Are you a Quiet Speculation member?
If not, now is a perfect time to join up! Our powerful tools, breaking-news analysis, and exclusive Discord channel will make sure you stay up to date and ahead of the curve.
Welcome to the first complete monthly metagame update since the bans. Plus a little more. May 31st is included because I didn't look carefully enough at the dates when entering paper events. Once I realized the mistake, it was much easier to add in all the results from May 31st than go back and remove the original offenders. Whoops. But still, 31 days of data makes for a better data set.
There's Still an Outlier
Despite losing Phlage, Titan of Fire's Fury, Boros Energy continues to be an outlier, but only on Magic Online. However, this wasn't the case in paper, which has no outliers for the first time in a year. In fact, the current situation strongly resembles summer 2025, where Energy was utterly dominating online but wasn't even top deck in paper. Which does suggest that it will see a resurgence in paper pretty soon. The deck is just too efficient to be kept down, even if its midrange plan is significantly weaker now.
As always, outliers are removed from the data analysis but are reported in their correct position on the metagame charts.
June Population Metagame
To make the tier list, a given deck has to beat the overall average population for the month. The average is my estimate for how many results a given deck "should" produce in a given month. To be considered a tiered deck, it must perform better than "good enough". Every deck that posts at least the average number of results is "good enough" and makes the tier list.
Then we go one standard deviation (STdev) above average to set the limit of Tier 3 and the cutoff for Tier 2. This mathematically defines Tier 3 as those decks clustered near the average. Tier 2 goes from the cutoff to the next standard deviation. These are decks that perform well above average. Tier 1 consists of those decks at least two standard deviations above the mean result, encompassing the truly exceptional performing decks.
The Magic Online data nearly exclusively comes from official Preliminary, Qualifiers, and Challenge results. Leagues are excluded, as they add analytically useless bulk data to both the population and power tiers. The paper data comes from any source I can find, with all reported events being counted.
While the MTGO events report predictable numbers, paper events can report anything from only the winner to all the results. In the latter case, if match results aren't included, I'll take as much of the Top 32 as possible. If match results are reported, I'll take winning record up to Top 32, and then any additional decks tied with 32nd place, as tiebreakers are a magic most foul and black.
The MTGO Population Data
June's adjusted average population for MTGO is 14.62. I always round down if the decimal is less than .20. Tier 3, therefore, begins with decks posting 15 results. The adjusted STdev was 26.21, so add 27 and that means Tier 3 runs to 42 results. Again, it's the starting point to the cutoff, then the next whole number for the next Tier. Therefore Tier 2 starts with 43 results and runs to 70. Subsequently, to make Tier 1 requires 71 decks.
With slightly more than a full month of data, population has increased and surpassed April's 1408 with 1664 results. June would have beaten April's mark even if I hadn't accidently included May 31st. Concurrently, unique decks rose from 86 to 101, so the unique deck ratio rose from .0611 to .0607. That's below average for MTGO, and more importantly is way lower than I'd expect for the first month after a ban. 24 decks made the Tier List, down from 25 in April, though considering that April had more outliers, the drop in Tiered decks isn't too surprising.
| Deck Name | Total # | Total % |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | ||
| Boros Energy | 202 | 12.14 |
| Weapons Manufacturing | 124 | 7.45 |
| Goryo Blink | 105 | 6.31 |
| Colorless Etron | 92 | 5.53 |
| Broodscale Combo | 91 | 5.47 |
| Izzet Prowess | 89 | 5.35 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 86 | 5.17 |
| Tier 2 | ||
| UW Control | 68 | 4.09 |
| Ruby Storm | 67 | 4.03 |
| Boros Ponza | 65 | 3.91 |
| Amulet Titan | 55 | 3.30 |
| Esper Blink | 53 | 3.18 |
| Living End | 49 | 2.94 |
| Tier 3 | ||
| Green-Based Eldrazi | 38 | 2.28 |
| UW Blink | 36 | 2.16 |
| Domain Zoo | 35 | 2.10 |
| Yawgmoth | 29 | 1.74 |
| Dimir Tempo | 26 | 1.56 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 24 | 1.44 |
| Jeskai Control | 24 | 1.44 |
| Necro | 22 | 1.32 |
| Spike's Latest Mono-Green Thing | 19 | 1.14 |
| Sam's Ritual | 17 | 1.02 |
| Mardu Energy | 15 | 0.90 |
Their positions have been shuffled around, but most of the key player from the pre-ban metagame are still here. Farewell, Jeskai Blink, it seems that Phlage was too essential to lose. Jeskai's demise has enabled Broodscale Combo to come roaring up from the depths of Tier 3 to third place overall. Funny how a deck with maindeck Wrath of the Skies and Consign to Memory could single-handedly keep the deck that relies on colorless threats and Urza's Saga down, isn't it? We'll see if Broodscale is simply reveling in its predator being gone, or if this represents a new metagame reality.
