Magic The Gathering Thread XXIII: Modern is Dead, Long Live Modern

[LansXero]

Here's a weird thought: more people should play bad decks. Instead of minmaxing the most perfect deck possible

There is 'I would like it if' and there is 'should'. Nobody bar the designers of the game are qualified to tell players what they should or shouldnt do, and even then things like Commander were born because people kept making up their own ways to play the game. One of those ways, the competitive one, is precisely getting the most out of every card in the deck. The most fun? no, the most winning. And it will happen whenever there are rewards attached. If you got rewarded for 'fun' then people would clown themselves to death. But since Arena isnt designed that way, you get what you've seen.

[Eurus]

It's possible that you would enjoy the game more if it didn't have control archetypes, but a lot of people wouldn't. I don't play control, but I appreciate that it keeps certain deck types from getting too dominant and gives aggro a good niche to exploit.

Believe it or not, this is one of the less control heavy metas as far as I recall? Creatures keep getting bigger and stronger and more resilient with each set lately, and control has relatively weak counterspells. No Mana Leak, no Snapcaster, the only four Mana board wipes either have limited applicability (Ritual of Soot) or a rough Mana cost (Kaya's Wrath, very tough to drop on turn four reliably). Even the two Mana removal slot feels much weaker than it's been in the past. W/U/B control is definitely a good deck right now but I don't feel it's meta dominating to an unhealthy level.

[Tvtyrant]

It's possible that you would enjoy the game more if it didn't have control archetypes, but a lot of people wouldn't. I don't play control, but I appreciate that it keeps certain deck types from getting too dominant and gives aggro a good niche to exploit.

Believe it or not, this is one of the less control heavy metas as far as I recall? Creatures keep getting bigger and stronger and more resilient with each set lately, and control has relatively weak counterspells. No Mana Leak, no Snapcaster, the only four Mana board wipes either have limited applicability (Ritual of Soot) or a rough Mana cost (Kaya's Wrath, very tough to drop on turn four reliably). Even the two Mana removal slot feels much weaker than it's been in the past. W/U/B control is definitely a good deck right now but I don't feel it's meta dominating to an unhealthy level.

Control has gotten progressively more neutered since Alpha/Beta (for good reason.) The Deck often ran a single threat in the whole deck, modern control is more like a midrange deck. The decline of control is probably best seen in the repeat bans from the last few years, as combo decks had nothing to stop them and completely shattered the format. If you take out control you have to remove every other archetype but biggro.

[LaZodiac]

It's possible that you would enjoy the game more if it didn't have control archetypes, but a lot of people wouldn't. I don't play control, but I appreciate that it keeps certain deck types from getting too dominant and gives aggro a good niche to exploit.

Believe it or not, this is one of the less control heavy metas as far as I recall? Creatures keep getting bigger and stronger and more resilient with each set lately, and control has relatively weak counterspells. No Mana Leak, no Snapcaster, the only four Mana board wipes either have limited applicability (Ritual of Soot) or a rough Mana cost (Kaya's Wrath, very tough to drop on turn four reliably). Even the two Mana removal slot feels much weaker than it's been in the past. W/U/B control is definitely a good deck right now but I don't feel it's meta dominating to an unhealthy level.

I mean that's fair. Even if control decks aren't that strong, the strengths they do have are absurd. Teferi is a little pushed.

[Marywn]

I mean that's fair. Even if control decks aren't that strong, the strengths they do have are absurd. Teferi is a little pushed.

Teferi wasn't really an issue for me, until I fought a deck that exclusively was meant to just delete me from the game and not allow me to win in anyway. I was fine with the deck, but the person I was facing was just dead silent and didn't say anything except some type of counterspell or board wipe

ALso did everyone see Parhelion II? I'm very interested to try that vehicle out.

[LaZodiac]

Teferi wasn't really an issue for me, until I fought a deck that exclusively was meant to just delete me from the game and not allow me to win in anyway. I was fine with the deck, but the person I was facing was just dead silent and didn't say anything except some type of counterspell or board wipe

ALso did everyone see Parhelion II? I'm very interested to try that vehicle out.

