot of shitty artifacts like ornithopter and springleaf drum. It's a build around dude, that doesn't make it bannable. When you build around mox opal you maybe get the ability to play two signal pests turn 1. That doesn't put it on par with the original moxen in any way, the whole reason those cards are so good is that they're strictly better than lands in almost any deck. Did you know ad nauseam gets to play a "black lotus"? Tron gets to play ancient tomb and mishra's workshop, only they're strictly better. Don't forget all of those control decks playing ancestral recall, I mean they are paying 1 mana to draw 3 thats pretty much the same. Your argument is retarded.

>>51563065
This. Now can we stop?

>>51562935
>the dude
>you have no idea about Vintage
sure smells like some samefagging, so much for those 0 fucks given

>>51563065
At least this is coherent.
The main argument against your examples is that the drawbacks are heavier with more narrow restrictions. You don't have to wait turns with suspend, match 3 lands with different names.
For Mox Opal, a 0 mana nonland is the easiest thing to play and metalcraft is more broadly satisfied.
What you might call narrow application could instead be considered streamlined.
You could run a ton of different decks featuring Mox Opal, and it could be decent. But why bother when certain builds appear to take greater advantage of it?
You could build a Tezzerator deck with Mox Opal, for instance, but it seems like Arcbound Ravager is a pretty good card and if you choose to run that, then it pushes the builder to just make an Affinity deck. Nevermind that the Tezzerator deck could be decent or even very good, Affinity is great!

Same goes with Mishra's Workshop, since you brought it up. You don't have to put Trinisphere in a deck with Workshops, but it's too good to pass up. It's not that Mishra's Workshop is narrow, (You can do a LOT with T: Add CCC for artifacts) it's just that builds with it are highly streamlined. You could drop Workshop + Mox + Voltaic Key + Time Vault and win on the spot if you like. But most builds wouldn't bother with that despite its potency. It has more consistent options available which have tested better, and have its use 'solved' for the context of a particular meta. That doesn't make Mishra's Workshop narrow.
Mishra's Workshop is a very streamlined card, just like Mox Opal.

>>51563552
Now you truly showed how misinformed and stupid you are.

Just because a card is narrow doesn't mean it can't be used in a streamlined strategy/deck.

Just because a card works in a streamlined deck doesn't make it not narrow.

Doomsday is extremely narrow card and needs decks to be built around.

Now I can use it to win with wordgorger dragon or with infinite mana through help of obedience and 2x SDT's into a win-con, but why do it when I can use it with a lab man and build a deck around it with a ton of counterspells to protect the combo?

Does streamlining your strategy and deck makes the cards that aren't used almost nowhere else suddenly not narrow?

Stop fucking bringing up Vintage, we're talking about Modern here and about Opal in the context of Modern.

A lot of people here don't know shit about Vintage (you clearly included) and doesn't care about it either.

Start fucking discussing Opal in Modern and leave out other formats, because quite frankly, just because a card is good in vintage doesn't make it good in other formats. Slash Panther is good in Vintage, not good anywhere else, Trygon Predator is good in Vintage, not good anywhere else. Chalice of the Void got fucking limited in Vintage and is very powerful in Legacy right now - only Tron plays it in Modern and it has nowhere close to the effect in Modern compared to other formats. Counter Balance is insane in Legacy - not played in either Vintage or Modern.

AGAIN - Speak about fucking MODERN and fuck off with your Vintage wetdreams.

>>51563065
I agree with that opinion of Mox Opal. It's the same reasoning as Delver. You have to build a deck around it and restrict your card choices to maximize the card's utility.

>>51564076
Delver needs a ban desu

>>51562770
Force of will is a terribly shitty card. The only reason its played is because it is necessary otherwise it would just be belcher and storm all day every day.

2 for 1 with a requirement for blue. LOL

>>51564935
Lets also ban Kiln Fiends senpai while we're at it and Thing in the Ice

Jesus this thread is shit.

>Opal is better than the OG Moxen
I have no words

Lmao @ all the asshurt affinity and lantern players in this thread, can't to drink your salty tears when Opal is banned in March.

>>51565370
>everybody thinks opal is fair
>everybody must play the same two decks
I play tron, burn, delver and junk. You're just bad at this game. Fuck off, desolator

File: trolling.jpg (242KB, 596x1826px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 596x1826px

>>51565370

You aren't trolling anyone, you're just an idiot.

>>51565429
>nobody ITT can prove that opal isn't a strictly better moxen in artifact strategies
>Y-y-you're just b-bad at the game
>YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND VINTAGE OMG
Maybe you should learn to read the other posts about how I feel about other decks faggot.

Opal is a disgusting card and mark my words it WILL be BANNED in March because of this.