The Paper Population Data
Paper was on trend to set a new record for sample size in May and actually achieved that in June. April saw 724 decks while June hit 1054, which is the largest sample for several years. I think. I'm not combing through all my updates to check. Anyway, unique decks also increased significantly from 77 to 88 for a ratio of .083. That's low for paper, but I'm not too surprised. This is the middle of RCQ season, so players aren't feeling experimental.
22 decks made the Tier List this month, which is down from April. This is expected because there are no outliers to lower the thresholds. The unadjusted average population is 11.98 so the List starts at 12. The STDev is 20.98, so the increment is 21. Therefore, Tier 3 runs from 12 to 33, Tier 2 is 34 to 55 and Tier 1 is 56 and over.
| Deck Name | Total # | Total % |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | ||
| Weapons Manufacturing | 101 | 9.58 |
| Izzet Prowess | 96 | 9.11 |
| Boros Energy | 85 | 8.06 |
| Goryo Blink | 71 | 6.74 |
| Broodscale Combo | 59 | 5.60 |
| Tier 2 | ||
| Living End | 51 | 4.84 |
| Colorless Etron | 50 | 4.74 |
| Esper Blink | 35 | 3.32 |
| Tier 3 | ||
| Domain Zoo | 33 | 3.13 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 32 | 3.04 |
| UW control | 32 | 3.04 |
| UW Blink | 28 | 2.66 |
| Amulet Titan | 28 | 2.66 |
| Ruby Storm | 27 | 2.56 |
| Boros Ponza | 26 | 2.47 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 23 | 2.18 |
| Green-based Eldrazi | 22 | 2.09 |
| Yawgmoth | 21 | 1.99 |
| Burn | 20 | 1.90 |
| Dimir Tempo | 17 | 1.61 |
| Necro | 13 | 1.23 |
| Simic Ritual | 13 | 1.23 |
Boros Energy was effectively dead at the start of June but then came back strongly during the last few weeks. I expect it to be contending for the top spot in July, especially since Weapons Manufacturing didn't do as well as I expected. Yes, I know it took the top spot; I'll explain in the Analysis section.
The Chess Clock Conundrum
June's data also shows just how different the online vs in person environments are. UW Control and Boros Ponza are a whole tier higher online than they are in paper, and that's no accident. Ties don't exist in online play, but they do in paper. Both decks are perfectly capable of hard locking their opponent out of the game, but actually winning is a bigger ask. Increasingly, both decks are only running Solitude and Kaheera, the Orphanguard as win conditions, which aren't fast ways to win if the opponent doesn't concede.
Which makes it counterintuitive that they're doing better online than in paper. MTGO forces you to try and play at least two games, but you only have to play one game in paper, meaning that MTGO's chess clock is a win condition. Both UW and Boros require a lot of click-heavy game actions in my experience, so they use a lot of clock. That should incentivize players to play out online games but concede in paper. However, my experience is the opposite. Players concede far more readily online than in paper, and that lets the current builds of Control and Ponza thrive. Having to actually close games in paper or tie is a strong disincentive, and so these ponderous decks are doing better online than in paper.
June Power Metagame
Tracking the metagame in terms of population is standard practice. But how do results actually factor in? Better decks should also have better results. In an effort to measure this, I use a power ranking system in addition to the prevalence list. By doing so, I measure the relative strengths of each deck within the metagame so that a deck that just squeaks into Top 32 isn't valued the same as one that Top 8's. This better reflects metagame potential.
For the MTGO data, points are awarded based on the population of the event. Preliminaries and similar events award points based on record (1 for 3 wins, 2 for 4 wins, 3 for 5), and Challenges are scored 3 points for the Top 8, 2 for Top 16, and 1 for Top 32. If I can find them, non-Wizards events will be awarded points the same as Challenges or Preliminaries depending on what the event in question reports/behaves like. Super Qualifiers and similar higher-level events get an extra point and so do other events if they’re over 200 players, with a fifth point for going over 400 players.
