Ok, hmm, what might be something very interesting that would be extremely hard to set up is a vintage power rating number, sort of like a dci number.  With something similar to a college tournament bracket only you play more than one game if you lose.  To determine the rating they take a complex form of statistics including past tournament results, match win %, and turn that into a numeric value.  Different tournaments could seed different people differently based on their past experiences there.  This is all hypothetical, and difficult to set up, but not overly difficult.  I imagine they probably have tournament software avaliable that isn't too expensive for things of this nature.  Basically the goal of something like this would be to determine who the best player from past results entering a tournament is compared to the player that isn't the best, which in turn gives the best player the greatest chance to be successful.  Which rewards people for their skill to a higher degree than what we have in place now.

This is all hypothetical though, and is based on the assumption that a complex score/seeding system is avaliable, and that people who run large tournaments would actually want to put something like this in place.  Also, more importantly is if the players actually want it.  It would certainly reward the superior player more, which, in the end is the goal of any athletic event.  (Yes, MTG is an athletic event)

I also understand nobody has been complaining about the tournament setting, which would make this entire post including the points extremely mute.  It just seems that with vintage might want something like this more than any other format because of the amount of skill+luck involved which keeps the best player from winning.

Also, to make this post even more simple and summarize it in entirety, more in depth detailed statistics more better players doing better which = good.

If it sounded like I was complaining, I wasn't.  I was just stating facts as best as I see them.  I'm certainly not implying vintage is a bad format, I love vintage.  I've made about 120+ posts about vintage (Some were legacy).  Although I won't get into it too much, the part of vintage that I love for me is having a hobby and making money in the process through good trades, things of that nature.  You certainly can't say that to as large of a degree as other formats, and you certainly can't say that about a game like Chess in a typical sense.  

Also, could anyone please explain to me how large tournaments work?  Like, I believe they use very complex statistics to determine the top eight, I'm just wondering if anyone can validate this. 

Definitely, I 100% agree with that.  My post is about many things such as how these two opposites can exist in the same format.  It is also about if vintage is really more skillful overall which is extremely debatable, considering all the complexities of it compared to other formats.  I do think though it isn't an accurate comparison to compare vintage skill requirements as a total package with any other format based on how swingy it is.  Also, it's about if our tournament settings are the best possible, which due to complexities such as time constraints and these already discussed factors, which they obviously are not.  As a rule of thumb the more a good player plays the more his skill will be shown based on his records.  In a tournament setting according to chance just like your poker example the better player will win, but the worse player does have that chance to steal the pot.

Basically this is all really hypothetical, and I just thought it was interesting, and would make a decent topic.  This is sort of my own study and thinking of philosphy in magic terms in a way. 

Aka Lucksacking, I mentioned it in my post.  (If someone doesn't understand this short answer, read his entire post first)

Sure it doesn't that's why vintage is swingy.  How about if the situation isn't perfect, and you only have a first turn oath without FOW backup, or Tinker while an opponent is playing Welder.  Then you need to think.

So, you're saying it's easier building decks for other formats than vintage considering in vintage the card pool is larger than any other format, and there are so many decks you have to metagame against, more than any other format by the way.  Also, I'm sure the good vintage players understand the combat step.

They do all play some of the same cards, but, that is because they are so heads and tails above everything else in magic in power levels.  Have you ever thought of the idea that the broknenness evens out?  Sure, Black Lotus isn't fair, but, if everyone plays it it's not like anyone has a card power advantage over another person.

I planned on writing this into a magic theory article for a website but I'm posting it here.  So, it probably doesn't sound like a normal post in the wording that I use.  Some things I state as facts, are probably more opinions, but obviously writing an article saying "I think this"  "I think that"  "This might be true" ect, doesn't make a good article, you have to sound like you know what you're talking about ect.  Anyway, tell me if you think my post makes sense, and if this idea has merit.

The Fundamental Flaw in Vintage

Vintage is the most skill intensive format, but at the same time the least skill intensive format

Ahh, paradoxes.  Vintage is an enigma format of Magic, it is widely known as the most swingy format where one mistake can drastically destroy your chances of winning.  On top of that, the term "luck sacking" is used full force in this format to describe events that happen to destroy your chances of tournament success.  However, Vintage is also the most difficult format to play correctly.  There are so many card interactions, that in large tournament events judges often make serious game altering decisions that are determined to be wrong later.  But, we are all humans, and as humans we all make mistakes.  This is a fact of life.

Back to my point, logic tells us two things.

1. Vintage has the most card interactions, thus making it theoretically the most skill intensive to take advantage of these card interactions through proper deck building, design theory, and actual playskill.