>>51563886
>fuck off with your Vintage wetdreams
wew lad

>Does streamlining your strategy and deck makes the cards that aren't used almost nowhere else suddenly not narrow?
It doesn't make cards with broader applications suddenly any less broad.
Mox Opal has broader application than Doomsday whether or not either card appears in a dominant, streamlined strategy.
A 0 mana artifact that adds mana of any color with the condition that you control 3 of a single and common card type, of which the card itself happens to be, is not that narrow.
It is certainly not as narrow as something that costs BBB and exiles most of your deck and stacks the remaining cards.

>Just because a card works in a streamlined deck doesn't make it not narrow.
It also doesn't necessarily make it narrow. Your argument is invalid.

>wah wah keep it Modern
Take your own damn advice, you brought up Mishra's Workshop and now Doomsday. I'm only talking about them to address the points.
It seems highly (laughably) important that you stress how little I must know about Vintage, and it's just as retarded that you're bringing up old cards for examples.

So, let's keep it Modern.
Gitaxian Probe was recently banned. Its main uses were in Infect, Kiln Fiend, Death's Shadow, with occasional Burn and Delver variants. Also whatever fledgling Storm decks remained.

Many people considered the ban of Gitaxian Probe to have been long overdue. Much like Mox Opal, Gitaxian Probe was a go-to additive for any deck that wanted to exploit a certain strategic axes. For some decks serving as a crutch for 'god hands.'

With Gitaxian Probe gone, Mox Opal is one of the few remaining aggressive and exploitative zero mana cards. But between Affinity, Cheerios and Lantern, it's well on its way. And we just had another artifact block.

>>51565499
You are the only one who thinks its ban worthy. And the only one who has no idea why the moxen are good (They are even better than lands because you can play multiple a turn)

Why do people hate blue so much? Why is it any different if I counter your creature or terminate it?
How else are we supposed to deal with spell based strategies?
Why is turn 1 hand molestation more accepted than a counter? Aside from cryptic, modern counterspells aren't even very good

>>51565649
you can play multiple opals a turn too, they just function as lotus petals and considering that moxen are restricted in vintage it's not terribly likely unless you play every single one of them and only some decks do that.

You're the one who doesn't understand the points that have been made several times throughout the thread and instead chose to put your hands over your ears and ignore them. I'm also not the only one ITT who thinks it is banworthy but nice try senpai.

>>51565649
I think it's ban worthy too.
But then I thought Splinter Twin and Birthing Pod were ban worthy as well. It's ok, people didn't listen then either.

Y'know you can play multiple Mox Opals a turn too. It's just that every mox after the first translates to a Lotus Petal. Which is still probably too good for Modern.

>>51565722
Counterspells give people feel-bads because they deny etb effects and death effects too, which normally provide some countermeasure against conventional removal.

You'll find some people who actually prefer taking hand rape to counterspells, because counterspells usually cost the opponent more mana which keeps them on the back foot earlygame.

>>51565741
>point

we get your point, affinit/lantern player punched you unconcious and repeadetly raped you for few weeks straight that's why you're crying over a card that requires strict and specially crafted deck to even be worth a damn.q

>>51565741
>>51565814
So lotus petals are now better than the moxen too?

Let's settle this

http://www.strawpoll.me/12271389

File: 1450366578101.jpg (88KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 500x500px

>>51565904

>>51565855
>arguing that mox are good because you can play multiple a turn
>point out that mox are restricted and that some decks don't pack all of them making it harder to play multiples
>point out opal is just a lotus petal when you draw more and can effectively play multiple a turn which is another pro compared to og moxen
Learn to read.

>>51562038
I was friendo. Got my shit pushed in. You?

>>51565722
Nobody complains that there are too many counterspells in modern, but I think the main reason wizards has moved away from them is that they limit design space. The best answer to anything is countering it on the stack. Creatures, removal, combos, card draw you name it. So if you have something like UU counterspell in standard it just makes everything else worse. So they've tried to make counters more conditional, but then that just takes away the best thing about counterspells. There's no middle ground.

>>51565814
I mean this child is probably right, and sadly wizards plays by the numbers and most kids nowadays enjoy tapping creatures so thats what we get.

I don't doubt mox will get banned, its just that its another dumb ban.

>>51565524
If Opal is a STRICTLY better mox than OG moxen in Artifact based strategies, then please REMIND ME why workshop decks do not play a single one, yet play all 5 OG moxes?

>>51566298
In the context of modern you twit. In vintage you absolutely need those moxen to function when you play them and opal doesn't do that 100% of the time which is why it doesn't see play in shops. In the context of modern which is what this whole discussion is about, mox is strictly better in artifact strategies.

>>51566095
Went 6-3. Just left with my homies and now we're wandering around downtown.
The female judge was a massive bitch. What'd you play today?