Due to paper reporting being inconsistent and frequently full of data gaps compared to MTGO, its points work differently. I award points based on the size of the tournament rather than placement. For events with no reported starting population or up to 32 players, one point is awarded to every deck. Events with 33 players up to 128 players get two points. From 129 players up to 512 players get three. Above 512 is four points, and five points is reserved for Modern Pro Tours. When paper reports more than the Top 8, which is rare, I take all the decks with a winning record or tied for Top 32, whichever is pertinent.
The MTGO Power Tiers
Again, June's total points are up from April's 2464 to 3008. The fact that it had the first 5-point worth challenge in a long time definitely helped. The adjusted average points were 26.26, therefore 27 points made Tier 3. The adjusted STDev was 48.14 so add 48 to the starting point, and Tier 3 runs to 75 points. Tier 2 starts with 76 points and runs to 124. Tier 1 requires at least 125 points. There's a minimal amount of movement between and even within the tiers. Mardu Energy fell off and was replaced by Neobrand.
| Deck Name | Total Points | Total % |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | ||
| Boros Energy | 382 | 12.70 |
| Weapons Manufacturing | 233 | 7.75 |
| Broodscale Combo | 184 | 6.12 |
| Goryo Blink | 180 | 5.98 |
| Colorless Etron | 168 | 5.58 |
| Izzet Prowess | 164 | 5.45 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 150 | 4.99 |
| UW Control | 132 | 4.39 |
| Tier 2 | ||
| Ruby Storm | 118 | 3.92 |
| Boros Ponza | 114 | 3.79 |
| Amulet Titan | 101 | 3.36 |
| Esper Blink | 91 | 3.02 |
| Living End | 87 | 2.89 |
| Tier 3 | ||
| Domain Zoo | 65 | 2.16 |
| UW Blink | 64 | 2.13 |
| Green-Based Eldrazi | 60 | 1.99 |
| Yawgmoth | 53 | 1.76 |
| Dimir Tempo | 46 | 1.53 |
| Jeskai Control | 46 | 1.53 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 45 | 1.50 |
| Necro | 39 | 1.30 |
| Spike's Latest Mono-Green Thing | 39 | 1.30 |
| Sam's Ritual | 31 | 1.03 |
| Neobrand | 28 | 0.93 |
Jeskai Control used to be more distinct from UW, but at this point it's just UW with Galvanic Discharge.
The Paper Power Tiers
Paper's total points rose from April's 1007 to 1622. There were a lot more events and a higher proportion of 2-pointers. The unadjusted average points were 18.43, setting the cutoff at 19 points. The STDev was 32.37, so add 33 to the starting point and Tier 3 runs to 52 points. Tier 2 starts with 53 points and runs to 86. Tier 1 requires at least 87 points. There was minimal movement within the Tiers, and nothing between them. Necro fell off and was replaced by Izzet Cutter.
| Deck Name | Total Points | Total % |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | ||
| Weapons Manufacturing | 150 | 9.25 |
| Izzet Prowess | 148 | 9.12 |
| Boros Energy | 136 | 8.38 |
| Goryo Blink | 110 | 6.78 |
| Broodscale Combo | 95 | 5.86 |
| Tier 2 | ||
| Colorless Etron | 73 | 4.50 |
| Living End | 72 | 4.44 |
| Esper Blink | 57 | 3.51 |
| Tier 3 | ||
| Domain Zoo | 52 | 3.21 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 52 | 3.21 |
| UW control | 49 | 3.02 |
| UW Blink | 49 | 3.02 |
| Amulet Titan | 47 | 2.90 |
| Boros Ponza | 42 | 2.59 |
| Ruby Storm | 40 | 2.47 |
| Green-based Eldrazi | 35 | 2.16 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 33 | 2.03 |
| Yawgmoth | 32 | 1.97 |
| Burn | 25 | 1.54 |
| Simic Ritual | 25 | 1.54 |
| Dimir Tempo | 24 | 1.48 |
| Izzet Cutter | 19 | 1.17 |
Composite Metagame
That's a lot of data, but what does it all mean? When Modern Nexus was first started, we had a statistical method to combine the MTGO and paper data, but the math of that system doesn't work without big paper events. I tried. Instead, I'm using an averaging system to combine the data. I take the MTGO results and average the tier, then separately average the paper results, then average the paper and MTGO results together for final tier placement.