YEah that's basically what I had to deal with. I won by deck out and it sucked, thus this massive conversation that has consumed the thread (sorry).

Parhelion II looks a bit tricky to get out, but is a good example of a control finisher in my mind. Once that's out you're swinging at least 13 damage minimum with basically 100% safety. That's two turns at the absolute worst.

[Marywn]

Also looking real forward to Solar Blaze, the Board Justice Strike

[Eurus]

I do think Teferi is really pushed as planeswalkers go. I'd prefer it if he didn't do everything...

[Marywn]

Parhelion II looks a bit tricky to get out, but is a good example of a control finisher in my mind. Once that's out you're swinging at least 13 damage minimum with basically 100% safety. That's two turns at the absolute worst.

Cheat it out with Thran Temporal Gateway?

[LaZodiac]

Cheat it out with Thran Temporal Gateway?

Okay that could really work. Slot that into some sort of white blue artifacts matter deck. I like it! Maybe lighten up on the artifacts matters part a bit to slot in some more token-y stuff, put in the one that turns tokens into angels so your smaller cards can become useful in late game.

[Techwarrior]

It really seems like your issue is the win condition of choice for a control deck. I understand that getting decked by Teferi ult and tucking himself is difficult to stomach, I really do. The problem is there isn't a really good way to make a control finisher. The card basically has to win the game on it's own, protect itself from removal, and further the game plan of the deck when winning the game isn't something you can immediately do.

Aetherling is one of the better examples of this being problematic. An aetherling that stuck won singlehandedly, was incredibly difficult to interact with, and could just sit back as a moat if need be. The only really ways to kill it were by countering it, or tapping your opponent out.

Splinter Twin is great example of a control deck that had the gameplay you're suggesting control decks should have. When you got Twin on your creature, you won the game. The rest of the deck was removal, counters, card advantage, and deck manipulation. The card is banned in modern because of the play patterns it made. Twin asked, "did you leave removal up?" and if you didn't or you didn't have it you died on the spot.

Is Teferi really good? Yes. Is there a better way for finishers to be printed? Yes. Am I glad Teferi was printed? Yes. I'm sorry it had to go through standard, but I do prefer that they push the envelope on cards occasionally. Guilds standard was honestly the best standard environment I've played, and it had Teferi in it.

[LaZodiac]

It really seems like your issue is the win condition of choice for a control deck. I understand that getting decked by Teferi ult and tucking himself is difficult to stomach, I really do. The problem is there isn't a really good way to make a control finisher. The card basically has to win the game on it's own, protect itself from removal, and further the game plan of the deck when winning the game isn't something you can immediately do.

Aetherling is one of the better examples of this being problematic. An aetherling that stuck won singlehandedly, was incredibly difficult to interact with, and could just sit back as a moat if need be. The only really ways to kill it were by countering it, or tapping your opponent out.

Splinter Twin is great example of a control deck that had the gameplay you're suggesting control decks should have. When you got Twin on your creature, you won the game. The rest of the deck was removal, counters, card advantage, and deck manipulation. The card is banned in modern because of the play patterns it made. Twin asked, "did you leave removal up?" and if you didn't or you didn't have it you died on the spot.

Is Teferi really good? Yes. Is there a better way for finishers to be printed? Yes. Am I glad Teferi was printed? Yes. I'm sorry it had to go through standard, but I do prefer that they push the envelope on cards occasionally. Guilds standard was honestly the best standard environment I've played, and it had Teferi in it.

Yeah, that's a point.

Also, I got a bug bite in me from the idea of Parhelion II portal shinanigans and made a deck in preperation for taking that idea with it. It's not the best, I think, but I think it works decently well? Made it out of random stuff in my collection and some ideas I had that are neat.

