In case it is still relevant, I want to participate in the vote.

I am 38, I have been playing since 1995.

As our little project for 2 years have shown me and my friends, we can confirm that the above statement is true.

So very true. This reminds me a lot that I also love to play computer games, which from time to time demands constant upgrades on the computer equipments necessary to be able to play modern games. Second hand computer equipments almost never beat the new, retail price from the shop. Yet I deemed constant upgrading well worth the money since I get fun out of playing the games.


Well said. The main purpose of playing a game is first to have fun, in my opinion. Countless times we witnessed the price of Standard MtG cards goes down after the cards rotate out, yet people who like to play Standard does not regret and keep on buying newer cards necessary to play the format they like. They invest their hobby in T2, not their money.






Very well articulated.

Me and my friends would really love to meet and play with more new T1 players, and we would really like to see that T1 grows and develops. If there is a chance to get new players interested, then by all means we are sold to whatever idea to get them to play T1. We are sad to see our cards stay in the binders unused, untouched. If that means there might be a dip on the value of our collections, so be it. With more players, then perhaps there might be real support from WotC as opposed to just 1 sanctioned T1 event per year, just in the USA. I wish I would be able to see in the future T1 World Championships held worldwide, just like the sweet 16 DCI Invitational event in the past, held around the world. More players, more support, more tournaments, more fun.

We do not see the virtue of WotC printing and selling 'official proxies' for a fixed price any slightest bit. What guarantee do players get that they might get more wizard actively sponsored, sanctioned T1 tournaments if they buy that 'official proxies'? Such 'official proxies' do not hold more value than a word 'Lotus', hastily scribbled on a piece of paper and pasted on a MtG Swamp. A proxy card is still a proxy, an euphemism for what essentially is the eternal truth; whatever terms one wants to use it is still and it will be forever a fake card. Either print real, official, playable cards usable in sanctioned T1 tournaments, or do not.

There are already other card companies that do sell proxies intended to be used in MtG T1. If players need proxies, they can simply scan, print out any cards they want themselves with excellent quality using any decent laser printers. They hardly need any 'official proxies' service from Wizards, they do not need to buy a 10$ a piece proxies.  What they actually want is to be able to own the real cards, to play with real cards, that they are allowed to use in any Wizard-sanctioned T1 tournaments.

We suggest perhaps Wizards might want to test the field a bit by awarding real, playable cards to top 9 of the annual T1 Championships to see what is the response first. It will be a tightly controlled, very limited prints, just print 9 cards for the top 9 as the prize for the Championships, and see how is the response from T1 players, if they are concerned with the possibility of negative response.

Agreed.

If we are talking about just deck names, then perhaps it is correct that there are countless names for T1 decks in existence. If we are talking about archetypes for nowadays T1 decks, then it is entirely a different thing.

Regarding the golden age of T1, me and my friends see it more as a return to the stone age.

And,


How is that so?

Exactly.

During our tiny pilot project, I came to the league with all sort of decks, my favorite to bring in was the Turboland. It might not stand real chances to win against fields full of competitive T1 lists copied from all around the world, but I liked to play with it anyway because it was very fun to play. Other occasions I wanted to play with Control Slaver, SS, DZNought, Dredge, Uba Stax, Zoo, 3-color Land Destruction, WGDx, etc. I wanted to also build and tried to play Miracle Grow, Flash, Gift, etc. on occasions, too. In essence, I liked T1 because it allowed me to play with all sort of decks that I wanted to play with my friends. I do not need to win all the time. What I do need is to have fun.

The definition of 'fun' is of course subjective, but it is nonetheless an important factor along with cost of commitment when deciding whether one wants to commit into certain hobbies, especially if those hobbies do cost a considerable amount of money as well as time.

Which is Null Rod vs Time Vault vs lots of balls workshops vs dredge. We hardly think that qualifies as 'a ton of viable T1' decks, and to us it is just not fun to play decks that are made deliberately inconsistent, that looks more and more like highlander lists.


Thank you for posting some of the P9 examples. However, no offense, I still think that the new border, new art, and possibly in foil treatment for those P9 cards do not really stand up to the old, original P9.