This generates a lot of partial Tiers. That's not a bug, but a feature. The nuance separates the solidly Tiered decks from the more flexible ones and shows the true relative power differences between the decks. Every deck in the paper and MTGO results is on the table, and when they don't appear in a given category, they're marked N/A. This is treated as a 4 for averaging purposes.
| Deck Name | MTGO Pop Tier | MTGO Power Tier | MTGO Average Tier | Paper Pop Tier | Paper Power Tier | Paper Average Tier | Tier 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boros Energy | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 |
| Weapons Manufacturing | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 |
| Goryo Blink | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 |
| Broodscale Combo | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 |
| Izzet Prowess | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 |
| Colorless Etron | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1.50 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.00 |
| Esper Blink | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2.00 |
| Living End | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2.00 |
| UW Control | 2 | 1 | 1.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.25 |
| Ruby Storm | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.50 |
| Boros Ponza | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.50 |
| Amulet Titan | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2.50 |
| Green-Based Eldrazi | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.00 |
| UW Blink | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.00 |
| Domain Zoo | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.00 |
| Yawgmoth | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.00 |
| Dimir Tempo | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.00 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.00 |
| Necro | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | N/A | 3.5 | 3.25 |
| Jeskai Control | 3 | 3 | 3 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3.50 |
| Spike's Latest Mono-Green Thing | 3 | 3 | 3 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3.50 |
| Sam's Ritual | 3 | 3 | 3 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3.50 |
| Burn | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.50 |
| Simic Ritual | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.50 |
| Mardu Energy | 3 | N/A | 3.5 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3.75 |
| Neobrand | N/A | 3 | 3.5 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3.75 |
| Izzet Cutter | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 3 | 3.5 | 3.75 |
Average Power Rankings
Finally we come to the average power rankings. These are found by taking the total points earned and dividing them by total decks, to measure points per deck. I use this to measure strength vs. popularity. Measuring deck strength is hard. While you can make a Wins-Above-Replacement-esq metric for the Magic cards in an individual deck, there's no way to make one that lets you compare decks. The game is too complex, and even then, power is very contextual.
Using the power rankings helps to show how justified a deck’s popularity is. However, more popular decks will still necessarily earn a lot of points. Therefore, the top tier doesn't move much between population and power and obscures whether its decks really earned their position.
This is where the averaging comes in. Decks that earn a lot of points because they get a lot of results will do worse than decks that win more events, indicating which deck actually performs better.
A higher average indicates lots of high finishes, whereas low averages result from mediocre performances and a high population. Lower-tier decks typically do very well here, likely due to their pilots being enthusiasts. Bear this in mind and be careful about reading too much into these results. However, as a general rule, decks that place above the baseline average are over-performing, and vice versa.
How far above or below that average a deck sits justifies its position on the power tiers. Decks well above baseline are undervalued, while decks well below baseline are very popular, but aren't necessarily good.
The Real Story
When considering the average points, the key is looking at how far off a deck is from the Baseline stat (the overall average of points/population). The closer a deck’s performance to the Baseline, the more likely it is to be performing close to its "true" potential.
A deck that is exactly average would therefore perform exactly as well as expected. The greater the deviation from the average, the more a deck under or over-performs. On the low end, a deck’s placing was mainly due to population rather than power, which suggests it’s overrated. A high-scoring deck is the opposite of this.
We'll start with MTGO's averages:
| Deck Name | Average Points | Power Tier |
|---|---|---|
| Neobrand | 2.33 | 3 |
| Spike's Latest Mono-Green Thing | 2.05 | 3 |
| Broodscale Combo | 2.02 | 1 |
| UW Control | 1.94 | 1 |
| Jeskai Control | 1.92 | 3 |
| Boros Energy | 1.89 | 1 |
| Weapons Manufacturing | 1.88 | 1 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 1.87 | 3 |
| Domain Zoo | 1.86 | 3 |
| Izzet Prowess | 1.84 | 1 |
| Amulet Titan | 1.84 | 2 |
| Colorless Etron | 1.83 | 1 |
| Yawgmoth | 1.83 | 3 |
| Sam's Ritual | 1.82 | 3 |
| UW Blink | 1.78 | 3 |
| Living End | 1.77 | 2 |
| Dimir Tempo | 1.77 | 3 |
| Necro | 1.77 | 3 |
| Ruby Storm | 1.76 | 2 |
| Boros Ponza | 1.75 | 2 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 1.74 | 1 |
| Esper Blink | 1.72 | 2 |
| Goryo Blink | 1.71 | 1 |
| Baseline | 1.70 | |
| Mardu Energy | 1.67 | N/A |
| Green-Based Eldrazi | 1.58 | 3 |
The winner of MTGO Deck of May is Broodscale Combo. We'll see if this is a flash in the pan next month.