Does Rise/Fall still have a place as a 1 of in Delver?

>>51566384
So, what you are implying is that if OG moxen were legal in Modern right now, affinity, lantern and cheerios would find Opal as strictly better than OG moxen in their decks?

>>51566450
He's not implying it. He flat out said it

>>51566446
it never did

>>51566430
I went 4 and 5 with tron. You? Mabye we played each other

>Ban X!
>Ban Y!
>Z beat me, ban it.
This is what is killing Modern. Shut up about Opal, none of the decks that play it are broken.

>>51566476
Sram 0s has given scrubs the chance to screw over Lantern Control. They've been frothing at the mouth for this opportunity for months

>>51566467
I was on Jund and managed to avoid Tron all day.
I may have sat near you. Did you play a guy playing 4 colors and get a game warning?

>>51565855
This is a special kind of not getting it that can only result in "durrr I was only pretending to be retarded!" when they finally understand.

Just actually try reading >>51565499

Look, think about this. I'll spell it out:
-The 5 original moxen are each limited to 1.
-You can use up to 4 Mox Opal in a deck that would care.
-Due to the legend rule, Mox Opal is virtually limited to 1 insofar as behaving like the original moxen.
E.g: Turn 1 Mox Sapphire, Mox Jet, Mox Opal gives you Blue, Black, and one of any other color.
-In this context, Mox Opal is better than either Mox Sapphire or Mox Jet.
-If you have an additional Mox Opal card in your hand, due to the legend rule (Mox Opal is legendary) you would replace your first Mox Opal card after tapping it for mana with the second Mox Opal.
-This sequence is basically the same as playing a Lotus Petal, cracking it, then playing another Lotus Petal.
-If you didn't have a spare Mox Opal in hand, then your Mox Opal on the field would continue to be a multicolored mox.
-Despite each Mox Opal beyond the first being worse (A Lotus Petal instead of a mox) it doesn't take away from the first Mox Opal behaving like a mox.
-The reason this is powerful is because while you can have up to 4 Mox Opal in a deck, you can't have more than 1 of each original mox.
-It is impossible to have a Mox Sapphire on the field, tap it for blue, then cast another from your hand to tap for an additional blue.
-Mox Opal can do this, and tap for whatever colors you want.

>>51566298
>STRICTLY
I never said strictly, and only made pains to stress you were hung up on someone else's usage of 'strictly' better. People including Mark Rosewater and his R&D staff use strictly better flippantly and figuratively as 'pretty much' not the autistic way you understand it as 'literally.' Nothing is strictly better than anything when you take it so literally. Leatherback Baloth is not strictly better than Gnarled Mass because it dies to Smite the Monstrous.

>>51566551
I got a game warning once but i dont remember playing anyone on 4 colors. I was the big dude with a beard and ball cap in the yellow macho man randy savage shirt. You from the area or travel?

>>51566457
Learn to read you fucking idiot. IN THE CONTEXT OF MODERN MOX OPAL IS BETTER IF ACTUAL MOXEN WERE LEGAL YOU WOULD JUST RUN THOSE BUT THEY AREN'T IT'S A FUCKING COMPARISON HOLY SHIT

>>51566645
Came from Florida. I don't think I remember you. I look like a drug dealer and wore a Dino shirt, if that sounds familiar.
You have any amazing plays today? All my matches were pretty ordinary

>>51566476
>t. affinity player

Guys, I think we should go back to old OP, this one attracts some next level retards.

>>51560910
Gitaxian probe

>>51566668
I must not have seen you. It's always hot as balls in madness so I bounced outside as soon as every match was done. The best i did was dismember a glistmer elf turn 2 and then extrapate it, all is dust a blighted agent turn 3, ulamog turn 4 and then double reality smasher turn 5. He scooped after that lol. Really shoudnt have won that match

>>51566645
What was the warning for?

File: 1474167711269.jpg (68KB, 640x631px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x631px

>>51566950
I misplayed and maped up a second tower insted of a mine like i needed and said "well fuck me" and laughed and the dude next to me called the judege and reported me for my potty mouth lol. Me and my opponent gave him a screw you dude look but i probably shouldnt have swore out loud so all's fair i guess

File: Affinitybabsbtfo.jpg (53KB, 1184x406px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1184x406px

Wtf I hate mox opal now

>>51567090
inb4 they unban chrome mox in March.

>>51566571
You are outright wrong. Here is an example:

Counterspell is strictly better than cancel.

ITT: People can't read.

>>51567396
Read my post again, from
>STRICTLY
I cbf'd even copypastaing that shit again.
It's up to you how much of a fuss you want to make over the 'strictly' better nonsense.
Just say better, fuck.

