Forsythe's Article on the B&R List, 6 Months Later

[Smmenen]

First, go re-read the article:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/133

This article was published 6 months ago tomorrow.  I was wondering what you people think of it now that we have had the test of time in between.  Perhaps one of the most interesting parts of the article for me was Bryce's (klown) Comments at the end and the bit on people writing in to Restrict Mishra's Workshop.  Ironically, it seems to me that the Workshop decks are much stronger, but the reasons for its restriction espoused in the article have basically fallen away.  Do aggro decks really consider TnT anymore to be a threat?  


Just curious,

Stephen Menendian\n\n

[Matt The Great]

No one really cares about portal. Stompy could not win even if you allowed it ten taigas. One more 2/1 for one mana will bring Stompy up to the level of other stellar decks like Parfait and white weenie. Jungle Lion will not do a damn thing, so the entire argument is an aesthetic one, and god only knows how little aesthetics mean to the average Magic player.\n\n

[Smmenen]

Portal has a black tutor to add.  But that's really off topic - I shouldn't have even included the Portal question my original post.  I am curious about the other questions I asked.  

Steve

[Eastman]

TnT is still just as threatening to aggro, but I think we all know that it just isn't commonly played anymore. Generally the players who actually HAVE the workshops are savvy enough to be running the superior Mud/Stax style lock decks.

It isn't like Jungle Lion would help against TnT anyways  

Interestingly enough I think Workshop's relative rarity is helping to keep it from becoming degenerate. With fewer Workshops in existence they're being less played and even less tested than the entire selection of blue control, for instance. Workshop/Welder decks are a relatively new invention, and they've a lot of catching up to do before they become as truly overpowered as they are capable of being.

[Smmenen]

Eastman - interestingly I did some number crunching on decks with some of the data you gave me and more that I did myself for the upcoming Rector Article, and I found that the number of Workshop decks in top 8s since Gush was restricted is around 18% - that's including TnT which was about 1/4 to 1/5 of the Workshop decks.  Compare that with combo which has control (25%), combo (25%), and aggro-control (16.6%).

Stephen Menendian

[Eastman]

Smmenen,

Now compare that 18% with the print runs for Workshops...


If these things were everywhere they would require restriction.


It is almost as if the modern meta doesn't merely consist of Combo, Aggro, and Control but as you listed the major archetypes

Workshop
Combo
Control
Aggro-Control.

I think this actually defines an overall meta shift that I've been looking to put my finger on. Hmm....

[Smmenen]

Keep in mind, that's just top 8 data though.  You can't build a deck just to beat that - it also has to beat Sligh and Suicide.

Stephen Menendian

[MoreFling]

I think Eastman is right. The only reason it's not degenerate is because of the rarity of the workshops. I believe the same is true for Dragon, because of the rarity of the Bazaars. I tested it again today, and it's just stupid how easy it goes. But I'm ranting off topic here, so i'll stop.

[kl0wn]

I still stand by my position of not restricting stuff. You can always hate a deck out if it becomes too powerful. In Type 1, the environment is self-correcting.

Looking back on things, all that round of restrictions did was kill AoS and force Dragon to play more colors and a smarter game. Killing Earthcraft was really bad...there should ALWAYS be a competitive mono-G combo deck in the environment.

Unfortunately the environment isn't as diverse as when that article went up, but that's to be expected due to all the momentum that competitive Type 1 innovation has been picking up since I got really competitive back in 2001.

If you look at the trend on the whole, we had a very narrow environment back then. I remember how Neutral Ground in NYC was the only source for competitive Type 1 results pretty much for the entire world. The only decks that did well there were Keeper-hate Sligh, Keeper, Suicide and Mono-U. After about a year or so, the format just exploded with new ideas and we ended up with the most open metagame I've ever seen in any format (the one I mentioned in my letter). Then people really started to get to work on developing decks, GAT evolved and was killed, and now we're where we are: not as open, but the best decks are much more visible.

[MoreFling]

addendum to what kl0wn said: and not to mention, there is no best deck, everything is keeping everything in balance pretty good right now.

[dandan]

Once again we highlight the fact that there is no good reason why Portal (and Starter) aren't allowed in Type I - THE format for all cards ever printed.