Incorrect. That does not apply to me and my T1 friends. We currently prefer to play in 1.5 because it gives us more fun because we get to play with decks and cards that we like, and we are not yet ready to quit eternal nor do we ready to quit magic yet.   

Good opinion.

I cannot speak for other players from outside of my T1 ring, but I know for sure that me, 2 of my old T1 friends, and 7 other T1 players that used to gather together with us and play T1 in the old days outright considered it was outrageous that we were exiled from the decks that we liked, from the decks that we had collected their components one by one because we liked how those particular decks played. It was not a mere cards collecting project for us.

We did not mind at all if certain decks were made obsolete through the printing of new cards, better mechanics, better abilities, and through ever evolving skill of deckbuilding resulting in newer and better decks. However, what has happened was exactly the opposite.


Moreover, new players that we were trying to attract to T1 did not give us the issue of price as the entry barrier. We tried to help them got interested in T1 by lending cards, selling necessary cards cheaper, we helped them with decklists, playtests, etc. They are outright objected to the idea that the supposed to be powerful T1 decks nowadays stand a fair chance of losing to a good, competitive 1.5 decks. There is no more anything fascinating about seeing T1 decks, acquiring cards to build one, and playing with them now, they said.

Yes, the current price of P9 does influence whether someone might want to join or no. But, T1 is a hobby. If it is fun and really worthy as a hobby, perhaps as with other hobbies people are more willing to consider that they might want to join in because they also want to experience the fun.

With that, we think now that it is much better and much more fun for us to just play 1.5. More decks, more opponents to play with, and we get to play with any 1.5 decks that support cards that we used to like to play with in T1. To us, that equals fun.

We agreed that just blindly reprinting old cards will not necessarily bring new players in and retain old players to try T1 or to keep playing T1. Fun is equally important, and if it is fun perhaps players are more willing to part with some of their money.


Regarding the pictures of those oversized power 9 cards someone posted on the previous page.

There is nothing that can make me want to ditch out my power to get P9 cards with that new border, that new arts (especially that timetwister, the ugliest of them all), and that foil treatment. At whatever price, thank you very much, I shall keep mine any time any day. Those were really prizes for winning T1 World Championships?  I consider the one that Tom Chanpheng got more valuable than any of those. What is worse, they cannot be played at all due to the painting size.

To reflect true support to T1, the very least they could have done was to provide Top 9 of the T1 World Championships with 9 P9 cards that actually were fully playable.

Currently me and my T1 friends fall into the above described category. We currently regards that 1.5 is currently more attractive to us due to more tournaments and more opponents that we can meet and play together with, also due to the diversity of type of decks available in 1.5. Until a yet defined time, our T1 cards will stay in the protective binders.

You are correct on those 3 points you made.

I and my T1 friends support reprints of old cards if that is what it takes to get more T1 friends who can play with us using real cards, not proxies. That, and no more senseless deck building restriction policies.

There is no need to do reprints in foils, we are just as happy to see old cards reprints done in alternate arts aesthetically; that is, do not make something that looks like that berserk alternate art!   

If the first phase of The Deck strategy which is permanent (including mana) control is achieved, then it is much better to move to the next phase which is hand control than toying around with the opponent's draws. Instead tutor up for hand destruction, play out a shaman to control artifact mana, tutor for more bombs and either regrow bombs or hand destruction to squeeze out more card disadvantage from the opponent under mana lock.

  

Perhaps you might want to do away with that Tolarian Academy, that is one land that ever since from the very beginning never conforms with the card selection criteria and gameplay strategy for The Deck. It does not do anything by itself, and most of the time one does not want (and cannot keep in play for long) a bunch of moxes out due to possible enemy Shamans.

Perhaps it is much better to include and add more mana sources in the form of land(s) that actually can do something on its own, preferably producing on color mana; since the build has only a total of 26 mana sources 4 of them virtual, 8 out of the remaining 22 are artifact mana that are prone to Null Rod strategy, and 5 out of the remaining 14 are utility lands that produce colorless mana means that this particular build is a bit less stable when facing mana disruption strategy. Maybe playing 1 less wasteland for a colored mana land will help.

Thank you for the clarification, Mr. Stephen M.