>>51567396
NOT IF YOUR OPPONENT HAS A CHALICE ON TWO LOL

>>51567473
better is an opinion or at least a situational advantage. Strictly better implies that it does the same thing more a efficiently, which is a statement of fact.

Admit your mistake and move on.

File: 1475791342350.jpg (29KB, 288x351px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 288x351px

which do you think is better positioned overall in a control heavy meta, Esper Draw-Go or Esper Walker Control/Narset/whatever the fuck you wanna call it

File: 1482718174220.jpg (43KB, 582x741px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 582x741px

>>51567598
Strictly better in the context of modern which is what this entire discussion was about until you started getting pedantic and crying about
>muh vintage
In the context of the entire game as a whole opal is not better than the og moxen but in Modern, where the og moxen are not legal and we have a card that is not only comparable to them, but unrestricted and adds all colors instead of one but the catch is that only artifact strategies can run it. Honestly the whole derailing into "muh vintage" and then into this pedantic spiel just shows your lack of arguments and lack of understanding of this foramt and what needs to be done to keep it healthy.

>>51568328
>this discussion is still going on

>>51568464
Seriously. It's killed an entire thread

>>51568265
great, esper friends is all we needed to make this thread really take off

>>51568555
Its better than some retard saying opal is better than the old school moxes

>>51568555
I don't play esper, and while I don't think it's that great, it is competitive and the only true control deck in modern

>>51568629
>I can't counter any of the points about opal so I'll just call him retarded
>I'm also going to pretend I have no reading comprehension and completely ignore context

>>51568714
Dude fuck off. We don't care anymore

>>51568791
>f-fuck o-off
>We don't care anymore
Nice to see the mouthbreathers in this general run away from an argument because they lack basic reading comprehension. This opinion is probably going to be written off as a troll attempt because you idiots can't handle someone having a different opinion than you and when I tried initiating a discussion you just called me a faggot and put your hands over your ears and ignored every point made.

/tg/ is not only bad at magic, but bad at conversing as well.

>>51568714
Every single of your arguments has been countered, even when you tried being a pedantic fuck. And the context is irrelevant because that statement (including the retarded lotus petal is better) is objectively wrong no matter what.

>>51568890
Are you the rev for 15 guy?

>>51568265

Probably Esper Walkers, to be honest.

Personally I have a huge soft spot for UBx decks, and have been trying to make sultai and esper work for a while now, and Esper Walkers is the only deck so far that has taken me to a 5-0 at my LGS (which plays mostly tier 1-2 decks).

>>51568890
You give us tron players a bad name. I just want to cast fatties, but grognards like you, ruined it for me

>>51568898
>every single argument you've made has been countered
>even when YOU TRIED BEING PEDANTIC
First of all, I'm not the one who misinterpreted a comparison between opal and og moxen and went on a tirade about vintage, nor am I the one who interpreted the context incorrectly due to autism so get your shit straight. Secondly Not one of the arguments regarding Mox has even been close to countered so get your head out of your ass and stop ignoring arguments and pretending you're right.

show me where you think they were "countered" and I'd be happy to tell you why you're an idiot.

You people are the worst.

>>51569025
Ilu

>>51566731
What's you're point as far as I'm concerned the probe ban was unjustified bullshit.

>>51569614
t. infect player

>>51569946
I'm more of a lantern or 8rack kind of guy though.

>>51568977
>I'm not samefagging, I swear!

>>51570431
>I have no argument so it's samefagging
wew lad

>>51570453
I'm not going to repeat the same arguments on why opal is a fair card. Now fuck off

>>51570495
there were literally none you faggot, not to mention the lack of counter arguments regarding the power level and why it's a broken card. You can't just put your hands over your ears and ignore arguments kiddo that's not how it works. Opal is a vintage level card in Modern and deserves a ban, now fuck off

>>51570547
>opal is a vintage card
lol

I play living end AMA

>>51570578
Hows the AN match-up?

>>51570574
Actually, given how fucking werid vintage is, I wouldn't be surprised if it sees a fair amount of play in vintage. Decks in that format do tend to be fairly artifact heavy after all

>>51570594
It's a strange one. Slaughter games/lost legacy on their ad nauseam is usually instant win, and LE's land destruction plan is usually strong enough to hold them back. But some games you just don't have it or they just get their shit together too fast and you die. I think I've beaten ad nauseam more than I've lost to it but that's not saying much because I've played against it less than 10 times

>>51570578
Me too anon, me too.
Got any sweet tech?