Spoiler: A Historic Occasion

Show

1 Azor, the Lawbringer (RIX) 154
2 Diamond Mare (M19) 231
11 Island (M19) 265
1 Glacial Fortress (XLN) 255
1 Sai, Master Thopterist (M19) 69
2 Voltaic Servant (DAR) 236
4 Aviation Pioneer (M19) 46
3 Skyscanner (M19) 245
2 Aethershield Artificer (M19) 2
9 Plains (M19) 261
2 Depose // Deploy (RNA) 225
3 Aerial Engineer (M19) 211
1 Skilled Animator (M19) 73
1 Teferi, Hero of Dominaria (DAR) 207
1 Zahid, Djinn of the Lamp (DAR) 76
1 Settle the Wreckage (XLN) 34
1 Teshar, Ancestor's Apostle (DAR) 36
2 Disperse (M19) 50
3 Seal Away (DAR) 31
2 Temporal Machinations (DAR) 271
1 Meandering River (M19) 253
2 Azorius Locket (RNA) 231
1 Teferi, Hero of Dominaria (DAR) GR6
1 Hallowed Fountain (RNA) 251
1 Azorius Guildgate (RNA) 243
1 Azorius Guildgate (RNA) 244

[Marywn]

Yeah, that's a point.

Also, I got a bug bite in me from the idea of Parhelion II portal shinanigans and made a deck in preperation for taking that idea with it. It's not the best, I think, but I think it works decently well? Made it out of random stuff in my collection and some ideas I had that are neat.

Spoiler: A Historic Occasion

Show

1 Azor, the Lawbringer (RIX) 154
2 Diamond Mare (M19) 231
11 Island (M19) 265
1 Glacial Fortress (XLN) 255
1 Sai, Master Thopterist (M19) 69
2 Voltaic Servant (DAR) 236
4 Aviation Pioneer (M19) 46
3 Skyscanner (M19) 245
2 Aethershield Artificer (M19) 2
9 Plains (M19) 261
2 Depose // Deploy (RNA) 225
3 Aerial Engineer (M19) 211
1 Skilled Animator (M19) 73
1 Teferi, Hero of Dominaria (DAR) 207
1 Zahid, Djinn of the Lamp (DAR) 76
1 Settle the Wreckage (XLN) 34
1 Teshar, Ancestor's Apostle (DAR) 36
2 Disperse (M19) 50
3 Seal Away (DAR) 31
2 Temporal Machinations (DAR) 271
1 Meandering River (M19) 253
2 Azorius Locket (RNA) 231
1 Teferi, Hero of Dominaria (DAR) GR6
1 Hallowed Fountain (RNA) 251
1 Azorius Guildgate (RNA) 243
1 Azorius Guildgate (RNA) 244

Atleast you cant counter the ability of Thran Temporal Gateway unless its the new simic dual spell

[Ninjaman]

He actually did throw out Zetalpa earlier, it's a thing he fetched with Mastermind's Acquisitions most likely. That and Nezahal. I killed them both because he played them into a tapped out board state.

Aren't Zetalpa and Nezahal exactly the kind of win conditions you want control to play?

He couldn't because his ENTIRE deck otherwise was creature targetting removal and counter spells. He had nothing to play. He KNEW he had nothing to play. The fact that he literally played nothing for the rest of the game shows this.

They didn't play a single draw spell? That seems super weird. Their list must have been outstandingly bad then.
But even if they didn't have anything that doesn't mean they remembered he had nothing.

They literally had no spells that weren't designed to remove my ability to play, and thus had nothing to play when I played nothing.

Control decks typically play some card draw spells as well. When you play Devious Cover-up you should have some spells for it to counter to keep yourself from decking.

I only know he had at least one Devious Cover-up because I accidently played a creature that he countered, getting him the two elder dino's back. But by then his Immortal Sun had made his death inevitable next turn. Also Cover-up exiles itself.

Cover up doesn't exile itself, it exiles what it counters. They shouldn't run out before you deck yourself.

Here's a weird thought: more people should play bad decks.

What you're describing is casual. Arena is not for casual.

Instead of minmaxing the most perfect deck possible, have fun with it.

Here's a weird thought: People can have fun playing a minmaxed deck.

I feel like if a deck type is too consistent, it's boring for both players.

You said you hate not getting to play your deck. If your deck is consistent, that means you get to play your deck, instead of losing to your draws. How is that boring?

And while Thousand Year Storm decks seem interesting, they actually aren't in practice because they just remove your ability to play the game, which is never fun.