As for the black tutor, it's a Sorcery speed Vampiric Tutor. There is also a bad Mystic Tutor (Sorcery speed). Frankly until I see someone running 4 Merchant Scrolls, I have little fear of those 2. Lots of people don't even run the wonderful Demonic Consultation which is a 'now, now, now!' card.

As for the wording, if you can't understand Portal cards you are a retard.

P.S. After all the wailing, can we now admit they got it right (apart from not having separate Type I and Type 1.5 lists)?

[Ric_Flair]

The correctness of WotC's article depends on a more fundamental question.  The question that needs to be asked is "What does a healthy environment look like?"

If the answer is "an environment that hardcore fans like" then WotC was right.  The hardcore following of Type 1 generally likes the fact that blue is far and away the best color.  They like or at least do not dislike the fact that competitive tournament decks cost more than $2,000.  They also do not mind that the playing field is inherently unfair, favoring those that a) have played the longest and/or b) spend lots of money.

If the answer is "an environment that is sustainable and relatively open to average players" then WotC has failed.  The price of decks that won Origins was outrageously high and prohibitive to new or average players.

If the answer is "an environment that is balanced and fair to the average player" then WotC has failed again.  The rarity of NECESSARY cards in Type 1 makes it impossible for the player base in Type 1 to expand beyond certain limits.  Furthermore, the color balance is ridiculously bad.  Blue is perhaps 10 times better than the next closest color, black.  This sort of imbalance makes certain strategies all but impossible.  Furthermore, it chokes off innovation.  Every truly competitive deck must include blue, as the Top 8 at Origins indicated.  Even Sligh splashed blue.  Finally the power swing generated by many of the high priced cards makes it impossible for average players to ever catch up.  Even super broken cards like Yawgmoth's Will that are cheap require super expensive rares.  

All in all, the environment is one that a small group of hardcore players will like.  However, the average player has to be turned off more now than ever to the unfair, unbalanced, blue dominated, creativity choking, ultra expensive environment we play in.  Change is necessary to spread the word of the environment that could be the best ever, one in which nearly every card is permitted in decks.  As it is now, we are playing a format, that for the most part, consists of Restricted List decks, Mask decks, and bad aggro.  None of you will ever agree because you like this broken stagnant format, but this is the unassailable truth.

[Grand Inquisitor]

@Ric_Flair,  How about...no?  Ever hear of proxy tournaments.  These aren't a luxury everyone has access to, but they are a great way to improve the barrier of entry to T1.  Obviously, the most competitive decks are still going to be heavily powered and OOP driven decks that can't be created with $40 and 5 proxy's, but suck it up.

Sligh, Fish and Suicide can all be extremely competitive if build correctly and piloted by someone who knows what they're doing.  I wasn't completely convinced of this until I went to gencon and saw ankh sligh and fish kick ass in the hands of competent players.

None of those decks can handle a god draw from something like stax, tog or rector, but thats one of the reasons why people enjoy T1: "broken things happen".  All this has been said before, and most of it is chalked up to whatever your personal experience is.  Please don't piss on the format, just because its expensive.  Many people I know, who just started playing in the last 6 months have been doing very well with minimal investment.

Prepare for blatant self promotion disguised as argumentative evidence
Hell, I started playing in October.  I purchased an ancestral recall for just over $100, along with some other vintage staples (total investment about $200-300). I've been able to win three pieces of power and a pair of masks since then in the NE region (not easy pickins), and I'm not a very good player.

Yes, the format is not as easy to get into as some others, but we all know its the most enjoyable magic out there, and knowledge of the format, playskill, metagaming, and playtesting go a lot further than dollars.

[Ric_Flair]

I so enjoy ad homenim attacks and arguments based on empirical data with a sampling size of ONE PERSON.  Seriously, if Smemmen's point in this post to evaluate the comments of WotC six months later then I think we should confine our arguments to the format itself.  That is Vintage as such, and again ask ourselves, what does a perfect environment look like.  I would contend that we are far from it and that WotC could do more to get Vintage closer to that place.  

The facts remain, and no reasonable person can dispute them:

1) The format REQUIRES at least $400 investment for even the cheapest budget deck to be made optimal.  