>>51570574
>only partial quoting
Literal scum kys
>Opal is a vintage level card in MODERN

Still waiting on those "counter arguments" fagtron

>>51570701
This is going to sound dumb, but at one time my meta had a LOT of bgx decks that, if they endured and recovered from the first LE, could grind me out and eventually win. So I caught them off guard with a 1-of bow of nylea in the SB. The games it came out, it did so much work it was stupid. Otherwise my list is fairly stock. I'm experimenting with a single kari zev's expertise in the main right now. So far it's let me get LE out of the hand and once I stole tron's wurmcoil to swing lethal when he thought the block & lifelink would save him

>>51570722
I've been reading through all of this and still can't seem to see where opals power level and the need for a ban connect.

>>51565722
>How else are we supposed to deal with spell based strategies?
By banning them. That's the fundamental difference between modern and legacy. In legacy strategy of all kinds are allowed, but wizards accepts that blue will always be massively dominant because it's the only color that can deal with all kinds of strategies. In modern instead 'unfair' strategies are banned (or never printed) to ensure the format remains balanced without being massively blue centric.

>>51569614
I'm just saying that they would probably do it on the same terms that they banned g-tax.

It's not fun or fair, but they would do it

>>51570761
That makes sense actually, an extremely old bit of tech for extremely grindy games was loaming shaman for the same reason.

I think a single kari zevs can be really solid, it would either take a flex slot or a demonic dread slot I think.

>>51566731
TBD probe was banned because it was good against certain decks, rather than in certain decks. Wizards didn't want a card that punished decks that could hold up (or bluff) removal while being not very good against non-interactive decks.

>>51570722
K. Opal is legendary and requires metalcraft and is played in 2 decks. Not at all broken or ban worthy

>partial quoting
You literally said "opal is a vintage card" verbatim. Kys

>>51570819
Also something I haven't really seen other lists do is I run a single forbidden orchard. Rainbow mana + it makes Demonic dread targets. The downside is you can't use it after you cascade or you give them blockers.

>>51570906
>if it take a partial quote out of context it's ok
Naw fuck off faggot

All of your points have already been addressed in the thread but since you're obviously incapable of reading I'll repeat them
>Opal is a legendary card
Doesn't mean you can't play multiple a turn, it just turns every subsequent opal into a lotus petal, which FYI is considered a good card.
>requires metalcraft
This was the start of the whole discussion if you've been paying attention mouthbreather, this all started because I argued that Opal is unfair in artifact strategies since not only is it piss easy to turn on in said decks, but it acts as a rainbow moxen, something that wizards has deemed not healthy for modern based upon other bannings as well as design philosophy.

The card is broken in Lantern, Affinity and Cheerios and gives all 3 an unfair advantage via pseudo-vintage card in the modern format and because of this it needs a ban.

But go ahead and partial quote me and take shit out of context to "counter my argument" fucking faggot.

>>51571019
Jesus I've never seen such autism. THE CONTEXT WAS WHAT YOU SAID. YOU TYPED THOSE WORDS

So now lotus petal is as good as the moxen? PS, petal aint broken, which is opal's best case scenario

And no its not broken. Stop be being an ass-blasted tron player. You're giving the rest of us timmies a bad name.

>>51570964
I can see orchard being ran again if the meta favors cutting beast within, it's not fetchable like dryad arbor is and it does get bloodmoon'd.

Do you run kessig wolf run or vault of the archangel? I currently run just one wolf run and I love how easily it lets me punch through damage.

>>51571066
You only took part of the quote you fucking idiot what is so difficult to understand? Are you literally a fucking retard? There's a big difference between
>Opal is a vintage level card
and
>opal is a vintage level card in modern
If anything you're the fucking autist here since apparently you lack basic fucking reading comprehension.
>lotus petal is as good as moxen/petal is broken
Never said that learn to read, you brought up legendary rule and I gave a reason as to why that's negligible regarding Opal. Also og moxen are restricted in vintage so you only get 1 color out of em but with opal in modern you can get multiple colors which is a plus.

The people in this general need to get some fucking reading comprehension jesus christ.

>>51571115
Vintage level and in modern is the same shit, you dumbfuck. You compared opal=petal, and petal isnt oppressive, chroma be damned. Shit formatting because you are literal shit.

>>51571150
>vintage level and in modern is the same shit
No it's not you fucking mouthbreather, In vintage would be referring to card in vintage such as power 9 or some other shit whereas vintage in modern refers to a card that is comparably as powerful as a vintage card in the modern format, but is not necessarily a vintage level card.
>you compared opal=petal
Only after the first one and petal is fucking restricted in vintage so I would argue it can be pretty oppressive, especially if you run 3 along with your rainbow mox for artifact strategies only.

Read a book and then fucking kill yourself you troglodyte.

>>51571195
You are so fucking stupid

>>51571195
Like holy shit

>>51571204
nice argument kill yourself Opal is fucking broken and needs a ban.

