TheManaDrain.com
September 23, 2019, 04:44:46 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 46
61  Eternal Formats / Creative / Re: Boseiju. Community project. on: October 14, 2015, 10:54:15 pm
Man, I was just kidding.  I don't think it's a fit at all in blue, but since everyone is rah rah, blue, rah lately and T8s are mostly blue, i wasn't surprised to see someone say you should stick it in a blue deck.  Time walk and tinker are probably the only spells you could use boseiju for.  Everything else has no colorless mana or an alt casting cost (though now we have thirst again).  I suppose you could cast gifts off it or whatever...maybe yawg will.  But i think a blue deck already packing draw and counters won't need a non-U land to resolve anything at the risk of hurting their manabase. At most it is a 1-2 of SB card for the mirror.  I thought my post dripped of enough sarcasm to be obvious...guess not.

GBW are the colors you want for boseiju.  Lots of strong effects for what you are trying to do and with colorless mana tacked on.  You even get decay (already uncounterable) and maelstrom pulse (uncounterable with boseiju).
62  Eternal Formats / Creative / Re: Boseiju. Community project. on: October 14, 2015, 08:27:22 pm
I agree with previous post. My first thought would be Tinker and four Show and Tell.

Agreed.  Blue is the majority of top 8s. If you're going to run an off-beat land, it should obviously be in....blue.  Who better to beat blue decks than other blue decks with uncounterable spells?  Yeah, you could run a playset of Sylvan scryings and DT to uncounterably get an uncounterable win condition, but that's not blue.  Better to play ancestral, pitched FoW, alt cast gush, brainstorm, ponder, mana drain, misstep powered by your boseij...ooh wait.  So yes, boseiju is bad.  Sleeve up some underground seas and volcanic islands instead and just counterspell your way through counterspells and maybe one boseiju to resolve your restricted tinker on the off chance you draw boseiju for the one spell with colorless mana.  How's the saying go?  "If it's not blue, don't run it"...something like that.  I know the expression deals with "broken", so that must mean blue.

In all seriousness, as a fan of dark times myself, I like the inclusion of boseiju to power through sylvan scrying as DT 2-5.  Another, possibly better, or complementary approach is to run 4x living wish.  Same cost, sorcery speed.  You'll basically have DT 6-9 then, with the bonus of grabbing some critters like kataki or spellskite or contagion priest.  All of my DT builds ran a couple aether vials as well, to go all in on uncounterability. It casts your whole team @2, so it's fast to get online.  Spirit of lab, confidant, hexmage, contagion priest, qasali, spellskite....all 2cc.  Might want to try that.  Because of bounce and removal, you need 3 skite main and 1 more sb....there's just no way around it.  Even running your own missteps and discard, you still need skite.  You can't force a discard of the top decks, and they will out counter your single missteps, especially since they are stocking up on missteps and FoW, unable to counter your other spells.  Topdecking a draw spell/tutor/plow with FoWs and missteps in hand will wreck your day and pee in your cereal.  Dropping a turn 2 (or 1 with moxen) spellskite, or vialing it out in response to plow will save your wins more often than not.
63  Vintage Community Discussion / Rules Q&A / Control creature effects and equipment on: October 12, 2015, 09:27:20 pm
If I gain control of my opponent's equipped creature, does the equipment stay attached?  If so, can I equip another one of my creatures? I doubt the latter since it would seem you'd need to control the equipment through some effect to do that.
64  Eternal Formats / Workshop-Based Prison / Re: Shop Depths on: October 02, 2015, 11:36:49 pm
Hex Parasite is insanely slow

It is slow when you are referring to it as a way to get dark depths online.  But the card is actually much better than it used to be, not only are planeswalkers targets but it nullifies cards in MUD like Arcbound Ravager and Hangarback Walker. 



Parasite probably has more usability long term, but it requires mana.  A turn 1 jace could bury you before you hit 5 mana.  Hexmage kills it immediately.  Parasite also gets hit by misstep (which I expect to see MORE play) and chalice @1 should you land your single chalice - which ALSO hits map.  Hexmage varies the mana costs for getting the combo.  Hexmage is also a nice creature as a 2/1 first strike, where Parasite can pump, but dies to any creature.  I think it is a matter of long game vs short game.  Again, if you are playing shops first, long game may be okay and parasite is just another control card.  But in my experience, shops first loses much more often than combo first.  A dedicated shops deck is better than a hybrid shops deck.  But a dedicated combo deck is not necessarily better than a combo deck with a shops splash.  I think the key way to look at this deck is combo with a shops splash, not the other way around. 

Granted, it is fun to play either way, but as a shops-first deck, you are basically running bad lands with an occasional "oops I win", and will often draw useless things like map or depths when you need a golem or sphere or tangle.  Running less than 4x each of depths and stage means you almost always need to tutor for both halves, which is way too slow and disruptible.  However, if you are dedicated to the combo, every other card you draw buys you time (golem, tangle, sphere) and you many times will just draw into the combo or only need to tutor for one piece.  It makes it much faster and less vulnerable to hate/counters/disruption.