Fish needs Ancestral, Timewalk, and Sapphire.  A fish deck without these cards is strictly inferior to a fish deck with these cards.  Suicide is improved by the addition of a Lotus and a Mox Jet.  Ankh Sligh, the cheapest of these decks, requires and is improved significantly by the presence of Mox Ruby.  With Ankhs in the deck a free land drop is really sweet.  

Furthermore, the $400 in cards required is $400 in cash.  Unlike other formats where the cards are readily available, there is an exceptionally small market of people (read: idiots) willing to trade down a Mox.  Thus Moxen are acquired via purchase or win and that is basically it.  

2) The colors in the format are ridiculously unbalanced.  

Blue is so vastly superior to any other color in the format that even debating is silly.  Ancestral can easily be splashed via fetchs and duals into any deck (Ian DeGraff's Gobbo Sligh) and the deck is better.  Furthermore, the colors are so imbalanced that green and white a more scarce in this format than in any other.  Vintage is 4 color Magic at best (Blue, Black, Red as a foil to Blue, and Artifacts).  

3) The power level of certain colors/cards chokes off deck types.

I am adamantly opposed to Constructed formats in which certain decks just cannot be played.  I dislike Type 2 because combo is non-existent.  I dislike Vintage because aggro in the traditional sense is missing.  TnT pushed out the aggro decks and combo and control pushed out TnT.  Sui and Ankh Sligh are essentially resource denial/control decks with hyper efficient threats.  Gobbo Sligh with the Lackey and Seige Gang is ostensively a combo deck.  In fact, with Goblin Grenades it is possible to kill an opponent without even attacking.  Though this is unlikely.  Also I would contend that the strength of Red comes not from the creatures but the power of its sideboard cards.  As testimony to this look at DeGraff's incredibly focus Board.  As a natural enemy to the format's strongest colors, Blue and Artifacts, Red is destined to do well.  Nevertheless, White Weenie, Stompy, Green/Red and other classic aggro creature strategies are inherently unplayable.

Finally adding two cards to a sideboard or changing the kill in a combo deck from Tendrils to Illusions does not suffice as true innovation.  Building new decks and even new deck types is what innovation is all about.  Each year in Block old strategies emerge with new cards.  This is innovation.  In year's Block changed the entire approach to tournaments abandoning the mana efficient craze for high impact cards.  Each year in Extended, an entirely new deck type emerges.  This year Enchantress, in its almost entirely new form, got second at a Master's Event.  Mind's Desire decks were made from the ground up.  In Type 2 even control got a new interpretation with Wake decks.  

It is arguable that since Stax there has been no real innovation in the format.  The combo deck are essentially the same decks, with different and/or better kill.

And now for my ad hominem attack:

The problem with the format is that the hardcore audience likes the way the format is right now.  They think the game works best when everyone knows the best cards and the best colors.  They like it when a deck is "innovative" when they splash Blue for Ancestral or change the final kill cards in a degenerate combo deck.  They like crushing players with equal skill but inferior cards.  

They refuse to acknowledge its flaws and just chalk it up to newbies being whiners that lack cards.  The fact is if any other format were this broken/out of shape Magic would experience Combo Winter type problems.  Only because so few people play Vintage can it get away with such a pathetic excuse for a metagame or game balance.  Everyone plays this format because they like when broken things happen, but when broken things happen only for the rich or the old or those playing blue, the format stinks.

Not everyone that likes Type 1 falls into this mind set, but those who think everything is PERFECT now seem to be lacking the ability to truly look at the game.  There are five colors for a reason.  There are different strategies for a reason.  They print new cards for a reason (both to make money and spur innovation, which, I believe both require the other).  They don't make hideously broken cards as frequently for a reason.  Some Vintage players see this.  I have met many of them and I think that most TMDers fall into this category.  I myself, as a true egalitarian, would reprint all the good cards and let skill (WHAT?!?! skill...yes skill) determine who is the best at the Magical Cards.  

As for the proxy thing: Until proxies are legal, this does little to change the problem at the highest level, like GenCon.  It may make it slightly easier for non-Powered players to acquire Power, but only slightly so.

Changes to the format:

As was mentioned in the article, I believe that Black Vise needs to be unrestricted, if and only if, Workshop was also restricted (Stax does not need yet another good kill card).  This would bring back viable and cheap aggro allowing budget players and newbies to step up to the top tournaments without the bank putting a lien on their houses.

