Could Savor the Moment possibly find a home with a deck designed around Tezzeret?  The ability to use his abilities twice is quite strong.

Two points. 

The first may be an obvious one:  don't cheat.

If you cheat and get away with it, then you've cheated yourself out of the chance to improve your play.  If you cheat and fail, then people will label you as a cheater.  In any case, the bottom line is that cheating, even in the most casual of all matches, hurts yourself in the long run.  If you succeed, you may have won the game, but at what cost?

Secondly, always be aware of the game state, your surroundings, and your opponent's actions.  In other words, watch out for opponents trying to cheat you.

I've played plenty of casual, playtesting, and even competitive games where I've caught my opponent with one extra "mystery" mana which would allow him/her to win the game.  Or perhaps, more commonly, I've caught my opponent missing an assortment of fetchland, FoW, manaburn, mana crypt, and tutor damage.  Everything from "did I lay a land this turn?" to mysterious shuffle tricks have been attempted against me.  The disturbing part is that I know that I haven't caught every attempt at cheating.

Unfortunately, I'm sure that in most tournament settings, cheating is a reality.  It may not be as blatant as stacking one's deck, but more subtle forms of cheating exist.  I would suggest to everyone that plays competitively to follow these countermeasures:

• Shuffle your opponent's deck before each game.  (preferably pile shuffle)
• Keep track of your opponent's life total and sources of his/her loss of life.
• Keep track of your opponent's land drops.
• Keep track of your opponent's hand size.
• Ask your opponent questions regarding the game state. (show that you are paying attention)
• Call the Judge if you notice any "funny business"

I realize that my suggestions may point to the darker side of tournament play; however, potential cheating is a very important consideration.  After all, money is on the line.

Recently, I've been playing a few casual games with a friend who is currently playing Oath.  While Oathing, his graveyard slowly passes across what I deem to be the threshold between play and out of play.  It continues to the point where the entire area in front of him is supposed to be his graveyard (and the area slightly above to be the area in play).  This graveyard placement was common throughout our games and did not end after the Oathing finsihed.  I find this incredibly annoying and quite confusing as to what is in play and what isn't.  When I politely asked him to place his graveyard in the graveyard, I got the response: "I need to see what's in my graveyard at all times."

I was wondering if something similar were to happen in a tournament setting is there any official ruling regarding the placement of graveyards that spill out into play?

Thanks in advance.

Unfortunately, there is only way to improve flash in its current state:

Remove its significance to the format via restriction, reverse-eratta, or some other creative means.

Any deck that is so non-interactive and painfully simple to pilot, yet puts up results, should be dealt with swiftly.  (See Trinisphere)

This thread is devoted to the strategic improvement of Flash, not a debate about its role in Vintage.  Please make more of an effort to address the thread topic in future posts.  -DA

This list is 59 cards.  It seems the omitted card is a Yawgmoth's Bargain.

Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to respond to everyone that I'd like to...Maybe later tonight.  But just one question to forcefieldyou regarding this quote:






Do you play Control Slaver regularly?

Be honest.

Let me start off by saying, yes, I know this is my first post.  I have been playing Type 1 for quite a while, and have lurked TMD for ages as well as participated in many tournaments playing rogue and established decks.


Anyway, Type 1 is a broken format.  Yes, that is very obvious, but not to what I am referring to in my topic.  I'll state it again; type 1 is a broken format.  But in order to be a successful environment, it also has to be a balanced format as well.  Normally when this balance is lost (and new cards don't reclaim the balance), the DCI steps in and restricts or unrestricts cards in order to stabilize the format.  Now, what do I mean by the loss of balance?  Simply that one or two established archetypes makes up 75% or more of the field.  Sure, people try to come up with new, rogue tech.  Others play other established archetypes that may not be as competitive as the trend decks.   However, when these one or two archetypes (or variations) begin to dominate the field, that's when there is a serious problem with the format.  I believe this has happened, more specifically with the Control Slaver archetype.

Take, for example, this last Waterbury (Day 1) Top 8:

1st:  Control Slaver
2nd: Control Slaver
3rd:  TPS
4th:  Meandeck TPS
5th:  Control Slaver
6th:  Control Slaver
7th:  Rector Trix
8th:  Workshop Combo

Let's analyze.  50% Control Slaver.  25% TPS.  25% other.  With the finals being a Control Slaver mirror match.

Waterbury was a tournament with over 200 participants, so for a single deck to represent half of the top 8, *many* people must be playing the deck, or the inherent power of the deck must be very high.  I believe it's a combination of the two.  However, both of these observations have caused the DCI to react in the past for much lesser offenses.


Another recent large type 1 event was the Vintage Evolution.  I was unable to find the T8 results; however, it was yet another Control Slaver mirror in the finals.  


Now, one big thing everyone does before going to any event is metagame.  Which decks will be there?   What do I do against it?   The first thing that *everyone* thinks of is Goblin Welder.  In fact, that's why people bother to rummage through common boxes hoping to find some spare Lava Darts.  Let's think of another popular creature, Exalted Angel.  Assuming Goblin Welder is #1 on the list of what to metagame against, what number is the angel?  

Stop thinking...there is no answer, because most people won't even think about it.  And that can be said about many popular creatures such as Gorilla Shaman, Madness creatures/outlets, Morphling, Mishra's Factory, etc.  The list goes on.

Most people worry about Trinisphere, Welder, and Tendrils.  Which makes sense, but also shows that something is very wrong when people are taking up all these precautions over a R to cast goblin who would've costed 2R had he been printed after Mirrodin.


Obviously, Control Slaver is metagame distorting.  Why aren't people upset?   Why aren't people yelling for restriction?  The answer is very simple.  No offenses, but normally the vocal people who speak on these forums tend to shoot down people who mention restrictions or who mention that a certain deck is too powerful (like my post).  Chances are, these people are the ones in fact playing the deck, and therefore don't want to see something that they know how to play, and that I can only assume they consider fun, disappear into the void that is the restriction list.  Let's face it, 95% of the people on these forums netdeck.  And there's nothing wrong with that.  It's just that when everybody is netdecking the same deck, not only is it unhealthy for the format (because the format will lack diversity), but it makes for one hell of a boring tournament.


So what's the solution?  Normally, when the DCI deals with an overpowered deck, they tend to remove the drawing engine.  An example would be Necro/donate.  The left the illusions/donate combo unrestricted, but shut down the drawing engine, the Necro.  Thirst for Knowledge being the drawing engine, and Welder to bypass casting costs of expensive artifacts.  Both of these cards need to be considered for restriction.


In closing, no, I am not bitter about my first 4 matches being Control Slaver at Waterbury.  No, I do not have a death wish for everyone netdecking the latest version of it.  No, I don't think the people who actually created the deck are evil people.  In fact, since Waterbury, I have put together and have been playtesting a netdecked version of Control Slaver, with slight modification for the next large tournament.



If you can't beat `em....