>>51571195
You have no idea what you're talking about

>>51571195
Please never post again

>>51571195
Jesus christ

>>51571195
You don't even know the difference between vintage and modern

>>51571204
>>51571217
>>51571228
>I h-h-have no argument so I'll just call him a retard
>yeah that'll show him haha
Nice to see we looped back around I'm considering just linking my posts instead of retyping them for you retards since you're so incapable of reading. This argument has been done since you guys just started blatantly ignoring every point that has been made in the thread.

Can you just admit you're wrong? Is that so hard?

>>51571195
You can't even keep your own definitions straight

>>51571195
I hope wotc never sees or hears anything you say

>>51571266
Except those are the same as I've been arguing all thread
>>51571278
Scared that your precious mox opal is going to get banned? I'm not the only one who feels this way.
>>51571256
I actually do which is why I'm able to make comparisons between the two you dolt.

>>51571298
I play tron you stupid shit

File: IMG_2603.jpg (51KB, 290x420px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 290x420px

>>51540806

UNBAN CHROME MOX

tappedout.net/mtg-decks/blue-staff

OPAL DID NOTHING WRONG

>tfw you will never own a masterpiece Staff of Domination

>>51571298
You've changed it 3 times already

>>51571298
If you did, then you know OPAL ISN'T A VINTAGE LEVEL CARD

>>51571314
I literally haven't but keep telling yourself that so you can continue to ignore the points hun.

It's cute seeing you guys wiggle around desu

>>51571319
HOLY FUCKING SHIT LEARN TO READ YOU STUPID NIGGER

>OPAL IS A VINTAGE LEVEL CARD IN MODERN
>>51571195
HERE IS THE POST EXPLAINING THE DIFFERENCE FOR YOUR RETARDED ASS

KILL YOURSELF YOU FUCKING IDIOT

>>51571326
>its a vintage card
>its a vintage card but for moder only (?????)
>its a vintage card but for modern only but for only a couple of decks

>>51571341
So you're aware you're changing your own definition

>>51571352
I've maintained the vintage level card in modern throughout the thread but nice try retard

You didn't even link any posts because you know you'll get btfo

>>51571362
>>51571278
>>51571266
>>51571256
>>51571246
>>51571235
>>51571228
>>51571217
>>51571204
Linked some posts you should read stop posting and quit mtg

>>51571375
>I c-c-can't prove any of the arguments wrong nor link posts where he changed his definitions ;_;

Literally kill yourself

>>51571394
Why would i need to when you linked to it your self

>>51571409
I never changed any definitions though you fucking idiot, it's not my fault some mouthbreather saw
>opal is a vintage level card in modern
and reduced it to
>opal is a vintage level card
not even to mention the fucktard misquoting me but keep going dipshit. I love how you've just given up trying to argue and instead started focusing on being pedantic and avoiding arguments as if that somehow makes you right.

>>51571437
I've already countered your points but you just repeat them

>opal is a vintage level card
You said that multiple times
>in modern
adding that doesnt change anything. The context is the same. Stop being so stupid

>>51571503
you literally haven't countered anything but keep saying that you did if that makes you feel better.
>opal is a vintage level card in modern
The context is literally different read my previous post you dipshit.

I've asked you to post your "counter arguments" earlier in the thread and you didn't post shit so I'm fairly confident you're just a pedantic faggot who's run out of arguments but keep trying this pedantic line I'm sure it'll work out for you

>>51571310
Damn this looks like lots of fun, though it seems way too vulnerable to being burned out or run over by faster decks before you can get the cards you need down.

>>51571532
Because you have the memory retention of a goldfish and demand to be spoonfed

>>51571066
>>51570906
>>51563886
>>51563065
>>51561475
>>51561387
>>51559630
>>51559059
>>51554745
>>51550706
>>51550422

Jesus christ you killed this entire thread. You are just as bad as the rev for 15 guy

>>51546865
I can't tell if this is the best crafted bait of all time or an actual post from a 13 year old who thinks his middle school championship deck is modern playable. Either way props on making me cringe so hard my eyes rolled out out of their sockets.

>>51571628
Literally all of those were countered in the replies maybe you should learn to read you faggot.

>>51571066
was countered by
>>51571115

>>51570906
countered by
>>51571019

>>51563886
countered by
>>51565524

>>51563065
countered by
>>51563552

>>51561475
countered by
>>51562631

then there's this retard who can't read
>>51561387
by literally any post explaining he context So I'll use this one
>>51571195

>>51559630
countered by
>>51562734

>>51559059
countered by
>>51560129

wooo same shit different post
>>51554745
countered by
>>51562631

>>51550706
not even an argument against opal but read this post
>>51551010

>>51550532
countered by
>>51550532

apparently you're the one with the retention of a goldfish fucking kill yourself I'm almost positive you haven't been in this thread longer than 5 minutes but you saw someone wants to ban your precious opal and you just had to shitpost even though every argument made against keeping opal was shot down

Inb4 you try some pedantic shit instead of addressing the arguments

>>51571576
As with most exodia decks burn/zoo does suck. It can turn 3 without opal, but a turn 4 is often too slow vs aggro decks.
Racing with puzzle pieces is risky biz

>>51571796
excuse me one those was most likely deleted out of asshurt reports for no reason

>>51559630
countered by

>>51559805
>I enjoy reading such bullshit far too much
You might get even more enjoyment if you could actually read.