Whichever way you go, have fun.  But for the best results, I have extensively played both versions and the combo=first approach was far better, faster, and more consistent.
65  Eternal Formats / Workshop-Based Prison / Re: Shop Depths on: October 02, 2015, 02:02:20 am
Now that chalice is restricted, I looked back at my original list.  I also reread the posts.  I think there's now easily space for tabernacle, consultation, +1 other card.  I'd think a sphere would be good.  I think oath and dredge will be even bigger now that shops is weakened, so the main cages seem even more important to me.

I see a lot of the different takes on my build keep leaning towards a shop deck that just jams in the depths combo.  The last version posted at least runs 4 of each land and 4 maps, but with no urborgs the depths will be a tougher play on mana.  Hex Parasite is insanely slow.  Vampire is way better for speed, attacking power, and killing planeswalkers in one shot.  Parasite requires mana and a lot of life to kill things.  It also costs 1 which is blocked by misstep or chalice - just like map.  Varying mana cost is good, and adding speed to the combo and a solid threat in one card is good.

This deck really has to be a combo deck first and use workshop and shop soft-lock/clock pieces as a compliment...NOT shops as the main strategy.  As I said, and have found in testing, and others have found in testing as they reported, making this a mostly shops deck with the combo stuck in as an afterthought will lose.  It will be inconsistent at getting the combo and just worse than a dedicated shops deck.  But running 4 maps, 3 black tutors, 4 depths, 4 vampire, 4 stages....that's a LOT towards getting the combo.  The spheres and golems and chalice and tangles are all just tools to buy you time and offer you wins with golem/wire that need to be combatted in a totally different way than the depths combo.  That's one of the main reasons I took this approach.  Depths hate is mainly worthless vs shops, and shops hate sucks vs depths.  Plow is the only card that hurt both (golem and marit) and that's what the 4 chalice were for.  We still have 1 chalice and enough threat density that a single plow won't stop you...and also enough combo redundancy that you could poop out a Marit every turn or two.

Whichever build you try, remember to go combo first and shops second, not the other way around - it won't work.
66  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 21, 2015, 01:20:12 am
Everyone I've spoken with had many positive things to say about the event, and the little bit I was able to watch was highly entertaining.

I've been interested in Vintage since I first saw "Black Lotus" listed in InQuest magazine. The price tag was so high (comparatively) and the game text wasn't listed, so we all had wild speculations about what the card might do to be worth that much (we were WAY off  Very Happy).

Buying into Vintage on Magic Online was step one for me. Attending Eternal Weekend is on my list of things to do as soon as I can!



I think one thing that people are getting hung up on (as shown in the quote) is thinking that I'm saying CURRENT vintage players are unhappy with the U-control/shops/bazaar thing that dominates the format.  Obviously there's enough diversity within those three things to keep the current players happy (myself, apparently, the only exception).  What I'm saying is it is a hindrance to NEW players, because it is not an attractive thing to have 3 options from which to make a competitive deck.  Yes, you can make a ton of good decks within blue, but they all draw cards, counter spells, dig for bomb, win with a power spell of any splashable color.  The exception being merfolk.  If you dislike having the options of shops, dredge, or a blue counterspell/card draw deck, then an outsider would have very little incentive to play Vintage.  If you love those 3 options, you're in luck, because those 3 options will ALWAYS be viable.  If not, you are playing another format.  I'm not suggesting changing things because people that already play vintage are unhappy - obviously I'm the only one that dislikes this triangular box.  I'm saying it is a huge barrier to non-vintage players that could be brought in to the format.  Cost is a barrier, but not the ONLY barrier.  We can't just say cost and coin-flip stigma alone are the only barriers and keep beating our heads against the never-gonna-change wall that is the reserved list.  There is a way to dodge the price barrier and break the triangle through NEW printings.  

The only reasons I can think of for people not wanting to have this change are 1) people don't want new people to come in to the format (which I highly doubt is true), or 2) people are comfortable only having to metagame for big-U/shop/dredge decks and don't want a field where a 1000 strategies/color combinations could show up at any given tourney, even if it resulted in a net gain of format population.

If you enjoy those 3 sides of the triangle, there is nothing stopping you from playing those decks....new printings will NOT make ancestral, walk, tinker, etc. obsolete.  Those cards are here to stay.  Card drawing, counterspelling, sphering, and dredging will always be powerful and effective. But adding more options will only attract more players and give current players more strategies to explore.  That's not a bad thing.

Take a look at this top 8 from champs.  Is there strategic diversity?  Sure.  Are they all shops/dredge/U-counter, draw, dig, splashable bomb?  YES.  You can take shops and make 100 different variants that all share the same base 40 cards...same with dredge and blue.  A deck with 60 cards running 4x oath, 2x emrakul, 1x dragon breath is strategically different from a 60 card deck with 4x mentor, 3x pyromancer.  But if the other 53 cards are identical, does it really matter if they are strategically diverse?  And you can swap one blue draw engine for another, run mana drains instead of flusterstorms, etc....but they're all the same tactics. Draw spells, counter spells, find your bomb, win.  Most blue decks differ by more than the 7 cards as in my oath/mentor example....but they typically dedicate the same # of slots to drawing, countering, digging, win-con.  The fact that there are many draw spells - gush, preordain, brainstorm, thirst, etc. - doesn't mean a deck is really all that different because the card names are different either.  If they are just substituting card names for the same tactics, they are functionally the same.  Look at the blue-based decks in this top 8.  Diverse kill conditions, but otherwise VERY similar. And shops is basically lotus-on a stick + jewelry + spheres/chalice/tangle + beat you with lodestone, no matter if you run a forgemaster, metalworker, or wurmcoil - the majority of the deck is the same.  Dredge can dread return whatever it wants...it's still dredge.