It is also interesting to know your insight towards the correlation between Spell Pierce and the total number of Forces needed in the deck. Does this stand alone or is it also affected by the number of Shamans used and the presence of Land-D recursion? Or is it more affected by the number of specific answers included in the deck?
 

Would you kindly elaborate a bit on what kind of match-ups might the 3 Force and 1 Misdirection be applicable? Oath, perhaps?

Thank you.

To Mr. Stephen M:

I would be very interested to know what was Patrick's arguments regarding the proposed number of Force of Will to be put in the deck. Because of the original concept, quite a number of times during games I got the impression that perhaps less could be used since:

1.  the concept is more comfortable at establishing itself and answering threats than actively trying to stop opponent's spells from resolving to begin with.

2. there are not a lot of useful blue cards to comfortably support 4 much less 5 in this type of multicolor control deck; sufficient number of slots are needed for spells from other color that are better at answering threats other than blue, and to give those answer spells a certain amount of density to address the environment where the user plays.

Greetings, this question is directed to Mr. Steve.

Suppose step 1 of your deck building guide yields something along this line:

Out of the likely/perceived environment there are 2 archetypes that a lot of players like to play with, say 30% and 35%, and the rest are 10%, 10%, 10 %, and 5%, ; but those 2 archetypes that are represented the most are very different to one another (for example one is Oath variants and the other is GWU/GBU beat/disruption deck), how this will affect spell choices for the deck that we are trying to build?

Could you give a little bit insight as how to approach that situation? Is it affected by the other 35% archetypes that make up the rest of the expected environment?

Thank you.

Greetings.

This particular "deck" is not about a certain list, actually it is not even about a "deck".

It is actually about an idea, a concept, a perspective, on how to approach a game of Magic, then design one's deck accordingly with the goal in mind; just like what has been said by the original creator of the said deck. Brian wanted to have something that he could never cease to improve, and something that would win in direct proportion to how well it was played.

With that in mind, personally to me since from the beginning this "deck" actually offers a lot of room for tweaks and modifications, that one can always try to improve with spells substitutions or even disassemble it completely then rebuild from scratch if necessary to suit one's T1 environment. Personally, that gives me the most fun, since it is like playing never ending Lego blocks that one can always build into anything.

How to select spells and lands to suit the concept is often not a straight path, although this small reminder might help; that spell selections should be made with flexibility, efficiency, and versatility in mind while serving the concept. Also, preferably spells and lands that made it into the build should be able to fully stand on their own and do not rely on other components to function properly.

To help one focus on how to select spells to build one's version of this "deck", I actually find that understanding and following the steps described in the article titled "How to build your Grow-A-Tog" that was posted in the Starcitygames.com some time ago is very helpful to start early drafts and narrow down the likely builds that one might need. I imagined that these deck building guide concept is again repeated and tweaked on "The Return of The Deck" by the same author, although it might take me a while before I could read it. But I guess, it should be more or less similar to the deck building concept the author described in the "Build your Grow A Tog". Remember, it is never about certain lists. It is about a concept.

I hope sincerely that those articles can help the Original Poster's quest to narrow down and finally build his/her own version, that suits his/her T1 Magic environment.



PS. to doomsday's question; Reasons why I prefer Loam to Crux:
Its ability to always stay on the game unless it is removed from the game.
It is another target for Mystical Tutor easing pressure on Tinker.
It can be one components of the Gift pile that is fully functional whether it is on hand or in the graveyard easing pressures on Regrowth if we are in a situation that needs land recursions while needing something else at the same time.
It has the potential to put 2 extra cards in hand if for example I needed Library of Alexandria triggered faster.
Loam avoids popular artifacts deterrents such as Grudge and Pridemage.
It helps with Compulsive Research draws.
Loam helps me give another back door should the opponent think it is smart to try to play around my spell pierces by means of the waiting game.  

I am inclined to believe that the previewed artwork corresponds to Larry Niven's Disk.

Z Orb sounds like another artifact that might be in this package, as might be Icy Manipulator and perhaps Winter Orb. Cursed Scroll is also quite iconic, as well as Mindslaver.