Then see
>>51559437
>>51559805
>You're clearly caught up on the assessment that Mox Opal is contextually better than the original moxen and misses the point entirely.
It doesn't take much for Mox Opal to be potent other than 'run it in a deck with lots of artifacts.'
If you think that makes it shitty then Force of Will must also be shitty because it requires you to run it in a deck with lots of blue cards.
After the trivial setup it does serve as a better Mox, being that it provides multiple colors.
Each Mox Opal after the first is virtually a Lotus Petal. Yes Lotus Petal isn't as good as the Moxen but guess what it's restricted in Vintage while legal in Legacy.
The point is that Mox Opal has power at least comparable with the Moxen (It's in the fucking name) and the argument is that no decks in Modern should have that power.

>>51559630
>who brings up supporting evidence to prove their point? Hurr durr

>brings up blue based control decks for some reason when the problematic context being discussed for Mox Opal is combo/artifact decks. Hurr double durr

>Look guys I know so much despite my inability to reason some what call it autism but my mom calls it special.

>>51571796
Hey, you understand how a reply chain works. Every one you arguments goes the same way.

>its broken
No its not. And heres why
>lol no its a vintage card
No its not heres why
>but its broken
Repeat for 250 replies.

I play tron, as i have said multiple times.

Oh and the first post of the thread was me. You are a prime example that shit OP=shit thread

>>51571796
Oh shit, your posts are even getting deleted

Just bumping this trash heap closer to the furnace of 404

>>51571919
Same. Fuck this thread. Everyone here deserves a 3 day ban

The worst part about this, is that you guys keep responding to the bait. Good job killing any meaningful discussion.

>>51571871
no here's how it actually went you troglodyte
>it's broken and here's why given the context of moderns powerlevel
>no it's not it's a legendary and requires artifacts
But it is strictly better in artifact strategies and provides them an unfair advantage.
>pedantic shite begins
>misinterprets the comparison
>you don't understand vintage
continue until now

Oh and not every one of those posts was in the reply chain disphit

None of the points were ever refuted you simply stated some bullshit trying to justify mox and pass it off as an argument.

Just for shit's and giggles I'll type them out one last time
>mox is a strictly better moxen in artifact based strategies in modern
>moxen are too broken for modern and it allows the 3 decks that use it to do some degenerate things
>the fact that it is only restricted to artifact strategies is unfair to other decks that can't utilize a rainbow mox
>did I mention it's a rainbow mox
>mox in vintage can only generate their respective color while multiple opals can provide multiple colors
>legendary clause doesn't really hurt it all
>piss easy to turn on in respective decks

But go ahead and scream "muh vintage" or do some other pedantic shit instead of addressing the arguments like you've been doing the whole thread. Literally all of this has been posted itt and I'm only reposting to see what "counter arguments" you think you have.

If anything you're more of an example of shit Op's then I am since you never adressed any of the points and just continued to shitpost

>>51571919
Here i'll help

File: 2372.jpg (31KB, 598x448px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 598x448px

>>51572017

>>51572038
nice argument faggot address the points or get the fuck out

>>51572017
You went through your entire cycle in one post well done

>>51571919
Bump for justice

>>51572055

It's time to go to bed, Anon.

>>51572055
I'll address them

Opal is not strictly better. At all
It is not, and no it does not. That is not what degenerate means
Thats the entire point of the card
That is legendary and requires metalcraft. Its a mox in name only
Multiple opals? Lol wut? Colours In a MUD deck?
Oh yes it does
Thats why Ornithopter is run (btw its a pretty shit card on its own)

File: adpZeVB_700b.jpg (16KB, 610x610px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 610x610px

This whole thread

File: concentrated-regular-bleach-ymal.png (9KB, 255x255px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 255x255px

>>51572131

>>51572098
>opal is not better
No argument as to why strike one
>It is not, and no it does not. That is not what degenerate means
Affinity getting a t3 kill isn't degerate? Lantern getting a lock in palce on t2 isn't degenerate? Cheerios can t1 kill becasue of opal and it enable t2+ kills, that isn't degenerate?
>point of the card
sure but that doesn't mean it's unfair
>multiple opals
Didn't even touch the point that with og moxen you cannot make RR or any combination of the sort whereas with opal you can
>oh yes it does
It's literally not even a downside every opal after 1 is a lotus petal fuck off
>ornithopter and it fits in with affinity's strategy with signal pest and plating which makes it a good card in affinity retard

try again

>>51572151
Its like you are intentionally being stupid

An opal on a board with no artifacts is a dead card

All of those require ZERO interaction on your part. That is not degenerate.