Again, not saying CURRENT vintage players dislike this, because apparently everyone just loves this, but many non-vintage players see this as a reason to never get involved with the format.
67  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 19, 2015, 01:57:37 am
For the sake of not derailing this thread more than I have, I posted my responses to the new thread.

But as far as "diversity", which I'm not saying doesn't exist in Vintage, outside of the kill cards, I don't see much difference in the top 8 decklists.  Dacks/Jaces, FoWs and missteps, probes and other card draw.  Do you not see a ton of similar cards in the oath, mentor, thieves, jeskai and delver lists?  Yes, they have 8ish cards dedicated to a kill that's unique (delver/pyro, sphinx/thief, oath/bomberman, narset, mentor) but the rest of the deck is really the same shell.  I mean, just do a card by card comparison (don't even count mana) and you'll see the cards that overlap > the cards that differ.  The workshop lists are basically identical (I assume they brewed together) and dredge is the same stock list you can find anywhere.  I mean, you say that there is a ton of diversity in the format where all the strategies can compete.  The top 8 has 6 or 7 different strategies, granted, but they run 50% of the same blue stuff or are shops or dredge. Why is that okay with everyone?  And I'm not saying Vintage isn't healthy, I'm just saying it could be a LOT better and more popular.  It's healthy in the sense that your average 30 year old Joe who works an office job and goes jogging on Sundays is healthy.  I want it to be JJ Watt healthy.  Are you guys all happy with the way it is?  No aspirations for greatly expanding the pool of players?

Please respond, if you plan on responding, in the other thread.
68  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 19, 2015, 12:34:04 am
They can't print cards to "fix" the format because the focus is primarily on making Standard/type 2 cards.  I think the vast majority of people who buy packs of magic cards are people who are just dabbling in the game for the first time, so they aim to appeal to that crowd.  Wizards/whoever has an idea of what they think Magic should be and that's what it is.

Vintage will always be about finding the cards that slip through the cracks.  They'll never design cards with the vintage metagame in mind.  Garfield never planned Dredge, Shops, or Delver.  That's why Vintage is cool and standard is comparable to just playing with precons.

Yeah, I really dislike standard too - it tends to be "top decks" and the constant rotation is a hassle.

But things like containment priest, spirit of the lab, lodestone golem...those WERE made for vintage/legacy.  Commander sets, FTVs, Vintage Masters, etc are totally for eternal formats.  They don't need to make a whole set to fix it all in one shot, but a premier set with 5-10 cards like the ones I listed in previous posts would totally open things up.  Yes, there is some openness of diversity WITHIN blue, shops, bazaar...but I think a premier set with 10 cards such as those I suggested would make the format as wide open as Modern.  You could even make cards with clauses like some of the old islandwalker cards had, but in reverse (i.e. instead of "sacrifice X if you don't control an island" make it "sacrifice X if you control an island").  Things like "You can't cast X if you control an artifact".  How hard is that really?  And even if they were to make a standard set/new packs with card like the ones I mentioned earlier - those are just GOOD cards that are playable in all formats, not broken, but have impactful effects.  They'd be useful in all formats, too.  And if someone just getting into the game saw a 1R 3/1 first striker with a chewer effect...why would that not be something that would appeal to newbies?
69  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 18, 2015, 11:47:17 pm
I'll make a new post then.  Sorry if my discussion was out of place.  I just saw the Champs result as emphasizing my point of the Vintage triangle being dominant.  And nobody has really refuted it either...they all seem happy or comfortable with it. 

How about this?  Bazaar decks have blue cards, like Narcomoeba and Chain of Vapor - rendering your triangle an illogical classification scheme. 

It's revealing that you changed your characterization of the "dominant" triangle from being Force/Shop/Bazaar to U/Shop/Bazaar, and illustrates the flaw in your characterization of the format.  The error in your thinking is the assumption that color parity = strategic diversity.  That's simply not the case.  As I said before, grouping all blue decks puts decks as diverse as Merfolk and TPS into the same category - they they couldn't be more different.

Why would we group a UB combo deck in the same category as a UWG Aggro-Control deck, like Noble Fish?  Your classification scheme makes no sense.  It's fundamentally arbitrary and has no real world bearing on the experience of the format.

Quote
Doesn't make sense to me, when MORE diversity and making all 5 colors equally powerful is completely achievable.

It's neither achievable in Eternal formats, nor would it necessarily be desirable.  Why must there be an imperative to make all colors equally powerful?  Why does that matter at all?  After 22 years of accumulated printings, not all colors are equal, nor should they be forcibly made to be. 