If the deck removes your ability to play the game that means they've won. The game is over then, it's over before they actually kill you. The interesting part is whether or not they can get to that point or if you can prevent them.

The problem is those win conditions are boring.

This is a completely subjective statement.
Also boring =/= bad for the game

Slowly building Teferi up so you can activate his stupid exile emblem that makes your opponent literally unable to play the game.

When you get the emblem you've pretty much won. If you don't want to play it out, just concede.
Also, the opponent you played had two elder dinosaurs, are they not "fun" win conditions.

That's not fun, at all, and I don't know how anyone could consider otherwise.

When the emblem hits you've lost. The fun is up to that game. And if you think you still have a chance even after the emblem hits, then the fun is seeing if you can wiggle yourself out of this seemingly impossible situation, trying to make every play count in the hopes that you will get there.

It's like land destruction. I want control decks to have finishers that End The Game Now, not "in a couple turns all of your lands are exiled so you can't play. I don't have any real way to finish the game so just concede please."

They have a real way of finishing the game. Decking you out while countering all your stuff is a real way of finishing the game.

And yeah, mid-range has to be controlly against aggro, but at least my control options are interactable against.

So are control's control options. Teferi is killable, there are spells that can't be countered, there is hand disruption to pick apart their hand, there is indestructible/recur-able threats to play around sweepers. If you're not interacting with them, you're not trying to interact with them. And that's fine, not interacting is a perfectly legitimate way to beat control, but don't talk about how they're non-interactable.

I disagree on the "you play aggro against control" though. If you're playing mid-range, you have to play controlly against them because you'll end up over extending and as a mid-range deck that's something you need to avoid.

Being careful about overextending is what aggro does against control. Sometimes they get to play under sweepers, but a lot of the time you don't play into them.
You don't have to avoid overextending as a midrange deck, you have to avoid overextending as a midrange deck against a control deck. If you're a midrange deck against an aggro deck you don't have to avoid overextend, you pretty much have to overextend, because that is how you win.

Almost all my control games are me removing Teferi all day, or dealing with the ****ty terrible not-white at all Dawn of Hope. But really lifegain control deck bull**** is a completely different beast.

Dawn of Hope is totally a white card though. And it's one of the win conditions that doesn't need to take forever to win, and still you are hating on it.

To explain what I mean: Control decks, the best ones anyway, that people always gravitate towards...their only real way to win is to ensure their opponent isn't actually allowed to play. Counter their spells so they can't do anything,

I'm not sure what you're explaining. I know this. This is how control decks opperate.

destroy their lands (or exile them with Teferi's ult) so they can't do anything,

Control rarely wastes time destroying lands, that's really more of a prison strategy, which is kinda control, but really a completely different beast.

play nothing but removal so they never get anything to stick.

If they play as much removal as you play creatures, then they can have removal for all your creatures, or they can not, they aren't guaranteed to have answers for everything.
Also, creatures with ETB/death triggers and recursion removal is a losing game for them.

It feels poisonous to the game's life, at least to me, that you get decks that are so completely dedicated to ensuring the other person you're playing against doesn't get to actually do anything.

Aggro is doing the same, it's just going about doing it in a different way. Instead of answering all your stuff it aims to kill you before you can do anything.
Magic is a game. You win by doing what your deck is supposed to do, and prevent your opponent from doing what they're supposed to do.

Combo decks are fine since those pieces are usually interactable with.

Combo decks are usually less interactible than control, and requires more specific interaction. Control decks can be beat by just hammering out threats.

You can stop a combo from going off and that's actually engaging. You can mount a defense against Aggro and try to get them to overextend. But with control, literally playing the game is playing into their strength.

No, not playing the game is playing into their strength. You win against control by doing more than they can keep up with. You win by playing around their answers.

I'm not saying control decks will kill magic, I'm saying that if anything could, it would be that.

Combo decks and prison decks have a much higher chance of doing that.

But yes you're right, modern will persist. I'm just saying standard would become a hellzone if control decks became the only viable deck.