Restrict Workshop.  See above.  It was not broken in TnT.  It is in Stax.

Restrict the best four-of Tutor in the game, which, either Intuition or Rector should be gone.  Search plus acceleration is too good and WotC already stated in the article that they detest combo and think that it hurts the game.

Ban Academy and unrestrict those cards that were caught in its wake.  This would allow for a cheap and viable control deck: Tinker.  

Reprint the good stuff.  Never going to happen, but this would solve all but the color balance problem, which I believe is second to the cost issue.

Out of the Box Changes:

Make Ancestral, Timewalk, and Yawgmoth's Will colorless cards.  I know this will never happen in a million billion years, but this would do a lot to eliminate the color balance problem.  

Limit the number of restricted cards per deck and subsequently drop a bunch of cards off the B/R list.  

Allow X proxies in decks, where X is either a reasonable number necessary for a deck to compete (I am thinking between 7 and 10 cards); or where X is the number of restricted cards allowed per deck should the aforementioned suggestion be adopted.

That is it.

DISCLAIMER

I know the flames are coming.  I know that many of you disagree with me.  But I love Magic and I really enjoy Type 1.  But at the end of the day I think the game is the best when more people play.  If you disagree with this then ignore these comments as a philosophical difference.  Otherwise, I am more than willing to debate, though I doubt I will convince.  I really want to know why I am wrong.  If you can show me I will change my mind.  The aggressive tone of the post was for provocation purposes only, please take no offense.\n\n

[Matt The Great]

Ric: I appreciate the sentiment, even though I don't agree with all the details.

PS: Tinker decks would "require" the Moxen, no?

[SpikeyMikey]

If you'd have talked to me 2 years, ago, I'd have disagreed.  In fact, I wrote an article on building budget T1 decks, however, changes in the format and a series of horrible restrictions has made it to where you must have power to compete.  Dragon with Entomb was cheap and incredibly efficient.  While I hear people talking about how it's still good, it's no where near as powerful as it was prior to that.

Losing Gush killed GaT, but it also killed TurboNevyn and Stasis.  Neither of those decks saw a lot of play, but it still cut off two relatively cheap decks, Stasis obviously more-so than turboland.  They didn't even give us a chance to build a deck to beat GaT.  It would've been one thing if the deckbuilders out here had tried and failed, but they didn't even give us long enough to prove that we can build around it.

In any case, the biggest problem is that T1 *is* gaining in popularity.  You can see it in the rise of prices, you can see it in the increase in tournaments, and with the limited cardpool we have, cards are becoming increasingly hard to acquire.  I refuse to pay $100 for a workshop.  I saw a beta lotus sell at nationals for $1000.  Frankly, I'm not that stupid.  I'll play with proxies, or just play unpowered and lose first.  I just sold a bunch of power, because I was looking at making half again what I paid for them or more.  Then only thing I kept was my Ancestral.  Let some idiot with a big pocketbook have all the moxen, we've got a 1.5 tourney every week in SD...

[Dante]

I think you're way off here on so many points, it's not worth responding to (but I will anyway).

- if you really think most of the people here want to beat up on newbies/people's type 2 decks with their Hulk/Stax/etc, you're dead wrong.  Disagree all you want, people post here (and morphling.de and others) to bring the level of Type 1 AS A WHOLE up.  If people wanted to hoard their tech and decks, they would, but they don't.  Very, very few people want to beat up on newbies who don't have cards.

 - you point out the barrier to entry (you say ~$400).  Welcome to hobbies, they cost money.  This problem isn't going away unless Wotc reprints cards or proxies become legal, neither of which are likely to happen in the future.

- you obviously never played type 1 during the vise age.  It wasn't pleasant.  It was either "do I have 1-2 vise in my opening hand" or "do I have gorilla shaman in my opening hand/can I dump my hand turn 1-2".  Talk about removing deck building and relying on opening hand luck....

- your other "solution" (and I mean that as loosely as possible) is to re-tool the whole environment (remove/restrict anything "tutor" related [rector, intuition], restrict workshop and fast mana, etc) simply so that people can attack with Gray Ogres again.  Why should there be color balance?  Why should lay creatures and attack with them have to be a viable strategy?  Simply so that "budget" players can be competitive and type 1 can "flourish".  At that point, it's not even type 1 anymore.  