I acquired the Exiled quite expensively, and frankly speaking I do not think that the contents are worth up the price of the package. if this The Relics package is released I hope it will not be as expensive as The Exiled....

Greetings, everyone.

I would like to wish dear all The Mana Drain Members and dear Moderators team a Merry Christmas 2009 and a very Happy Holiday to all of you!

Thank you anyway for the effort, Mr. Fantastic! 

It sure brings back nice, good old memories, be able to read again those old stuffs 

I am going to respond to Campee 's inquiry regarding a bit story of Brian's deck and Keeper, I shall do it as soon as I have enough time.

I would really love to acquire a copy of a particular Duellist Edition be it in actual or an electronic form which has the cover picture resembling a human-butterfly hybrid, if I am not mistaken the artwork was done by somebody by the name of Scott Kirschner (?). It is of a high nostalgic value for me since it has the article about The Deck and its creator.

Although both come from Mirrodin there was a reason why Brian considered to test Chalice in his deck to fight Rector but not Trinisphere.

Brian used to have problems with combo decks that utilized a lot of discards + Forces of Will most notably such as Rector deck back then, which resembled a crude, precursor form of the modern TPS nowadays. He proposed at that time to test in the main deck a pair of Chalice of the Voids as the solution to stall the discard plan and the cheap tutors; as well as having some possibilities to reinforce and cover match-ups against other deck types that exist in his metagame. To compensate for the strategy then perhaps a few spell modifications is needed.

How was that main deck Sower(s) doing for you in that particular matchup against Mike Noble's Blue Bell 1st UGW Aggro Control. Could you comfortably steal and get to keep any of your opponent's creatures game 1 and 2 at least 50% of the time with enough operational mana in play without him being able to do anything about it?

Greetings.

I have stopped playing T1 completely since the onset of mass blue cards restrictions. To me it is akin to putting expenditure caps on Formula I race or perhaps Football clubs.

However, to some extent I still try to follow the development of T1, and one day as I found out there are several attempts to redesign and reuse this deck in 2009 as is apparent from Starcity articles by Patrick Chapin and here in themanadrain. Needless to say I am very interested and become very curious to see what is this recent incarnations of The Deck all about.

I started playing T1 because of this deck, and it was solely because of it I patiently collected all of its necessary ingredients one by one until I completed building it. It is the only T1 deck that will always have a very special place in my heart. It always provoked thought to play properly, could always be improved, and won in direct proportion to its pilot' skill. I mostly enjoyed playing with it and following its development, except during a brief period when at a certain stage of its development it tried to rely excessively on mana denial plan, the unexpected chosen approach which I disliked.

Seeing the latest lists whether in Starcity or in themanadrain site, I cannot help to become very curious of its current contents, and why suddenly this deck is deemed plausible again for T1. Is it because the environment becomes slower?

From what I gather around themanadrain, the proposed meandeck list in the starcity premium is likely to have several Spell Pierce and or Annuls, Force of Wills, the staple Blue cards and Tutors, Tinker target(s?), perhaps a Pernicious Deed, some Gorilla Shamans, and Sower(s?).

In particular, since I do not have access to the starcity premium, I would really like to understand what are the reasons behind the decision to use Sower as the pinpoint removal of choice for this latest incarnations, and I would really expect to read better arguments than mere to raise the number of Blue spells to support Force of Wills.

With 2 as its casting cost and without flash, it is a steeply priced, sorcery speed anti creature. What creatures exactly one wish to steal with this creature? Colossus? Titan? I thought that nowadays people are more fond of using Inkwells. Is it to steal Dark Confidants? Tarmogoyffs? Dark Confidant is cheaper and generally can come out faster than Sower. Can this deck really afford to tap out  2 during its turn to deal with enemy Dark Confidant ASAP to prevent more cards filling enemy's hands, or to prevent imminent death from Tarmogoyff beats? After game 1 if the enemy support red then REB and or Pyroblast might come in to kill or counter the Sower. The solution is temporary, not a permanent one. At the most it is a 1 for 2 card advantage.