It would also be a hellzone if aggro decks became the only viable decks, or if midrange decks became the only viable decks.
Magic thrives on there being many different archetypes that prey on each other.

My desire to play a game that is fun is making me play Arena. Other players are just deciding I don't get to have fun today. All conceding does is make me more frustrated.

It's not on your opponent to make you have fun playing. In casual, sure, but don't play a match in arena and expect your opponent to value your entertainment.

Parhelion II looks a bit tricky to get out, but is a good example of a control finisher in my mind. Once that's out you're swinging at least 13 damage minimum with basically 100% safety. That's two turns at the absolute worst.

Parhelion II is a horrible control finisher. It dies easily, and requires you to already have board presence. It doesn't really help your control plan, because you need to already have a board before it does anything.
Good control finishers are hard to interact with. Parhelion II is easy to interact with, dying both to artifact destruction, creature removal, and the removal of your other creatures, which you aren't playing a lot of in the first place.

[Silfir]

You're going to have a lot more fun in Magic once you shake off the mindset that involves you policing other people's decks. Let out your frustrations on Wizards, by all means - they're responsible for the shape Standard or Arena is in at any given time, for better or worse. The players just try to win with the decks they've constructed as best as they can. What seemed like a pointless exercise in futility on their part to you may have been them simply trying to learn more about how their decks doesn't manage to win after establishing control so they can correct that in deckbuilding.

[Shadow of the Sun]

There's also a concept I've seen referred too as "Life EV". Which is basically that while you may drop some percentage points scooping before your opponent has you actually dead, you save a lot of time, a lot of frustration, and can go onto playing more games.

[LaZodiac]

Aren't Zetalpa and Nezahal exactly the kind of win conditions you want control to play?


They didn't play a single draw spell? That seems super weird. Their list must have been outstandingly bad then.
But even if they didn't have anything that doesn't mean they remembered he had nothing.


Control decks typically play some card draw spells as well. When you play Devious Cover-up you should have some spells for it to counter to keep yourself from decking.


Cover up doesn't exile itself, it exiles what it counters. They shouldn't run out before you deck yourself.


What you're describing is casual. Arena is not for casual.


If the deck removes your ability to play the game that means they've won. The game is over then, it's over before they actually kill you. The interesting part is whether or not they can get to that point or if you can prevent them.


This is a completely subjective statement.
Also boring =/= bad for the game


When you get the emblem you've pretty much won. If you don't want to play it out, just concede.
Also, the opponent you played had two elder dinosaurs, are they not "fun" win conditions.


Being careful about overextending is what aggro does against control. Sometimes they get to play under sweepers, but a lot of the time you don't play into them.
You don't have to avoid overextending as a midrange deck, you have to avoid overextending as a midrange deck against a control deck. If you're a midrange deck against an aggro deck you don't have to avoid overextend, you pretty much have to overextend, because that is how you win.


Dawn of Hope is totally a white card though. And it's one of the win conditions that doesn't need to take forever to win, and still you are hating on it.


Aggro is doing the same, it's just going about doing it in a different way. Instead of answering all your stuff it aims to kill you before you can do anything.
Magic is a game. You win by doing what your deck is supposed to do, and prevent your opponent from doing what they're supposed to do.


Parhelion II is a horrible control finisher. It dies easily, and requires you to already have board presence. It doesn't really help your control plan, because you need to already have a board before it does anything.
Good control finishers are hard to interact with. Parhelion II is easy to interact with, dying both to artifact destruction, creature removal, and the removal of your other creatures, which you aren't playing a lot of in the first place.

Yes, they are. And then I removed them, and after removing all his Teferi's and Elder Dinosaurs I figured he'd want to admit defeat.

I think he did have draw spells and stuff, I just don't remember what all he played. The point is by the end of it he literally did not play a single card

I coulda swore Cover-up exiles itself...weird.

There should be more casual formats (beyond just playing with your friends).

I guess the point I'm trying to get across is that control decks seem really oppressive to me because at least with the other types of decks I can eek out a win if I make the right decisions. From the word go Control decks try to make it so that not doing anything is the only way to avoid them, and that plays into their hand as well.