The design of Magic is fundamentally flawed, if the goal was to make color parity.  If the game designers wanted all colors to show up in roughly equal proportions, they would have made the colors equally powerful, and they would have created more than just 5 colors, and they wouldn't have printed the Onslaught fetchlands, which makes it so easy to play 3+ color decks with no cost.  Building more colors into the game would have made it less likely, over time, that best color (whatever that would have been) would be so ubiquitous. 

Your quixotic interest in color parity obscures the ridiculously awesome strategic diversity in the format today. 


I did equate FoW and blue, mainly because most blue decks start with 4x FoW and go from there.  Agreed, blue is not the same as FoW.  U-control is not the same as merfolk.  Merfolk is fish, more akin to a GW humans, BUG  aggro, delver, etc.  Yes, there is some diversity.

But can you honestly say that Vintage is not at least 90% Shops builds, bazaar decks (mainly dredge), or U-control (draw cards, counter spells, play a finisher and some PWs)?  Fish and storm or belcher are maybe the other 10%.  Steve, you and I used to meet at the same house and play in the same tourneys when we were college aged.  Do you think it is good that decks have to start off with the same X cards, depending on archetype, to have a chance to compete?  Would it be terrible if decks like mill, poison, burn, RG aggro, etc were as powerful and good as any blue control, shop, or bazaar deck in a 100 man tourney?  I mean, there is a reason why people say "I need X cards in my main/sb to beat shops, X to beat dredge, and X to fight through opposing U-control....and maybe 1 tutorable, splashable board sweeper for fish."  These decks make up the majority of the scene.  And it's not that i don't understand why.  Obv those cards and strategies are the most powerful.  but do they have to be?  Can't new printings open up diversity further and even the color wheel?  If you could run a monowhite deck successfully, consistantly, there would be cards that are sitting in binders now that may become playable in new decks.  If you could run infect and win, it could make Modern and standard players join into vintage and would open things up - and make more unplayed cards playable.

I'm really not trying to bash Vintage.  I do love the format, if nothing else but for nostalgia But I dislike seeing that formats as wide open as Modern are not more of a model for Vintage, where a VAST variety of strategies AND colors are viable and competitive.  Yes, GW humans and the like exist...but my point isnt that the format is ALL U/shops/bazaar...it is just an overwhelming majority of it and the best options to have a chance to win consistently.  Any deck can wander in as a hate deck and steal a metagame.  But the top three have been the top three for a long time - and are far more powerful.  Just look at your sb if you disagree.  Why would growing the format be so bad by printing new, powerful, but univerally useful effects in non-artifact, non-blue colors be so bad?

And as I said, I made a new thread, but I feel the top 8 (and really top 64) hammers in my point that U-control, shops, bazaar give you the best chance to win as they have for a very long time.  I don't like that and I really don't get why everyone is so fine with it.  Does everyone just love draw/counter, artifact prison, zombie making so much?
70  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 18, 2015, 10:49:44 pm
I'll make a new post then.  Sorry if my discussion was out of place.  I just saw the Champs result as emphasizing my point of the Vintage triangle being dominant.  And nobody has really refuted it either...they all seem happy or comfortable with it.  Doesn't make sense to me, when MORE diversity and making all 5 colors equally powerful is completely achievable.
71  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 18, 2015, 10:27:57 pm

Fair point on the attendance, but I don't know if 2015 vintage is thriving more than early 2000s vintage was.  

 Yes, it's expensive...but so is Modern.  

As a point of reference, I can say that I played competitive vintage (Type 1) magic in the late 90's and early 2000s in the Northeast and it was virtually IMPOSSIBLE to get a tournament going.  Aside from Gencon, or the occasional major side tournaments in Edison, NJ there wasn't much.   Most major GP's couldn't even find 8 T1 players for a side vintage tournament, and even the Wotc store in Exton, PA was hard pressed to find 3-4 players for true vintage.  It was a scoffed at format. People thought it was a turn 1 format (which it wasn't till the Dark Days of Urza's Saga) and people thought it was too expensive.  (which is a shame, because I think the holy trinity years of necro-mirror-zoo was one of the coolest formats ever).

I'll go out on a limb here, and probably get flamed into an oblivion, but I truly believe that Vintage is more affordable now than it was back then.  Almost NOBODY was willing to shell out $100-$200 for a Beta Mox or ~$1500 for a vintage deck, but today many, many people are able to put together a set of power.  Fewer people spent major money on collectibles back then. It wasn't normal.  

I firmly believe the average magic player was more surprised at someone buying a $400 Lotus back then, than a $3000 lotus now.  People are willing to spend tremendous amount of money on their hobbies these days, that wasn't the case then-

I just remember SCG P9s were 100+ man and they weren't even the big tourney like Worlds....fired off a few a year.

As far as willingness to buy - the Vintage players in the 90s were teenagers.  $300 was a summer's work.  The same players now are in their 30s.  A lotus is a paycheck for most of us.  40 hrs work < 90 days of work for comparison's sake.

At the sake of blaspheming the U/shop/bazaar lovers, would it really be so terrible if WotC evened out the color wheel, diversified strategies even more (yeah, there are different builds of blue, shops, and bazaar decks), and made players of any income level and strategy affinity equally able to compete through new printings? 