Moreover, how realistic would it be the chance of resolving a sorcery speed, 2   casting cost and expecting it to remains in play to steal enemy's creatures when as a result of the popularity of Tezzeret control and such; most likely opposing decks would be packing nearly full compliment of Null Rods, backed up by their own mana denial plan, counters, pressures from utility creatures, and fast clock from Tarmogoyffs?

If it is pinpoint removal that is needed, given the nature of creatures that are commonly used in T1 why smother is not considered, for example? What about the old staple such as Swords to Plowshares or perhaps Path to Exile. It is already a multicolored control deck, if it already supports 4 City of Brass + Fetchlands probably it won't be hard to support a couple Tundras?

If it is one to many effects like the old versions which is needed, and it is considered not hard for the deck to tap 4 mana out during one's turn to handle enemy creatures, perhaps this deck can use 1 anti creature enchantment as a form of persistent one to many effect? I understand that Moat and The Abyss have their own holes, what about enchantment such as Humility, then?

Nevertheless, all being said I am still really looking forward to read the full article, be it 3 months from now.
I really liked the proposed 5 steps to design your own deck very much which I read in the article regarding how to design one's GrowATog a while ago. I guess this recent article regarding the Return of The Deck also contains more or less the proposed 5 steps, albeit applied now to reconstruct this deck.

As with Balance and Timetwister, like Avanzo I think that they required thoughts and considerations to play correctly.

It is possible that Mr. Stephen might want to include the Chain of Vapor not primarily to bounce opponent's permanents, but to use it on his own board position to generate storm count for the brain freeze, or to bounce relevant opponent's permanents at the cost of a few of his lands when his Tidespout Tyrant is already in play...

Hi there Aikokun.

If you are looking for a White Parfait list, maybe you can try the list submitted by Meadbert. My friend played something similar like that list except that he used 1 Goblin Charbelcher and 1 Sacred Mesa as the win condition, also he used only 3 Scroll Racks. He did not use Isochron Scepters, I think. In the Isochron Scepters' slots and the 1 Scroll Rack slot he used 1 Moat, 1 Replenish, 1 Soldevi Digger that was later changed into 1 Reito Lantern to do a little bit recycling, 1 Tormod's Crypt, and 1 Ivory Mask; if I am not mistaken. 1 of the plains he substituted out for a Serra sanctum. That said, maybe Isochron can have merit in this kind of deck. Feel free to try.

thank you.

Hello there, mr. cheese.

If the goal is to get a deck that is quite cheap to build and have decent shot at your T1 tournament, I do think that Oath Angel can be tried. However, it really depends on the likely participants for the said tourney. The more high powered the participants, then your friend should also try to use top decks like Flash or GaT. Oath Angel maybe is more suitable if the likely participants are using middle speed decks. At least manaless Ichorid is also quite cheap to assemble, and if your friend has already backgrounds in other formats like T2 then learning how to play the deck won't be too difficult for him. Flash, GaT, and Manaless Ichorid can be built well under the 10 proxies rule. Hopefully that helps.

Thank you.

Congratulations to Mr. Stephen Menendian on your latest achievement, 1st place finish at GenCon Vintage 2007.

I got the feeling that it was only a matter of time that you will be rewarded with the achievement in accord to your efforts and devotions to the Vintage community.

I always enjoy reading your article at Starcity on a 3 monthly basis, and although it might be not so up to date by the time I am finally able to read the article (because it's always 3 months old from the release date ), I always find it very enlightening to try to understand the contents of your article, how the logic that formed the base of the articles are formulated, etc.

Agreed. Honestly goblin matchup in general is not what the original deck was aimed to fix. In a large tourney there is quite some probability that there could be some players playing with Goblin decks, it is to be expected. URB is not geared to beat Goblin decks in the first place. If the environment is infested by a lot of Goblins, then one thing for sure we can change our deck of choice for that environment to adapt.

Thank you.

Hello, there, wierdmtg13.

If you would like to have an edge against the goblin matchup, maybe you would like to consider testing some Engineered Plagues on your URB? Some modifications can be arranged to accomodate the plagues in the main or sideboard, depending how often are you likely to face the matchup. Engineered Plagues are quite helpful to help the goblin matchups in 1.5, and we have our counters to help keeping our plagues in play.

Hope that helps.

Thank you.