2.  Vintage is the most swingy format where even a player that's been making countless upon countless mistakes throughout a match can pull the random Tinker and bust out a Darksteel Colossus.  This makes vintage less skill intensive in this area than other formats.

Now, looking with these two viewpoints at the way a Vintage tournament is structured, you reach this fundamental flaw.

The eight players with the best records enter into the top eight.  This is all good and well, and definitely the way that has been the most successful way for time constraints, and general fun.  I don't know about you, but, I don't want to play a two/three/four day tournament just for a chance to win a Mana Drain.  (A one day tournament is okay though)  A night at a hotel probably costs more than that, assuming you're looking for one that's clean. 

Looking from a realistic viewpoint, a top notch player could be 6-0-0 entering into the seventh round of an eight round tournament.  He is in a match and he through all attempts and purposes is totally pulling away from his opponent from his opponent's glaring mistakes.  However, down to the wire he is out of counters and has a soon to be lethal Akroma, Angel of Wrath on the table with a Spirit of the Night removed from the games via swords.  Then, his opponent topdecks Yawgmoth's Will and wins.  Second game, the same situation, the top notch player is ahead from his great playskill, but, all of a sudden his opponent manages another lucky topdeck and the match is lost.  Next round, the top notch player is a little deflated, but still plays very well, but still manages to lose 0-2.  Thus, he is knocked out of contention for the top eight, even though he had a flawless tournament.  (Flawless tournaments probably don't exist even for the best player, but bear with me for this example.) 

So, what did we learn from that?  Vintage is extremely swingy, and rewards playskill immensely, but it also rewards dumb luck probably to just about the same degree.  Sort of like a bi-polar format in a way.

In a perfect world of magic there would be a record or score for correct playskill, but the world isn't perfect.  The best player doesn't always win the match, whereas the luckiest player doesn't always win a match.  It is sort of a blend of both.

Can Crucible of Worlds work under a Null Rod?  I'm working on building a deck, and I'm not totally positive.  My gut thought is no, but, I just want to confirm this.

Why couldn't they just errata Yawgmoth's Will to only play a set number of cards before banning it? That to me would make a whole lot more sense.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/273

So, Goblin King can now be lackeyed out, he can be matroned for, he can be recruitered for, ringleadered, ect ect.  Does he even have a place in current FCG lists?  FCG is a beatdown deck more often than not, and he provides more of a beatdown, and helps FCG contend with new versions of Fish that are up and coming that are giving FCG some difficulty.

Also, if he does have a place, is there even more reason now to run Aether Vials in FCG over Food Chain, or is an Aether Vial version of Goblins just too slow to contend with the meta of today?

Also, what would you even cut to play Goblin King?  FCG is a really tight list.

I guess there has been quite a bit of innovation, I've been working with a lot of wacky oath builds recently, so I may of dejected the idea of classic Oath builds. 

For some reason I just have never found a draw engine I thought was really that good, that I liked, that could keep up with all the stuff people throw at you.  It's almost like if your entire deck is built around abusing your draw engine like a control slaver, or a gifts deck, standard Oath will not have as strong of a chance.

I'm just throwing this idea out here, but would the scroll ancestral draw engine have any place in Oath?  You would have to play a couple Misdirections definitely to support it, and, typically, if you don't play Mana Leak you can't counter something first turn with just a mox and an island anyway.

I'm sorry, I'm bad at organizing concise ideas for topics, but, what I'm trying to get at is, is there enough Oath innovation going on?  Are people utilizing Oath to the best of it's abilities?  Also, is Gaea's Blessing even essential to Oath?  It's horrible when you draw it, and typically you don't need to recur your Oath creatures anyway.

I haven’t played in any SCGs tournaments, or many vintage tournaments for that matter, but, I have followed Oath on TMD and playtested my own builds of it for some time.

Ok, as most people know there are many, many different builds of Oath that have achieved top eights all over the world.  These include lists from using red as a third color, to black, to being basically mono blue builds with green for Oath, to even being a 3CC/4CC skeleton with the Oath combo in it.

What does this mean?  Originally, I thought that these myriad of Oath builds were the result of careful strategic metagaming, which they indeed have been to some extent, but has there also been a lack of desire to part from the meandeck U/G mold among many people?

I can’t say that there has been a lack of innovation, because, there has been innovation.  People have played TPS with the Oath engine sideboarded, people have played versions of Oath using Mindslaver in conjunction with Bringer of the White Dawn to endlessly slave their opponents.