2W - hexproof 3/3, Spirit of Lab
1R - 3/1 first strike, chewer effect
1WG enchantment - sacrifice ~:exile up to two target artifacts and/or enchantments. Put a white 1/1 flying spirit token and a green 3/3 beast token into play under your control.
1RB enchantment artifact - players cannot gain life.  Whenever a player draws a card ~ deals 2 damage to that player.
1GR - 2/2 shroud.  Lands cannot add more than 1 mana of any type.  Lands with abilities that do not add mana do not untap during untap steps.

I don't think these types of printings would hurt.  They are on flavor and help offset the power of the vintage triangle through good printings that aren't format warping.  This is all I'm asking for.  I want a balance of power and more viable strategies that don't stem from U/shop/bazaar.  Given the depth of card access, it would make the format a super-Modern in popularity and playability.  Forgive me if that's a bad thing.

And the result of Champs only hammers home my point of what you need to play (or at least start with) to have a chance. Thus why it brought up my posts.
72  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 18, 2015, 05:05:28 pm
But I bet a lot of people feel the same as me, and it's a reason Vintage isn't what it once was, costs aside.

There were 450+ players at Vintage Champs this year, up from 330 or so players the year before. Your claim is unsubstantiated...

When Vintage players find Modern more fun, that's a problem.

Why is that a problem? First of all, you are expressing your personal opinion and not that of "Vintage players". Second, Magic players enjoy different formats and some enjoy and play all formats. One of the great things about this game is that you can play it in many different ways. If you enjoy Modern more, go play Modern. If you don't like Vintage, why should Vintage have to change to accommodate you? Especially again given the size of this recent Champs. Lastly, are you actually a Vintage player? The majority of your posts are complaints, sarcasm, or downright trolls...

It sounds like you enjoy playing off-the-wall decks. Well, I do too. Brian Kelly does as well. The difference is that we are willing to work within the confines of the format and metagames. The same as every other brewer in every other format. You can clearly have success in this format going against the grain, albeit you still have to work within the constraints.

Fair point on the attendance, but I don't know if 2015 vintage is thriving more than early 2000s vintage was.  It's probably better than it was last year.  Hopefully that's good enough for everyone.

It's true I'm expressing my personal opinion.  I thought, however, a goal of the Vintage community was to increase Vintage enrollment and retain players...not just roll with fluctuating attendance and let Vintage players leave while some fill their shoes.  I suppose I'm wrong there.  It's fair to say, due to geography mainly but also due to dissatisfaction of the unnecessary constraints of a Vintage triangle, that I am now really more of a Modern player than Vintage.  I play vintage rarely (unless on cockatrice) and more for a 1-of fun game, not a tourney.  I used to play it all the time, but since 2009 It has really lost my passion and loyalty. Maybe I got burnt out trying to swim upstream against a mighty river of shops/U/bazaar.  It seems most are comfortable going with that flow, so I suppose I have no more to say on that.  Hopefully that scenario attracts lots of people.

And the majority of my posts are probably complaints, trolls, etc., but I try to reveal issues through sarcasm at times - many times. I do just give my opinions on cards and things (Jace, Vryn's Prodigy for example) right or wrong.  But this is the interwebs, where people throw up their opinion sometimes. Sometimes I just love a good trolling.  But I do think Vintage will put itself in a hole if it embraces 95% of decks being FoW/shop/bazaar.  I think that will put off a lot of people.  If 450+ people at Champs makes you feel like Vintage is thriving the world over in the way that modern and Standard are, then good for you - and hooray for ostriches.  If you would like to look at the reality of the format compared with newer formats, you might see that cost is only one portion of why people shy away from the format.  Yes, it's expensive...but so is Modern.  Especially when you can play with proxies/borrow cards, cost can't be the only reason.  There is a "coin-flip" stereotype about the format, but really I think that dissuades about 1% of people - most don't really believe that is true.  I think most are people that don't want to play counterspells all day or build a concrete prison or regurgitate zombies while the opponent just tries to race.  There are lots of people that enjoy 2 mana bears, whacky combos, and strategies that are not predominantely blue or colorless.  If you want them to sign up for Vintage, then some things in Vintage DO need to change - namely the weapons other decks have to fight those 3 cards.  Cavern of Souls is the only great, universally playable card printed lately that smashes through the FoW wall, but that one (and maybe there are a couple others I'm not thinking of) card is not enough.
73  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 18, 2015, 01:40:06 pm
What did you end up playing?

Nothing.  A flight + hotel + event entry + lost vacation days isn't worth the shot at a grand prize to me.  

Well so what you are saying is the monetary investment isn't worth it for you. Why is it worth it for the other 750~ people to fly in, get a hotel, show up and 'think outside the box' and play Hatebears or whatever "off-beat" decks you fancy at the most important event of the year? You lose a good deal of credibility by not showing up. If you aren't going to show up and play, who cares that you "hated" the top 8 and were "disheartened".

You basically just made all my points for me!