There was a whole thread on this awhile back, so none of my points are anything new.  The environment has advanced beyond "lay creatures and attack with them".  Deal with it.  The environment requires a commitment if you want to do well, both time and money.  Deal with it.  The best thing for the format would be for reprinted power/mana drain/workshop/etc, but I don't think it's gonna happen.  If you long for the days when 1st turn Kird Ape was a good opening, I'm sorry, those days are gone.  99% of the people who post on this board do not want to beat up on people with little knowledge or lack of cards.  If you think otherwise, you're wrong.

This is all I'm going to say on this, if anyone has anything they need to say PM me, but I've wasted enough time on this topic already....

Dante

[Ric_Flair]

Quote Why should there be color balance?  Why should lay creatures and attack with them have to be a viable strategy?  Simply so that "budget" players can be competitive and type 1 can "flourish".  At that point, it's not even type 1 anymore.

Dante, thank you, I could not have made my point any clearer.

This is exactly the response I knew I would get and does nothing but prove what I said.  Vintage's hardcore want the format to be broken, warped, and frankly bad.  Magic has evolved beyond this mentality.  WotC realized wisely that Magic is most successful with the broadest audience playing the GAME.  The collectible aspects are secondary, which should inform the B/R list as well.  If the rest of the game has come to understand this, Vintage could too.  
As far as the cost of hobbies, one of the things that makes chess, Srabble, puzzles...etc such great hobbies is that anyone can participate with minimal investment.  $400 ain't a lot but really, would anyone be satisfied with one budget deck?

[Milton]

Quote As far as the cost of hobbies, one of the things that makes chess, Srabble, puzzles...etc such great hobbies is that anyone can participate with minimal investment.  $400 ain't a lot but really, would anyone be satisfied with one budget deck?

First off, you are just looking at dollar cost.  The opportunity cost of becoming a chess master is much higher than the dollar cost of becoming T1 viable.  Playing casual chess is about as expensive as casual Magic, but I don't know any casual chess players who insist that they can or should be allowed to compete with the masters without putting in the time becoming a master themselvs.

Also, what metagame are you talking about?  THE Metagame?  THE format?  I don't understand.  I play in a very competitive metagame and Suicide, Fish and Sligh all do very well.  I was at GenCon and I saw some very simple and inexpensive decks win prizes.  Sure, people that are new to the format and are new to competitive play generally don't do as well as the people who have played for years or have played in a great many tournaments.  But, I wouldn't have it any other way.  I don't want to play in a metagame where very little skill, very little investment (from the point of preparation, not necessairly monetary investment) and very little knowledge are required to win or even be competitive.  

I want to be in a format where entry is easy (a simple $50 Sligh deck can be very competitive) but mastry is hard (winning tournaments is very difficult and requires time, patience and skill).  I want to play in a format that favors the prepared and the skilled.  Now, you automatically equate preparation and skill with good cards.  In my experience good cards win sometimes, but preparation and time investment win most tournaments.

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote Finally adding two cards to a sideboard or changing the kill in a combo deck from Tendrils to Illusions does not suffice as true innovation.  Building new decks and even new deck types is what innovation is all about.  Each year in Block old strategies emerge with new cards.  This is innovation.  In year's Block changed the entire approach to tournaments abandoning the mana efficient craze for high impact cards.  Each year in Extended, an entirely new deck type emerges.  This year Enchantress, in its almost entirely new form, got second at a Master's Event.  Mind's Desire decks were made from the ground up.  In Type 2 even control got a new interpretation with Wake decks.

So whenever the top decks in T1 dominate too long, there should be a rash of restrictions just to stir things up?  Pure nonsense.

As for ad hominem attacks, I never claimed to be an innovator - in fact, I have always credited Westredale for the RectorTrix skeleton I used as the basis for Rectal Agony.  It is a tuned variant, no more, no less - but as others have pointed out, decks that differ by just a few cards can perform dramatically differently, so just because two decks happen share the same engine does not invalidate the successes of whichever one came later.  I did put an undue amount of time and effort into perfecting the deck, though, so such casual dismissal is singularly offensive and personal.