Yes it does.

Yes i can. City of brass (Its a rainbow land! Ban it!), ruby, bolt bolt. Vs. Citadel, opal, pass (So fucking broken brah!)

Thats a fucking downside you dumb fuck. 1 card=1 mana is far from ideal

So ornithopter is the real problem then. Because you just gave an example of how a sub optimal card REQUIRES other to be good. Just like opal.

No u

>>51572221

You've heard of bait right?

>>51572235
At this point i'm to tilted to give a shit

>>51572240

Understandable, I guess the thread is dead anyways. I just had to check, that's all.

>>51570813
Is that why format is so dominated by B and G?

>>51572247
I think he's serious is the problem. ANd wotc checks social media for format health. I hope they don't check this thread

>>51572221
>an opal on board without artifacts is dead
Almost never happens in artifacts decks try again faggot
>zero interaction
They all happen fast enough that they can outpace interaction specifically the lantern and cheerios degeneracy.
>yes it does
Nice to see you agree
>Yes I can City of brass..
I was referring with moxen only but nice try I probably should have been more clear there though, you "got me"
>It's a downside
If you've gotten it down early you've already gotten value out of it and getting what essentially amounts as a lotus petal to do whatever on board isn't bad by any means, but I'll admit it isn't ideal. Still not a downside
>Ornithopter
The card is sub optimal you are correct in that assessment. But in affinity it is about decent for the reasons stated, I never said it was a problem unlike opal. Also doesn't even refute the fact that it is piss easy to turn it on in Lantern, Affinity and cheerios by using cards thhat further each of their strategies

File: download (3).jpg (4KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 300x168px

>>51572258
Of course! They're the most fair colours after all :^)

When the fuck is a new thread?

>>51572281

I'm sure you've stated it in your many many posts, but what deck do you run?

>>51572314
Tron

>>51572281
I've had you agree for the most part so i'll continue

It happens all the time. Check you confirmation bias.

Any hate/removal/counter spells/INTERACTION stops all of those

We agree its fair? Good

Can't do anything with just four opals. 4 moxes can cast a rhino

That is the definition of a downside

An artifact deck runs an artifact that rewards playing an all in artifact strategy? Weird. Geuss ill just cast hurk's recall

>>51572344
Ban tower. Only get you out of modern. I still have burn, soul sisters and junk i can play' ill take the hit to one deck

>>51572344
Lol tron wrecks lantern. Git fucking good

>>51572357
>happens all the time
Objectively false, the decks are designed to tunr on opal early and this is no exception
>any hate removal spell
Sure as fuck aren't stopping a lantern lock t2 in msot decks same with cheerios going off with the god hand t1 on the play. Affinity is easier to interact with though you can stil get fucked easily.
>we agree it's fair
No lmao
>4 opals
Goes back to the turning them on argument which the decks do a damn well job of doing
>definition of a downside
There is no downside in that regard try again

keep trying I love it

>>51572418
You need to run more interaction if you are having trouble with those decks. You chose a deck that doesn't work well against combos, deal with it.

>Muh Opal is strictly better than OG moxen in MODERN ONLY and in ARTIFACT STRATEGY ONLY
Still no lel. Doesn't matter how much you try to spin this - you end up wrong.

You can ban Opal and in it's place unban Artifact lands and that would make affinity stronger than it is now with Opal.

U/R storm or mono R storm? Which you think are positioned better? (I know both are positioned bad, but...)

>>51572602
ur gifts storm

>>51571310
Geralfs messenger is better

>>51572530
No one said to unban artifact lands, just ban Mox Opal.

>>51572702
Thanks, sounds cool - I'll look into it.

Would it be a good idea to brew a waste not mono black control deck?

Looking for more fun oriented modern deck, getting bored of tron.

>>51574250
sadly no good wheels in moderp
you could force the B/R waste not storm build ft. burning inquiry especially since pyro ascension just got cheap as fuck

>>51571082
I do have a kessig wolf run. I've seen lists with vault and I don't get it, it doesn't seem like splashing white is worth it. deathtouch/lifelink is really strong but if you have a packed board pumping someone with wolf run and swinging balls out should be enough, right?

that being said, I've been looking at living end decks those weird fucking japs run at hareruya, they splash white and play shit like siege rhino in the main, and some have nahiri. I've been thinking about trying a white splash and taking it to a few modern nights to see how it does.