I'm not going to lay out $1000 to play blue, shops, bazaar, or lose (see your quote below). How many of those non-shop, non-FoW, non-bazaar decks made T8?  Okay then.  Money well spent I guess for all those bear players. (maybe they enjoyed the non-magic aspects of the trip, but I'd rather spend $1K on a better vacation.

Quote
But when I do play vintage, with nothing on the line I try to go with off-beat decks like GWB fish or WB dark times or GWB oath.  

Fixed that for you. I play all kinds of junkbear, darigaaz, sabboth decks when the stakes are low. But when you plan and pay for a trip to champs and are playing to win these decks don't make the cut. It's a 10+ round event and there's just too much variance, and powerful strategies to expect to overcome. Myself and my teammates tested hundreds of games and I had what I thought were the best junk, depths, and bant decks in our 8-10 deck gauntlet. They just didn't stand up. They won a fair amount of games, and had some strong match-ups but weren't worth taking a chance on at something like Vintage Champs. Is it chicken or egg? If 30 people sleeved up powered junk would one of them have made top 8? Possibly, but convincing 30 power owning Vintage aficionados who have waited all year for their one big event to put their bet on it is a tough ask.  

So then you don't disagree with me.  Competitive vintage is down to bazaar, shops, FoW.  Nothing else stands a chance.  And I'm not necessarily complaining strictly about color as much as I am all decks running through the 3 mentioned cards.  I get that blue has the most broken stuff.  One fix could be for WotC to make a white/green/red time walk in a premier set, not standard and vintage legal (and a real time walk, not final fortune crap).  Another option would be for hate cards that fight those strategies effectively that are maindeckable as a 4x of.  WotC was close with Spirit of the lab, but it needed hexproof to really compete in Vintage.  Right now, it's not even played.  I'm asking for cards like that.  Or a card that hates on shops, but is not ass otherwise (like ingot chewer - yes it has some fringe uses, but nobody would run 4x chewers vs a non-shop deck).  A 1R 3/1 first strike that killed an artifact on etb.  THAT is what I'm looking for.

Quote
I gave up shops a long time ago because, as powerful as they are, I hate being wedged into the FoW/Workshop/Bazaar box that tends to be 95% of Vintage.  Shops wasn't as popular back in 2000ish (right around its unrestriction), so I was cool with playing it then.  Once it became one side of the "vintage triangle", I put them down for lesser-traveled paths.

If you are such a rebel come prove everyone wrong and play. That 'box' is 95% of Vintage but there are a thousand little boxes inside those 3 categories. If you refuse to acknowledge that then I question why you would continue to even be interested in Vintage.

I think the reason is I HAVE lost interest in Vintage for the most part, but nostalgia makes me care about its fate.  I used to love it.  Now it seems you have to pick 1 of 3 cards to build a deck around.  Blue is uber-dominant because, as Steve says, all the best stuff is blue.  No doubt.  That doesn't mean they can't print really good WRG stuff (hexproof SotL, 3/1 first strike chewer for 2cmc, etc) that wouldn't break standard or modern (or make it a premiere printing) to even out the wheel.  As is, you have 3 choices and can build from there if you want to T8 in any sizable tourney.  Back when I played big tourneys, I ran shops.  They weren't popular. Once they became popular, I put them down.  Nothing else could stack up at that point - it was FoW vs shops until dredge came around. I'm not trying to say I'm a rebel and off-beat decks can win.  In fact, that's my point.  They can't win, and it sucks.

Quote
 Maybe I'm just anti-conformist.  

Who cares. Honestly what does this have to do with the results of Champs? I like to not lose. I played shops and still got my second loss in the 6th round. It wouldn't have felt any better had I been playing fucking jund.



Sorry for your loss.  You wouldn't have faired better without U/shop/bazaar.  You are emphasizing my point.  
But I don't think there's a reason blue/shops/bazaar HAS to be the top dogs all the time.  I think through new printings, they can balance it out so all colors are equally strong.  When they do that, i'll probably get back into the format.  Right now, I prefer Modern (and even legacy) where those 3 cards aren't allowed.  In Legacy, at least 2 of the 3 aren't allowed, but even there it seems like a FoW derpfest.

And all of this has to do with the Champs result, because the T8 just illustrates my point.  If you want to win in Vintage, you have to play FoW/Shops/bazaar.  Biggest tourney of the year, and nothing outside of those things can make a dent in the top.  I don't even think the top 32 or 64 had a fair amount of nonshop/U/bazaar compared to the decks that ran those 3.  I see that as a problem.  Maybe you don't.  But I bet a lot of people feel the same as me, and it's a reason Vintage isn't what it once was, costs aside.  When Vintage players find Modern more fun, that's a problem.  I used to LOVE vintage.  I owned all the cards several times, so cost wasn't an issue.  Now my moxen are just savings bonds, because they don't even come out of my binder.
74  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 10, 2015, 04:51:37 pm
I hate that top 8.  1 shops, 1 dragon (at least this is an interesting one!), 1 storm, and FIVE U-control aggro decks (FoW/dig/removal + some critter kill).  I am glad dragon made a showing.  Shops was just expected as always, and seeing that 5/8ths of the top 8 was blue counterspells is just disheartening.  Storm was also a surprise to see....but it stinks that only 2 of the 8 were unexpected.  Shops vs U is the expected dominance.  I didn't see the play % anywhere, but I wouldn't be surprised if more than 75% of the field was shops/U-aggrocontrol.  Maybe a spattering of storm and oath (and probably U versions of oath within 8 cards of the U-aggro control decks).