The Team White Lotus Yawgmoth’s Will Oath build basically opened my eyes to the possibility that Oath decks maybe aren’t utilizing all the tools they have in store to be a more competitive deck.  Most people realize that when you Oath you typically don’t Oath away your entire library, so, why haven’t many people thought about the possibility of utilizing the graveyard in Oath decks, because many, many cards use the graveyard to powerful effect. 

I've been working with Oath builds for the past month or so that utilize the graveyard, with Yawgmoth's Will, and are typically built without a Gaea's Blessing maindeck at the very least.  Running a full compliment of three or even four creatures basically guarantees that you won’t get decked without a blessing anyway.   

So, what do you think?

49_Cents, I saw that list it was interesting, however, drawing into mindslaver is a complete annoyance, considering you have barely any way to hardcast it.  My list, can, and does have ways to bring slaver into play easily.

Zulander, this isn't an Oath deck as much as it is a slaver deck with the Oath component.  It makes the Slaver lock faster by allowing a quick easy outlet for dumping Slaver and other Welder toys in the graveyard, and getting a Welder in play.

This Topic is also about opening people's eyes to the fact that Oath is a very flexible card, and maybe we're not utilizing it to the best of it's ability.  Team White Lotus certainly showed new tech with Yawgmoth's Will in Oath, which can be extremely powerful. 

In retrospect, I shouldn't of opened this topic with a list, I should of opened it with the premise that Oath is a very interesting card, and maybe more people should be working on lists that utilize it with the power cards of vintage.  Maybe a moderator can close this so I can get my act together, and post this topic with that premise?

One of my qualms with Oath has been the fact that it just doesn’t play enough broken plays.  It just seems like mono blue with a sometimes fast kill condition.  So, I went and teched with Oath while attempting to put in the broken cards that make a deck like Control Slaver tick, and this is what I came up with. 

(I’d like to add that since the closest tournament setting that I’m aware of that is even remotely accessible to me is in Kalamazoo, an hour and a half from my location.  Therefore, I haven’t been able to test this deck in tournament settings as much as I would like.  However, I have tested it for a while at the local place I play with fellow type one players, and have had somewhat encouraging results.  Furthermore, I’m not really advocating this build, because, I know there is probably a better one out there, I’m advocating the idea of playing the so called “brokenâ€? cards of vintage in Oath, when there surely is a way to do it.)


Welding Oath

4x Oath of Druids
2x Goblin Welder
1x Platinum Angel
1x Mindslaver

1x Ancestral Recall
1x Tinker
1x Yawgmoth’s Will
1x Time Walk
1x Demonic Tutor
1x Vampiric Tutor
1x Mystical Tutor
1x Engineered Explosives

4x Mana Drain
4x Force of Will
4x Brainstorm
4x Thirst for Knowledge
2x Phyrexian Furnace (-1 Phyrexian Furnace, +1 Vedalken Shackles if you want another win condition)

1x Echoing Truth

5x Moxen
1x Black Lotus
1x Sol Ring
1x Mana Crypt
4x Blue Fetch
4x Forbidden Orchard
1x Volcanic Island
1x Tropical Island
1x Underground Sea
3x Island
1x Strip Mine
1x Tolarian Academy
1x Library of Alexandria

This deck is basically built upon a Welder/Slaver skeleton, with Oath thrown in for faster kills, and all purpose graveyard building for a massive game ending Yawgmoth’s Will. 

At first glance the synergies don’t seem to obvious, like without blessing what happens if you deck?  The answer to this question is you usually get a Platinum Angel before you deck, so, even with no cards to draw you cannot lose.  Also, Platinum Angel is a decent Tinker target, a savage beater, some normal Oath lists without Tinker use it, which should say something.

This is a Slaver deck, it can’t slaver for an entire game, but it can slaver enough (especially against decks that can’t really screw their own gameplan over) to be able to pull the win out with a Platinum Angel. 

Thirst for Knowledge is amazing in this deck.  It totters on the level of broken when the card/cards you discard you actually want to discard.  An extremely strong card drawer.

Other than those cards though, this is pretty similar to almost every other control build out there.  4x Mana Drain, 4x Force of Will, 4x Brainstorm are in about every control deck, and for good reason.

I played Tooth, and I came in 60th with a 5-3-1 record out of around 300 people in Detroit.  I was 5-1-1 in 16th place at the tenth table till I got beaten down by the mirror match of Tooth, then beaten again by another mirror match of Tooth in round nine.

I did decently for my first type two tournament ever, (no FNMS, nothing.) also considering I barely tested type2 other than tweaking my own build of Tooth.

My initial post was a little scattered and confusing.