Uh...not? If a game is boring to play people won't play it. So yeah, that's pretty bad for a game's life.

Dawn of Hope should not have been printed and even Maro thinks so. White shouldn't get that degree of easy card draw, given card draw is one of it's main actual weaknesses.

The difference is that when I have to spend five turns destroying every single knight token bit by bit this cool and interesting swarm of knight decks is vomiting out, that feels like a fun back and forth. They're flooding the board and I have to stop them from what they're doing. That feels dynamic for both players, they're playing their History's and stuff, getting out their huge army, and I'm barely holding on by the skin of my teeth at 4 life because there's only so much I can do at four or five lands. But then I finally manage to get enough of a foothold that I stabilize and win. That's cool and dynamic, we both played our cards and went head to head in a battle of wits and strength. With a control deck they just say no to what you play. That's my problem, I'm aware that in this card game the goal is to stop your opponent from doing what they want, but control decks do it to effectively and too immediately. There is a genuine, serious difference that I don't think you're understanding.

No one really plays artifact removal, especially since WAR is gonna introduce so many Planeswalkers to contend to. Skillful Animator and having a lot of token creators can easily fuel Parhelion's crew, and cheating it out on turn 3 or 4 with some lands and lockets and the Thran Temporal Gateway is a pretty solid finish, personally. There's not a lot of ways you can contend with that and it finish you off in two hits minimum.

But yeah, I'm done railing on control decks. I got all my frustration out so we can probably drop this. I'm REALLY more of a Vorthos and I'd prefer talking about about the novel anyway.

You're going to have a lot more fun in Magic once you shake off the mindset that involves you policing other people's decks. Let out your frustrations on Wizards, by all means - they're responsible for the shape Standard or Arena is in at any given time, for better or worse. The players just try to win with the decks they've constructed as best as they can. What seemed like a pointless exercise in futility on their part to you may have been them simply trying to learn more about how their decks doesn't manage to win after establishing control so they can correct that in deckbuilding.

Truthfully I was just venting and I'm feeling a lot better about it now. It's really annoying in the moment you know?

There's also a concept I've seen referred too as "Life EV". Which is basically that while you may drop some percentage points scooping before your opponent has you actually dead, you save a lot of time, a lot of frustration, and can go onto playing more games.

Eh, I just don't like doing that because it feels so lame. Like imagine sitting down across from the table from someone and they play a few cards and you're like "actually **** it I can't win byeee" and then you fold. That's not fun for anyone either.

[Marywn]

I play fun decks, Not very viable ones. SO Parhelion II is something I would definitely run even if its trash.

[Silfir]

Eh, I just don't like doing that because it feels so lame. Like imagine sitting down across from the table from someone and they play a few cards and you're like "actually **** it I can't win byeee" and then you fold. That's not fun for anyone either.

On the contrary - if a player is willing to concede early when they know they will lose barring a complete freak miracle, you can potentially play ten or more quick games in the timespan of what would be two excruciating affairs, and you can actually figure out whether the win was a fluke and the matchup is actually even or even in your favor, strategic approaches that increase your odds of winning, cards to sideboard in or out, how to approach the matchup on a tactical level, and so on. I couldn't image how Magic could be any more fun.

Why would I be upset if my opponent concedes, in any situation? I don't play Magic to rub the fact I'm winning in people's faces.

I would be upset if they just took their cards and went home in a huff, yes, but that's where your analogy breaks down. Arena doesn't, and can't work like actual human interaction, not only because communication is restricted but also because online communication in competitive multiplayer is almost universally toxic and there's not really anything Wizards can do to fix that. In Arena, there is no button that says "become acquainted with the other person and start discussing the match like reasonable people at a local game store". If there was, and it worked as advertised (using mind control powers or some crap) I might actually spend money on it; as it is, I'll keep spending on paper, if and when I do. But the next best thing is to concede when you have lost and proceed to play potentially more interesting games against other opponents. There's just not enough time in the world to spend it not having fun playing a game.

[LansXero]

There should be more casual formats (beyond just playing with your friends).