Now the paper averages:
| Deck Name | Average Points | Power Tier |
|---|---|---|
| Simic Ritual | 1.92 | 3 |
| Izzet Cutter | 1.90 | 3 |
| UW Blink | 1.75 | 3 |
| Amulet Titan | 1.68 | 3 |
| Esper Blink | 1.63 | 2 |
| Grixis Reanimator | 1.62 | 3 |
| Broodscale Combo | 1.61 | 1 |
| Boros Ponza | 1.61 | 3 |
| Boros Energy | 1.60 | 1 |
| Green-based Eldrazi | 1.59 | 3 |
| Domain Zoo | 1.57 | 3 |
| Goryo Blink | 1.55 | 1 |
| Izzet Prowess | 1.54 | 1 |
| UW control | 1.53 | 3 |
| Yawgmoth | 1.52 | 3 |
| Baseline | 1.49 | |
| Weapons Manufacturing | 1.48 | 1 |
| Ruby Storm | 1.48 | 3 |
| Colorless Etron | 1.46 | 2 |
| Tameshi Belcher | 1.43 | 3 |
| Living End | 1.41 | 2 |
| Dimir Tempo | 1.41 | 3 |
| Burn | 1.25 | 3 |
| Necro | 1.23 | N/A |
Broodscale is also the paper Deck of May. That should put a pretty conclusive target on its back now.
Analysis
Weapons Manufacturing did very well in June. I expected it to do better. It was creeping up on Boros Energy before the ban, so with Energy weakened and Amulet retooling, I thought it would dominate. It hasn't. Boros maintained its place in Energy (though not quite as dominantly), and while Weapons did take the top spot in paper, it actually underperformed according to the average points.
This is almost certainly down to the deck's inconsistency. There's a huge gap between its best and its average hands (forget about its worst) which didn't magically disappear when the metagame shifted. This looks like the same situation we saw years ago with Rakdos Scam. Prior to Lord of the Rings, it was a fine deck but too inconsistent to really dominate.
There was no bridge between the Scam plan and its midrange plan. Orcish Bowmasters became that bridge and the deck became Rakdos Scam. No equivalent card has been printed for Weapons, but with so many cards being printed every year, it's just a matter of time.
The Ban's Impact
Meanwhile, Umezawa's Jitte has seen more play than I expected. I expected some attempts to make Stoneblade a deck again, plus random acts of Hammer Time, and I saw them. What I wasn't expecting was to see it maindeck in Energy. I thought if it saw play at all, it would be a purely sideboard card, but in the middle of June a number of decks had one maindeck copy. It fell off because this just isn't the metagame for incremental value, but this is more play than I expected Jitte to see. Mayhap its return isn't as remote as some expected.
Meanwhile, Violent Outburst hasn't moved the needle that much. Playing against Living End is more stressful and annoying than before, but the deck isn't actually better. I should have seen the reason for this would be Boros Energy, specifically Goblin Bombardment. I'm not sure how many players today remember Modern before Mox Opal was banned in 2020, but old-school Affinity had a really good matchup against Living End.
Yes, it occasionally running Tormod's Crypt maindeck helped, but Arcbound Ravager was the real reason. In response to Living End, you'd sacrifice everything to Ravager but not Ravager to itself. After Living End resolved, everything came back before the modular trigger went on the stack, so you got all the counters plus almost all your creatures.
Boros can sacrifice everything to Bombardment, get them back, then sacrifice them again for the win. Running Thraben Charm maindeck helps too. Meanwhile, Boros is also keeping Crashing Footfalls out because you can't out tempo Energy, which is how Rhinos used to win. There's no room for Rhinos.
Financial Implications
The set of the moment is Marvel Super Heroes, which is making waves in Legacy and Vintage thanks to The Fantasticar, but has minimally impacted Modern. A few cards are seeing exploratory play, but nothing looks to be an important staple. I don't see much opportunity for speculation for Modern as a result.
The next set is Lord of the Rings: The Hobbit. The original LoTR set made multiformat waves based almost entirely on The One Ring and Bowmasters. It wasn't a Standard-legal set, but The Hobbit will be, which doesn't give me much hope for many Modern worthy-cards.
However, there is a strong possibility that there will be reprints, specifically of The One Ring and Bowmasters. There's no confirmation of that currently, but should that happen then Hobbit will be in high demand. My advice is to be open to buying up sealed product but not to pull the trigger too early.