Just my rant, but it sucks that competitive vintage has devolved into "play shops or U or go play modern instead."

*Just saw the breakdown of 462 decks on the other page.  51 dredge was a total surprise to me.  But the rest was not.  1/4 shops, <50% FoW+U stuff, 1/8 dredge, 1/8 everything else.  So Workshop, Bazaar, FoW, or don't bother playing.  I don't like those options.  Not even that I am for or against playing any of those types of decks (I always played workshops back in the day and enjoy that archetype), but I hate that those are mainly your options if you want to compete at all.

What did you end up playing?

Nothing.  A flight + hotel + event entry + lost vacation days isn't worth the shot at a grand prize to me.  But when I do play vintage, I try to go with off-beat decks like GWB fish or WB dark times or GWB oath.  I gave up shops a long time ago because, as powerful as they are, I hate being wedged into the FoW/Workshop/Bazaar box that tends to be 95% of Vintage.  Shops wasn't as popular back in 2000ish (right around its unrestriction), so I was cool with playing it then.  Once it became one side of the "vintage triangle", I put them down for lesser-traveled paths.  Maybe I'm just anti-conformist.  And I get that dredge is the best "cheat conventional play" strategy, shops is the best "prison" strategy, and blue-based is the best "i can play the most bonkers stuff" strategy, but I just wish the whole color pie was more balanced.  WotC has done a much better job of balancing lately...for several years now actually...but there's just so much ground to cover that it seems the "top decks" will be and have been blue, shops, or dredge for quite some time.  

I will concede that there have been efforts to split shops into prison/aggro and efforts to make blue control/aggro (delver/fish/merfolk).  It just pains me that red has no shot at being more than an anti-artifact/bolt splash color and white/green are typically splash colors outside of hatebears (which is a minority in the overall scene).  Black is on the fringe of a color to itself in tendrils/storm, DT...but it still primarily a splash to the dominant gush/ancestral/walk/FoW blue base of many decks.  I just don't like that.  But again, I rant into the wind, because this won't change.  Blue has the most bonkers cards, with black having some powerful spells blue can use, and green oath, that blue can use.  So it make sense why people play blue - it just has the best stuff and can utilize other colors as splashes.  Drawing cards and countering spells is arguably the most powerful effects, and that falls to blue.  Dredge "psuedo draws" cards in bazaar and shops gains virtual CA by making your massive hand uncastable.  It seems red, green, white can't do those things as well.  When they print a hexproof spirit of the labyrinth or more sylvan library effects, maybe the wheel will turn.  Right now, they seem fairly stuck to me.
75  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] New Duals on: September 08, 2015, 10:03:40 pm
These new duals are nothing to be excited about, but I do like the enemy color manlands!
76  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] Bring to Light on: September 08, 2015, 10:02:57 pm
This card will be the nuts in Modern.  It's the closest thing that the format has for Demonic Tutor.  Bad tutors like diabolic mean you wait a turn to cast the spell.  With this, you get to cast it on the spot.  It'll be a combo enabler much like chord of calling - and in the same colors!
77  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs Playing Cheat Codes on: September 05, 2015, 11:39:18 am
Props for innovating!  While it is an oath list, there is enough uniqueness in it to make it YOUR deck.  I applaud that! #hatenetdecks
78  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 02, 2015, 11:39:32 pm
it sucks that competitive vintage has devolved into "play shops or U"

This has been the case for what, the last 12 years?

YES!  But that doesn't make it right.  I just wish every color had an equal chance and a variety of decks within a color that didn't overlap by 75% of the cards was viable.  Just saying - empty wishes, i know.  But I lament the situation and think it may contribute to why other formats grow while Vintage withers. Prices and all are part of the issue for sure, but the "blue, shops, or don't bother" options can't help much.
79  Eternal Formats / Global Vintage Tournament Reports and Results / Re: Vintage Champs 2015 – Decklists, Metagame Report, Video, Report Roundup on: September 02, 2015, 11:18:21 pm
I hate that top 8.  1 shops, 1 dragon (at least this is an interesting one!), 1 storm, and FIVE U-control aggro decks (FoW/dig/removal + some critter kill).  I am glad dragon made a showing.  Shops was just expected as always, and seeing that 5/8ths of the top 8 was blue counterspells is just disheartening.  Storm was also a surprise to see....but it stinks that only 2 of the 8 were unexpected.  Shops vs U is the expected dominance.  I didn't see the play % anywhere, but I wouldn't be surprised if more than 75% of the field was shops/U-aggrocontrol.  Maybe a spattering of storm and oath (and probably U versions of oath within 8 cards of the U-aggro control decks).

Just my rant, but it sucks that competitive vintage has devolved into "play shops or U or go play modern instead."