Basically, what I'm asking is could a new form of goblins develop to at least have a chance against the problem cards, such as utilizing Chalice of the Void, maindeck REBS, Aether Vial, and possibly it's own Jitte?  Still, I think this deck would have an incredible problem dealing with all the hate out there like you have said, which would make it somewhat unreliable. 

Goblins are only good when there's a lot of them out, and it is really difficult in type1 to get a large amount of creatures on the board, which is why I think Goblins might have some difficulty.  This is just speculation, however, with little initial testing to back it up.

Obviously these are all questions that require testing to answer, which I might do and get back to you. 

If Fish is set to dominate, is FCG set to dominate fish?  If so, what form will Goblins take?

In this thread, Fish is unanimously thought as a deck that could potentially be set to dominate by almost everyone.  FCG has typically has a decent match up against fish from what I understand, so could that potentially mean that FCG could become not just viable but a legitimate threat in an environment filled with a lot of fish?

http://www.starcitygames.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=278779

If so, what form will Goblins take?  Will it take an Aether Vial form, as discussed semi in depth on SCGs by Mike Zaun in this thread? 

http://www.starcitygames.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=278388

I believe Mike Zaun, said in one article that in the SCGs tournament Food Chain was not the primary factor of his success.  I do not know how much he used Food Chain in the tournament.  I also do not know how much or how little about how he cheated with Kiki-Jiki, however, he did win the tournament which does count for something, which makes his voice at least somewhat credible. 

In testing, one of the largest problems I’ve had with FCG was getting my taigas stripped.  I wouldn’t even be searching for them with Wooded Foothills, when I’d draw them my opponent would drop the waste and destroy them.  Of course, if I drew a lackey, this would be somewhat irrelevant.  Although through limited testing, Aether Vial forms of Goblins seem somewhat interesting.  It allows goblins to take out the clunky mana acceleration, become a cheaper dual-less deck, and if it runs Chalice, which allows them to have at least some form of anti control-combo disruption that actually gets out fast enough to do some damage.

Discuss.

What Corndog is trying to say I believe is that this deck can win through consistency as much as it can win by nutty draws.  There has to be something to be said for that, because consistency is pretty important.  Also, he hasn't done poorly with the deck like scrubbing out at every tournament he goes to.

I'd like to mention that in powered versions of Oath with Mana Leak, it is usually just as fast as Annul because you drop a blue source with a mox.  The real gem of Annul lies in the fact that it is so inexpensive, so you can play an annul and a draw spell in the same turn.

Scrying is exceptional, the life loss is almost meaningless in control mirrors which black was designed to play against.  Thirst can help feed Scrying, and taking out those cards you mentioned would make the TWL deck entirely different.

Also, since I didn't say this in my initial post, great job on the build it looks interesting.  Annuls are extremely potent, and can also be superior to duress in many instances not even taking into account the potential mana base problems running Duress would create.

Has your team tried any combo builds with running Will when you have that large graveyard?

Shade, I was under the impression that Intuition-Ak was almost useless in a control matchup because Intuitions are generally terrible.  Ok, you Intuition for three Aks, the one you get get's countered, and you're left with only one ak in your library as card draw.  Am I mistaken in this assumption?

Also, Scrying is much more compact a draw engine than Intuition-AK, which allows you to play other cards to improve your matchups against other decks.

Personally I have stayed away from Intuition-AK for this very reason, and I prefer an Oath Thirst for Knowledge engine over an Intuition-AK engine almost any day of the week.

This isn't technically a store, however, it is across the street from a store, and it's a place where people play.

Battlegrounds
103 W. Michigan Ave. Behind Miller's Shoe Store
Jackson, MI

($2 to enter, it's free the first time)

JACO, what are your strategies for mulliganing against aggro?  Is it to mulligan into a first/second turn Oath, hopefully with FOW backup if you're lucky?  Maybe that is my problem in the matchup, in testing I haven't been mulliganing too aggressively.  Also, would one Underground Sea be enough for me to test black in Oath effectively?  (I only own one)

Ok, for message one the problem with getting a swamp with a fetch is that you will not be able to Mana Drain the following turn.  Mana Draining into something such as a draw spell is incredibly huge for your tempo in a close match.  I agree with you against an unstable deck such as a combo deck Duress can be key, however those decks aren't usually where you run into the most problems.  You usually can deal with them without playing black for duresses.  I agree with you however that Duress is key to knowing how to play your deck against what your opponent is playing.

Anyway, I believe the reason there isn't really an optimal build for Oath currently is because it is such a metagame dependant deck, and the simple fact that people enjoy playing different variations of the control combo build.  An example would be it may be optimal to play Darksteel Colossus in a metagame without Welders, where in a different metagame with Welders it would not be optimal in the slightest.  In addition, I believe, any build of Oath can be powerful if you know what you're doing.