Please no, Hearthstone already has enough clowny formats and yet Arena is outdoing them. It divides the playerbase, lets people roost in their tiny comfortable bubble of bad deckbuilding and then those same people demand cards and changes tailored to their niche predilections. Ugh.

Also, unconditional countering is a thing of the past. Control's denial shell is rather weak, so even the most harsh Teferi / Nexus shell cant answer everything all the time or 'make it so you never play at all'. Sure, it MAY achieve that sort of dominance, but its either because its opponent let it or because it drew perfectly, neither of which are guaranteed to happen.

What you are experiencing is also a reflecton of the best-of-1 format, no sideboard thats unique to Arena. If your deck has a poor matchup vs control, you solve that on games 2 and 3 by sideboarding. So conceding early on game 1 once you've figured them out to side-in tech pieces is the correct answer 75% of the time. But that doesnt happen in Arena, and it skews people's perception of the game as a whole.

As for the whole 'X is going to kill Magic, unfun will make people leave', MTG is at the strongest its ever been, with over 25 years of unfun blue as a core part of it. So while opinions are always valuable, the numbers just arent there to support the idea that 'unfun control decks' are having any effect on making people quit.

[Ninjaman]

I guess the point I'm trying to get across is that control decks seem really oppressive to me because at least with the other types of decks I can eek out a win if I make the right decisions.

I really don't understand this.
Against every deck there will be some matches where you have to play right and some where you just lose no matter what you do.
Often if an aggro deck has a great draw and you have a bad draw, there isn't any amount of right decisions that will let you win that game.

From the word go Control decks try to make it so that not doing anything is the only way to avoid them, and that plays into their hand as well.

No, not doing anything isn't the way to combat a control deck. You need to swarm them with threats. Against control you are the aggro dec

Uh...not? If a game is boring to play people won't play it. So yeah, that's pretty bad for a game's life.

Control has always existed in magic, and it is one of the biggest TCGs in the world, if not the biggest, so it would appear you are wrong.

The difference is that when I have to spend five turns destroying every single knight token bit by bit this cool and interesting swarm of knight decks is vomiting out, that feels like a fun back and forth. They're flooding the board and I have to stop them from what they're doing. That feels dynamic for both players, they're playing their History's and stuff, getting out their huge army, and I'm barely holding on by the skin of my teeth at 4 life because there's only so much I can do at four or five lands. But then I finally manage to get enough of a foothold that I stabilize and win. That's cool and dynamic, we both played our cards and went head to head in a battle of wits and strength. With a control deck they just say no to what you play. That's my problem, I'm aware that in this card game the goal is to stop your opponent from doing what they want, but control decks do it to effectively and too immediately. There is a genuine, serious difference that I don't think you're understanding.

Playing against the control deck is the same, you're just the knight deck in this situation. The knight deck is seeing you just say no to whatever they are playing.
No, there really isn't that much difference. When you are playing against control you should usually be able to resolve something, since they play more lands than you and they play card draw, so if you can't it's because you don't play enough threats.

I think the gist of all your posts is "There are some decks I find it interesting to play against, and some I find it boring to play against. People should stop playing the decks I find it boring to play against."
The thing is that what decks you find interesting to play against and what decks you find boring to play against depends completely on you and what deck you are playing. I'm sure if you switched to an aggro deck you would find it more exciting to play against control, as you would get to do more, and felt like you had them under more pressure.

Dawn of Hope should not have been printed and even Maro thinks so. White shouldn't get that degree of easy card draw, given card draw is one of it's main actual weaknesses.

I did a google, and I found two times where he said he was scared of it, but I didn't find him outright saying it should never have been printed, do you have a source?
The thing is that it maybe shouldn't be able make the lifelink tokens, but it creates this weird situation where the draw cards when you gain life part is white, and the token part is white, but when you combine those two halves it suddenly isn't white.

No one really plays artifact removal, especially since WAR is gonna introduce so many Planeswalkers to contend to. Skillful Animator and having a lot of token creators can easily fuel Parhelion's crew, and cheating it out on turn 3 or 4 with some lands and lockets and the Thran Temporal Gateway is a pretty solid finish, personally. There's not a lot of ways you can contend with that and it finish you off in two hits minimum.