Regarding innovation in T1, it is virtually impossible to design a new deck given a cardpool with such a limited number of playable cards.  About the only time innovation has a chance to surface is when cards are introduced with each new set.  If anything, the last true innovator in T1 was Mike Kryszwicki, who desiged the horribly broken Mind's Desire deck that indubitably was the basis for it's restriction, and which also served as the foundation for Mike Long's Burning Academy.  Stax has been around a long time; call the earlier versions Duck Tape, LockStock, or whatever your want.  $t4ks is what all other great decks are in T1; highly tuned and tested amalgamations.

[Grand Inquisitor]

I'm going to attempt to get this thread back on topic.  I also realize, I didn't help much with my earlier post.

@Ric_Flair,  I understand your unhappiness with the current format.  I am impressed with your novel ideas about changes that could be made.  However, I think further discussion of your propositions should be done somewhere else since:
1) your suggestions are radical enough so that we're not really talking about the vintage format anymore.
2) i think that steve started this thread to debate strategic implications of the B&R list, not economical ones.  i know this is difficult, especially with workshop as the focus, but lets try.
3) dante is right, this has all been done before.

On topic items:

As the format moves towards combo, which I DON'T like, I'm glad that gush has been restricted.  There aren't many decks that run the single card now, but try to imagine potentially 4 (or 8 with y.will) free spells with the storm effect.

Restricting Earthcraft pissed me off something fierce.  I have the pleasure of playing in the same area as Moobius (aka Chris K), and his mono-G squirrelcraft deck was SO cool, and incidentally, a really inexpensive, competitive deck.

I hope entomb didn't have to do with Roy Spires wispering sweet nothings to WotC.  I'm unhappy that Dragon was able to adapt; as cool as shockwave is, it is still a complete bitch deck when you have someone draw three games in a row.  I'm ecstatic that Reanimator has found a competitive build again.

Everything that became unristricted (Recall, Hurkyl's Recall, Berserk, what else am I missing) has thankfully had little impact on what has become a diverse environment.

As far as workshop is concerned, I'm still undecided.  I liked stax, because aggro could do pretty well if built correctly.  If MUD becomes popular I'll be concerned, as it packs a lot more tools to beat up aggro.  If the Waterbury, CT tournament was any indicator, people will be moving back to stax, or at least doing a lot of revising on the current build.  Sure it put two decks in the T8, but all I heard from the people piloting it was how they wish they were playing something else.  Overall, the Workshop archetype is still young, and highly dependent on how much hate it sees.  We'll see what happens.

[MoreFling]

Quote I hope entomb didn't have to do with Roy Spires wispering sweet nothings to WotC.  I'm unhappy that Dragon was able to adapt; as cool as shockwave is, it is still a complete bitch deck when you have someone draw three games in a row.  I'm ecstatic that Reanimator has found a competitive build again.

Worldgorger doesn't draw that often. It's actually more difficult than you would imagine, and a good player won't 'just' draw a game for the heck of it. Sure, maybe it happened to you once, but don't try to claim this is a recurring event. In retrospect, I think the current Dragon version is better than what the Entomb thing ever was. It's much more redundant and resilliant. Ofcourse, it only exists by the fact that wasteland virtually doesn't exists anymore.
Also, if we're talking about stupid* decks, what Dragon essentially is, there are a LOT more of them in the current metagame. Long.dec is a shining example of pure randomness.

*With stupid decks, I mean decks that don't do anything, and then randomly win. Dragon draws some cards, dumps some cards, and then goes off. To compare, Hulk, brainstorms, duresses, AK's, drops Tog, etc etc. There's a lot more going on play-wise.

[Vegeta2711]

Quote if you really think most of the people here want to beat up on newbies/people's type 2 decks with their Hulk/Stax/etc, you're dead wrong.  Disagree all you want, people post here (and morphling.de and others) to bring the level of Type 1 AS A WHOLE up.  If people wanted to hoard their tech and decks, they would, but they don't.  Very, very few people want to beat up on newbies who don't have cards.

Quote - you point out the barrier to entry (you say ~$400).  Welcome to hobbies, they cost money.  This problem isn't going away unless Wotc reprints cards or proxies become legal, neither of which are likely to happen in the future.

Isn't that hypocritical to some extent? You talk about wanting good competition, but then blow off the money issue which is the #1 reason we don't have that many people playing.

[Ric_Flair]

EDITED:  Hereninafter the format in my posts will refer to Vintage, as of 8/03.  I thought this was clear, but apparently it wasn't.  I apologize for the confusion.