Hello, I'll try to answer some of the questions as best as I can.

Intuition - Ak to me seems just inferior to Thirst for Knowledge.  An AK with two in the graveyard provides three new cards at the expense of one and five mana.  Thirst for Knowledge provides three new cards at the expense of an artifact that may be useless in that current game state, and one card and three mana.  Intuition - Ak is definitely more explosive in the early game, however after you Ak with two in the grave chances are without a shuffle you'll not draw another Ak the rest of the game.  Thirst, however, provides a card advantage engine that will still be around come the late game.  Deep Analysis is also a consideration in Oath with Intuition, however it's sorcery speed really kills it. 

Black in Oath

I haven't actually tested black in Oath to that large of a degree, however, first turn fetch, underground sea, duress seems like a terrible play if Oath isn't in your opening hand.  What if your opponent strips your land?  I'm also not a big fan of the life loss of scrying.  People have said that life doesn't matter in vintage all too much, but it actually does in many matchups.  If you're sitting across from FCG and you have Akroma, something, out and you have two turns to kill your opponent while at low life scrying would not help.

Furnace - Chalice Oath

I'm in the process of testing this build, and it seems very powerful.  Something I've noticed about the Chalice builds is that they usually only need to run eight counters.  Chalice makes up for that because it's a counter in itself.  I've heard from reading that Chalice and Furnace make many difficult matchups especially against slaver easier.

Something I've been testing and I would like some input in is the addition of Wishes in Oath.  It dilutes room in your sideboard, but it's like a three mana instant demonic tutor midgame.  It also keeps you from having to scoop if your opponent drops something such as a platinum angel.

Thanks JACO, if he wasn't my friend I'd sell it for way more, but since he is I'll probably cut him a deal somewhere around the mark you set.  He after all did trade me proxy power a couple weeks ago that looks and feels like the actual card only it's slightly thicker and the ink is a little blurry.

This deck pains me, so many card choices seem suboptimal.  It looks like you're attempting some keeperish build of control Oath, but you don't even call it keeper Oath or have the basic duals plus fetches to make it competitve.

I don't even know what tarnished Citadel does and I pretty much read about magic all the time.  That = bad.  Cities of Brass and Gemstone Mine should never be in non salvager combo oath.  They're just fragile, and theres better options that I alluded to earlier such as Fetches with blue duals.  Why do you play Enlightened Tutor?  Are you going to tutor for a mox?  Imperial Seal sucks, don't play it.  Four Impulse is crappy as your main draw engine, it just doesn't do enough as the other stuff out there.

Anyway, I suggest you read about Oath builds in other threads to get a better idea of what the strongest card choices are.

Eleven now, I had six yesterday.  Thank you trade binder.

Ok, i'm pretty sure I'm getting a good deal from my friend here, however I'm not totally sure on the value of the FCG deck.

It's 100% complete minus power.

He doesn't want the pieces he already owns such as Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, or even Taigas as he plans to go mono red.

The deck has sentimental value to me as it's the first type one deck i've ever build, and a build of it just won a SCG.

Here is what he wants

4x Goblin Lackey
4x Goblin Piledriver
4x Goblin Ringleader
4x Gobiln Recruiter
4x Gempalm Incinerator
4x Goblin Warchief
1x Goblin Sharpshooter
2x Kiki-Jiki
1x Goblin Matron
2x Siege Gang Commander
2x Skirk Prospector
4x Wooded Foothills
4x Wasteland
1x Chrome Mox

Sideboard stuff
4x Artifact Mutations
4x Null Rod
4x Pyrostatic Pillars
4x Red Elemental Blast

He wants to go mono red, also.

So, value my deck!  What would you price it at assuming you do not have a vintage deck, and the fact that it just won a SCG.

I have some questions about the kiki-jiki thing.  First of all, did he actually know how to use it correctly in the first place?  I assume he "knew" he couldn't do that with kiki-jiki but did it anyway, because afterall he is a pro and he should have a good idea of how cards interact.  If my hunch is correct, that is just sad that someone would do that to win.  The thing about the pro tour is that many of the people cheat to win from what I've heard.  An example is drawing an extra card when an opponent looks down, ect.  I haven't encountered it, but in giant PTQs I imagine it's a big problem.

Anyway, good job on piloting the stax deck.  I imagine it must of took a great deal of skill to get that far.

Well, what I mean is separating the translucent foil section from the face of the card itself so I can put the translucent foil layer over a proxy of a card to make it appear foil.