*Just saw the breakdown of 462 decks on the other page.  51 dredge was a total surprise to me.  But the rest was not.  1/4 shops, <50% FoW+U stuff, 1/8 dredge, 1/8 everything else.  So Workshop, Bazaar, FoW, or don't bother playing.  I don't like those options.  Not even that I am for or against playing any of those types of decks (I always played workshops back in the day and enjoy that archetype), but I hate that those are mainly your options if you want to compete at all.
80  Eternal Formats / Creative / Re: U/W Mythstill on: September 01, 2015, 09:13:55 pm
I think 4 myth realized is fine because ideally you want to play it turn 1 and standstill turn 2.  Multiples aren't bad because it lets you kill that much faster after a balance/verdict turn.  I would probably cut 1 enlightened tutor and 1 flusterstorm.  Fuster is narrow and you have a lot of counters already.  I'd add 2 baby jace (vryn's prodigy).  Not only does he dig, but pitches extra myths (if you don't want multiples), ticks up all day behind a standstill, shrinks blockers for your manlands to swing, and flashes back balance/verdict/counters on your turn/draw.  His dig also makes up for the loss of 1 tutor and can find strip/waste faster to enable crucible.  in short, 2 baby jace is a must in this deck and it is THE BEST CREATURE EVER PRINTED! (Not snappy).
81  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] Hedron Archive on: August 31, 2015, 06:20:00 pm

This is gold.  It's the next baby jace!  First mana vault, now this?  Wow, this is awesome ramp AND card draw.  For 4 mana, it's not like shops have anything better to do.

A simple "I'm still stubbornly wrong about Jace, Vryn's Prodigy despite mounting evidence to the contrary and I don't think Hedron Archive is playable in Vintage" would have sufficed...

Tu che Wink

Touchι*

*Like button*

Knew I spelled it wrong but was too lazy to look it up, lol.
82  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] Hedron Archive on: August 31, 2015, 06:19:00 pm
But then what are you looking to cut for this?  Is there any mana source or spell you'd rather cut to gain this thing?

Metalworker.

Meh, I dunno.  If you run metalworker at all, it's not because you're looking to jump from 4 mana to 6...it's because you're trying to jump from 3 mana to 12.  Worker is also playable turn 1 off ONLY a workshop with no mox.  I wouldn't make that swap.
83  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] New Duals on: August 31, 2015, 06:13:28 pm
I just miss the days when flooded strand could grab island fish jasconious Sad

Hate to break it to you but this was never a thing

Wasn't it for like 12 hrs before WotC caught on and erratad fish?
84  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: Return to Zendikar Treasures on: August 30, 2015, 03:11:44 pm
Oh, I thought they were reprints from the Battle for Zendikar set.  Oh well...guess my misty rainforests still need to wait.
85  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] Hedron Archive on: August 30, 2015, 03:10:34 pm
In reality, I can't think of when you'd ever want to turn 1 this thing.  If you have shop+ mox on turn 1, think of all the other lines of play that are better than dropping this and casting a sphere.  chalice @1 + sphere.  chalice@0 + trini.  lodestone golem.  revoker on their mox (on the draw) + sphere.  I mean there is a lot of good to do with 4 mana and I'm not sure how much most shop decks need to ramp to 6.  MOST spells are 4 or less.  I suppose in a more aggro build with 4x wurmcoil/4x precursor golem, it makes a solid set up for a turn 2.  But then what are you looking to cut for this?  Is there any mana source or spell you'd rather cut to gain this thing?
86  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: Return to Zendikar Treasures on: August 30, 2015, 01:34:42 pm
Sucks balls that the new fetches are new, fuller size art and mythic.  I was looking forward to picking up blue fetchlands that weren't reprinted in Khans.  Looks like I'll be waiting for the next reprint due to the inevitable price gouge Sad
87  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] Hedron Archive on: August 30, 2015, 01:23:47 pm

This is gold.  It's the next baby jace!  First mana vault, now this?  Wow, this is awesome ramp AND card draw.  For 4 mana, it's not like shops have anything better to do.

A simple "I'm still stubbornly wrong about Jace, Vryn's Prodigy despite mounting evidence to the contrary and I don't think Hedron Archive is playable in Vintage" would have sufficed...

Tu che Wink
88  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] New Duals on: August 30, 2015, 01:22:23 pm
Basic land types on future "duals" is a must, unless the effect is stupid powerful like "when this enters play, sleight of hand".

I just miss the days when flooded strand could grab island fish jasconious Sad
89  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] New Duals on: August 30, 2015, 12:44:41 am
I don't think they're good enough for any eternal format.  Shocklands are superior.  These will almost always enter tapped.  With shocks, at least you have the option of making them untap for -2.  Counting manlands, scrylands, etc., I can't think of any time you'd need these even going up to 4 shocklands (and 4 real duals in vintage before shock lands even).
90  Eternal Formats / General Strategy Discussion / Re: [BFZ] Hedron Archive on: August 30, 2015, 12:42:29 am

This is gold.  It's the next baby jace!  First mana vault, now this?  Wow, this is awesome ramp AND card draw.  For 4 mana, it's not like shops have anything better to do.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 46
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.091 seconds with 19 queries.