@Milton

Quote Now, you automatically equate preparation and skill with good cards.

Read what I posted again.  I, in fact, imply the exact opposite.  Winning with broken stuff requires, by definition, less skill.  

As far as the rest of what you say, I agree.  I want a low cost of entry and high skill requirement.  Prohibitively rare, and hence expensive, cards are an impediment to that.

@ Everyone:

We need to stop and realize something: the B/R list, in fact all of tournament play is driven by the cost of cards.  Thus the cost of cards and their status on the B/R list are intimately associated.  One of the major reasons the PT includes no Vintage stops is because the cards are too rare and too expensive for enough people, especially outside the US, to play.  The sole reason Magic was spilt into T1 and T2 is economic in nature.  As such no discussion of cards that need to be B/R and what to do with the list to fix the format is complete without some consideration of the economics of the situation.

@ Video Game Boy

Quote As for ad hominem attacks, I never claimed to be an innovator...

Latin lesson:  ad hominem means to the person.  In common parlance an ad hominem attack is an attack or argument aimed at the person or side making the opposing argument instead of the opposing argument itself.  Thus I am not sure what you mean here.  The ad hominem attack I was referring to were responses to the claim that the format is too costly.  Instead of addressing this point, typical defenders of the format will respond "you say that because you don't have the cards..." or something of that sort.  

Instead of this wasted effort we should really talk about what makes the format so pricey and what we can do to lower costs.  This is the reason I think this thread could be different then previous "State of the Format" threads--because we can avoid these sort of irrelevant arguments.  

Furthermore the comments about budget decks ignore two major points:

1) No major tournament has been won by a budget deck.  Show me a Duelman or recent T1 Worlds won by a budget deck.  Oh, you can't?  Shocking.

2) Even budget decks can and should be optimized with Power if they are to truly compete at the highest levels.  There is NO iteration of Sui made better by the absence of Mox Jet or Black Lotus.  None.  There never will and can never be such a deck.  Power, by definition, makes decks automatically better.  

So if we could avoid the sideswipes and get focused on what Forsythe and Smemmen wanted, namely comments about the efficacy of WotC's recent B/R moves, then I think this thread could be more effective than the other similarly oriented threads.\n\n

[Grand Inquisitor]

Quote with broken stuff requires, by definition, less skill

More accurately, winning with good cards requires, by definition, less skill.  If one wanted to create a format where Kird Ape is the best card, it is difficult to win with mountain goats.  I know I'm ignoring the economic arguments, but thats an intentional choice.

Quote 1) No major tournament has been won by a budget deck.  Show me a Duelman or recent T1 Worlds won by a budget deck

Sligh and Fish each won tournaments at this year's Gencon.  They weren't the T1 Championship, but they were 50+ person tournaments filled with ninjas.

[kl0wn]

The addition of power DOES automatically make decks better, but that's the nature of Type 1. Playing with the super-broken, grandaddy-of-them-all cards is the nature of the beast.

Perhaps you should think about finding a different hobby if you don't want good cards increasing the effectiveness of decks.

I'm not taking shots or anything, but it seems like you're ignoring the fundamental principle of Type 1: having an unlimited card pool. When you have an unlimited card pool, obviously the best cards are going to rise to the surface. When you have a lot of people playing the format competitvely, the best decks will obviously use the best cards and become increasingly difficult to beat. As the competition grows and more people start taking notice, prices will rise. It's just a fact you have to deal with.

Being fully powered and having one of the more respectable personal collections out there, I'm all for reprints. Granted, I'd lose money on my "investments", but it would be a fair trade off for giving enough people the cards that they need to play with "the best decks" and allow for a Type 1 Pro Tour (which I would be able to qualify for eventually).

For the record, budget decks ARE viable. You just have to do some footwork and find the foils to common strategies of competitive decks. Pyrostatic Pillar is an excellent example, but few budget players have devoted much time and effort to exploiting the card.

A big problem that I see with budget players is that they try to budgetize the ultra-expensive decks (which never works) as opposed to using the time and energy to build new competitive decks that can be accomodated by their available resources.