Even if no one plays artifact destruction it still dies to removal, as does the creatures required to crew it.
What you're describing doesn't sound anything like a control deck. You're wasting way too many cards in an attempt to be fast, which is not at all where control wants to be. Control wants as few cards dedicated to winning as possible, and that means not playing Skilled Animator, a card that does nothing when you are trying to control the board and don't have a Parhelion out. TechWarrior explained control win conditions very will during this discussion. Control decks don't want to create the tokens to crew Parhelion. If it creates those tokens then it will kill you with those tokens.
What you described is a combo deck, and likely not a very good one.
For comparison Quicksilver Amulet didn't see play at any time it was in standard, including the one it just rotated out of.

[Eurus]

I really really want to make a deck around Feather. I'm not sure if there are any really good synergies with her that are standard playable right now, though.

[thorgrim29]

Beamsplitter mage maybe?

[Marywn]

Oh god, I just though of that too. That sounds... kinda insane, though counterspells and removal can stop it. I kinda want to try it.

[thorgrim29]

I kind of want to try a mainly izzet wizards aggro deck focused on combat tricks that dips white for Feather and maybe a few other things. With Adeliz, beamsplitter mage and Feather on the board you could get pretty disgusting damage out of a simple sure strike.

[Ninjaman]

I really really want to make a deck around Feather. I'm not sure if there are any really good synergies with her that are standard playable right now, though.

Rile, Defiant Strike and Reckless Rage are all nice synergies with her in her colors. Adamant Will and Assure are good at protecting her, though costing 2 hurts. Dive Down can do it for 1 if you play blue, but the mana might be rough.

Not a combat trick, but Ajani's Influence is nice card advantage with her.

Very pricey but Biogenic Upgrade and Bounty of Might seem fun.

Dual Shot let's you pick off X/1s

Essence Capture is a counterspell you'll get back, but the mana is tough.

Explosion is pricey but for 7 you can draw 3 cards each turn.

Fight with Fire kicked let's you shoot Feather for 1 and your opponent for 9, or just shoot a lot of his creatures.

Fungal Infection creates saprolings.

Gift of Growth gives you an extra tap on any creature.

Mass Manipulation is super pricey, but can give you repeatable mind control by targeting one of your creatures each time.

Seismic Shift is repeatable land destr

Switcheroo, and the new cheaper Izzet variant can both be used repeatedly.

Thrash, repeatable burn.

Yawgmoth's Vile Offering can destroy one of your creatures to reanimate something each turn.

[LaZodiac]

Please no, Hearthstone already has enough clowny formats and yet Arena is outdoing them. It divides the playerbase, lets people roost in their tiny comfortable bubble of bad deckbuilding and then those same people demand cards and changes tailored to their niche predilections. Ugh.

I mean stuff like Brawl and Commander, man.

[Otomodachi]

I mean stuff like Brawl and Commander, man.

Love to have a time machine to go back and point out to the Arena dev team, back in the like... pre-Alpha stage... just how important 3+ player games are to a healthy chunk of hte Magic community.

I really doubt we're EVER going to see anything beyond 1v1 on Arena, and it's a bummer. My understanding is they built their game engine in a way that makes adding more players exceedingly difficult. Please note- I GOT that understanding just from the phrasing the few times it's been talked about, so grain of salt. :)

[LansXero]

I mean stuff like Brawl and Commander, man.

On the WPN retailers group (which I also am) its the monthly meme to have someone asking for Commander Masters, Brawl Masters, Pauper Masters, etc. Its always someone with a niche community asking for releases / reprints centered around what the few players they have want, instead of growing the game by getting players who want what already exists.

Experimental products (Conspiracy, Battlebond, etc.) have always tanked and had to be clearanced away. Even the latest batch of masters sets failed, because niche casual communities dont buy product. Thats what could kill the game, shifting focus away of what truly matters to chase 'new players'

[LaZodiac]

I'm not asking for a Brawl product or anything (and EDH products rule) but I mean, making them an option for play in digital seems like a no brainer. Especially with WAR out.