Yeah, the canary decks do not really seem to work against them. I think right now Elves is one of the best decks to take against Eldrazi and the rest of the field. it has a very good matchup vs most Eldrazi decks because they have no real ways of stopping you from going totally elves on their ass.

http://mtgpulse.com/event/23562#322138

Meta full of eldrazi and 2x elves in the top 8, if you have acces to mtgpulse’s archtype analysis tool you will also see that it has a great matchup against Melira Company.

Other than that and affinity its just waiting for the april bans..

This. I think most people would actually have loved for a new tier 1/tier 2 contender. People were already going crazy for the processor builds and that was not oppressive at all. Sure it sucked that gy based decks became essentially unplayable, but still a new entry into the format was sweet. People didn’t want a tier 0 oppressive monster. Sadface

I think in the end it doesn’t matter which one they ban, but stacking temples may be ok because drawing 2 or more of an important 4 of should be a nut draw. eye of ugin facilitates crazy plays at every point of the game. Even if it is not 6 mana a turn, it is for suuure 4 mana really often when dropping multiple three drops from the uw/ur version.

More importantly, I don’t think it is in wizard’s interest to kill the deck entirely so I hope they just ban one. On the other hand, if they will just have to ban the other card later because it continues to be on the same levels as pod and twin, then that is also pretty feelbads. To be honest, Wizards had really put themselves in a bind with the simultaneous twin banning and eldrazi printing. If you read the signs from them, eldrazi does seem fated to be banned to oblivion if a single ban doesn’t do it. If eldrazi continues (and affinity honestly at some point probably, not that I am calling for band, just trying to be consistent with their application of metagame shares) to be a large part of the meta, what will wizards do? Can we really be confident that either of these two decks will be around in their current form (or post April ban at least for eldrazi) in 2 years?

Indeed, as much as I hate seeing what modern became, an emergency ban would be bad.
Like banning an almost broken (but not quite) deck like twin, without giving anything back to it.

Assuming no one disagrees that either temple or eye should be banned; should the deck be outright weeded out of the format, by banning BOTH eye and temple?

I do think banning temple is better than eye of ugin. I mean you can still do explosive Eldrazi Mimics turn 1 with Eye but this kind of play sounds more like a glass cannon than a real offender. The biggest offender right now is being able to do that turn 1 Mimics than a turn 2 Thought-Knot Seer via Eldrazi Temple.
Eye of Ugin is legendary so having multiples are horrible since you can’t float mana or even “float” cost reduction by other hand starting with multiple Temples will always be a good hand. Temples allow turn 2 Thought-Knot Seer if you keep playing Temples. Eye of Ugin lets you have a turn 3 Thought-Knot Seer and would force players to play other colorless lands to not only rely on Temple. Banning both lands would be the worst decision ever.

To be realistic I think that Wotc do not want to emergency ban something right now not because It is not needed but because they do not want to look like they are amateurs and don’t know what they are doing with modern. I mean specially because things gone crazy just few weeks after that polemic Twin ban.

Eternal Master announcement instead a Modern Masters 3 release sounds more like a bad joke. Something to change people focus from Modern Eldrazi mess to another eternal format that they really never gave any sort of support (besides commander products). Until few weeks ago they had stated that legacy would be more an online format than a paper one. Now they tell something more like “hey people Force of Will! Look we are printing Force of Will!!! Stop looking and talking about eldrazi, look we are giving you Force of Will!!”

Temple and Ugin were never a big problem until Oath’s release. They said that they only think about card design in standard and not eternal formats. Are they nuts? Why don’t they hire a team to see how some cards would interact in older formats? It would cost less than trying to fix the format after every set release.

I think it’s a slight misrepresentation to say “Eye can generate 6 mana in a single turn”, because you can’t do some of the most important things that could be done with something that *actually* produced that much mana in a turn. Eye can *conditionally* provide 6 mana in a turn, as long as any given spell is only using 2 of that.

By comparison, Temple never generates more than 2 in a turn, but the ability to have multiples means they can be stacked to focus on huge, game-breaking cards. Eye can’t do that.

When we discuss Eye by saying “It can generate 6 mana per turn” (or something along those lines), we calibrate our thinking to see the card as being much stronger than it is (compared to Temple).

certainly forcing them to draw eye+urborg – two legendary lands – in order to have a broken opener seems a lot fairer. It means they’ll also get hands with jsut one or the other, or multiple copies of a legenday land (esp useless if its eye). Two temples can just happen every now and then, and there’s no legendary drawback to ever punish you for putting 4 of them in the deck.

I’m personally rooting for an eye ban so that tron no longer has the same inevitability against my beloved esper control deck, but that’s selfish esp in the face of the more important issue of crippling the eldrazi decks. Not gonna lie, I haven’t attended a local modern event since the pro tour. Even knowing the deck won’t be that prevalent at the LGS, its existence has just psychologically taken my interest in the format down many levels 🙁

Eye can theoretically generate upwards of six mana in a turn, but the Temple ban stops the deck from its most broken openers: turn two Thought-Knot and turn three Reality Smasher. The Smasher is still possible off Eye + Urborg + colorless source, but it’s much harder to achieve without Temple legal.

From what I’ve seen the agreement is that Eye is the most broken piece, but it isn’t the agreed upon ban. Would not be surprised, personally, if both go but I expect one or the other.

That’s the conclusion I also came to. I’m not introducing canaries for the sake of introducing them – testing with GRx Moon, a deck I’ve had a lot of success with in the past, has shown me that I needed cards like Crack the Earth or Serum Powder to even approach the level of consistency needed against Eldrazi. Since those cards didn’t get me there, I’m giving up the fight and returning to the colorless legions.

Not that I’ve seen. Wizards has a history of banning both offenders (Cruse/Dig, Nacatl/Fire, etc.), but I think if they just banned Temple the deck would slow to a manageable level. That said, I haven’t tested it.

I’ve personally not seen many folks advocate banning both, but I haven’t seen much consensus on which one to ban. But that’s just my anecdotal observations. Not sure if anybody has hard data in that regard.