Furthermore, a lot of good players who are new to the format quickly make the leap into acquiring power cards. This makes it so that a lot of the good deckbuilders don't bother with budget decks since they no longer have a need to. I would work on budget decks myself, but that would defeat the purpose of my having spent bundles of cash on expensive cards. What's the point of limiting myself to budget decks if I'm not on a budget? Why would I ever decide to not play with the power cards that I own?

Finally, I NEVER beat up on players who don't have access to good cards; that would be impossible. However, I DO beat up on poor (in a purely skill-wise sense) deckbuilders/players and mindless netdeckers.\n\n

[Ric_Flair]

@ klown

Quote I'm not taking shots or anything, but it seems like you're ignoring the fundamental principle of Type 1: having an unlimited card pool. When you have an unlimited card pool, obviously the best cards are going to rise to the surface. When you have a lot of people playing the format competitvely, the best decks will obviously use the best cards and become increasingly difficult to beat. As the competition grows and more people start taking notice, prices will rise. It's just a fact you have to deal with.

I really respect your opinion most of the time, but here again you are attacking not the arguments but the individual making the arguments.  

I am calling out every person on this site.

Don't criticize me.  Instead:

Tell me how having an inaccessible card pool makes the game better?

Tell me how having radically imbalanced colors makes the game better?

Stop pointing a finger at me and argue these points....Oh wait you CAN'T because they are true.  The truth is unassailable.  Sometimes it is not want you want it to be, but too bad.  Vintage is seriously flawed and the most recent moves on the B/R list did nothing to eliminate or ameloriate this problem.

Quote Perhaps you should think about finding a different hobby if you don't want good cards increasing the effectiveness of decks.

I am not opposed to good cards.  I love good cards.  They make the game work.  But I am opposed to good cards that people do not have access to on a regular basis.  Even proxy tournaments do not solve this problem entirely.  In my opinion Magic is best when, like in Extended, no card is more than $25 and almost all of them are readily available.  We just passed the 10 year mark because WotC wisely saw that the game aspect is more important than the collectible aspect.  

@ The general audience
I want this game to be about pure skill.  I dislike losing a basketball game to a guy that is 6'10" but can't dribble just like I hate losing to a $4,000 deck played by a chump.  This is not skill this is budget.  And if your (the generalized "you," not Clown) first response is: "Suck it up" then you are afraid of fair competition, plain and simple.  You like winning because you have 5 Moxen in your deck and an Ancestral in your hand.  Play draft you chicken.  Then we'll see who is the best.

[knater]

"Play draft you chicken.  Then we'll see who is the best."

     Unless I open an exalted angel.  Or some other rare you don't like.  Then I'm lucky like the guy holding all the moxen and the ancestral.
     No one is making you play type 1, so don't try to turn it into type 2 or extended because you don't feel like spending money on power.  Being broken is part of Type 1-That is a large part of it's appeal.  If you don't like it then you are free to draft all you want.
     I don't own any power, but I still play type 1 competitively and love it.

[Zoofields]

Quote (knater @ Aug. 26 2003,07:48)    No one is making you play type 1, so don't try to turn it into type 2 or extended because you don't feel like spending money on power.  Being broken is part of Type 1-That is a large part of it's appeal.  If you don't like it then you are free to draft all you want.
    

Quote I really respect your opinion most of the time, but here again you are attacking not the arguments but the individual making the arguments.  

I am calling out every person on this site.

Don't criticize me.  Instead:

Tell me how having an inaccessible card pool makes the game better?

Tell me how having radically imbalanced colors makes the game better?

At least pay attention to what Ric is saying if you're going to criticize.\n\n

[Ric_Flair]

Moderator please close this thread.  No one has responded in even a basic fashion to the arguments I made.  Apparently, no one can prove me wrong.  They have amply pointed fingers at me, because that is easier, but no one has said anything even somewhat relevant about what I said.

@knater

Quote Unless I open an exalted angel.  Or some other rare you don't like.  Then I'm lucky like the guy holding all the moxen and the ancestral.

Have you even drafted before?  Even securing a bomb like the Angel is not guaranteed success.  The fact that white has a high number of draftable cards in OnBC means that it will be taken more thus reducing the depth of the card pool.  Draft, when played by non retard, non rare drafters, is necessarily self correcting.  Try it sometime.  Plus, even if the Angel is broken, it is equally accessible to everyone.  Everyone has the same chance of getting one.