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

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote 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 game aspect is driven by the collectible aspect - what makes Magic superior to other CCGs is that card prices are generally either stable or ballooning, which is what appeals Magic cards to card shops.  If magic weren't a collectible, no one would sell them, and without shops to sell the cards, you don't get new players.  Even in T2 the collectible aspect is what motivates players - trading chase rares they don't need for cards they do is how most players build their decks.

Indeed the game aspect is Magic's greatest strength - it has a lot less design restrictions due to the multitude of types and mechanics to choose from, as well as the ability to spawn new types and mechanics at will; most games usually only have 3 or 4 card types/mechanics, and Magic has literally dozens that it has accumulated over the years.  The only real limitation to Magic is that it is resource based, which causes players to make the majority of their decisions on card playability based on efficiency (Ancestral Recall > Concentration).  Resource-based games do have some benefit, though - when cards can be played as soon as they are drawn (such as with Trainers in Pokemon or Magic/Trap cards in Yugioh) then playing a card is based solely on it's power level, without having to take anything else into consideration.  Only in Magic can debates be waged over whether Deep Analysis is preferred over Accumulated Knowledge in a particular deck.

[Smmenen]

Quote (VideoGameBoy @ Aug. 26 2003,07:11)The game aspect is driven by the collectible aspect - what makes Magic superior to other CCGs is that card prices are generally either stable or ballooning, which is what appeals Magic cards to card shops.  If magic weren't a collectible, no one would sell them, and without shops to sell the cards, you don't get new players.  Even in T2 the collectible aspect is what motivates players - trading chase rares they don't need for cards they do is how most players build their decks.

I appreciate what you are trying to do here Eric, becuase I think your aims are noble.  But I have a big issue with "Collectibility."

Specificaly, I disagree with your assertion that if the cards weren't collectable, no one would sell them.  If they weren't collectible, they the price would be a function of a card's utility multiplied by relative rarity.

Then Juzam Djinn, which is very marginally useful, but rather rare -but, not a collectible[/b] would be worth $25.  

I have big issues with Collectors.  I wouldn't mind seeing collectors (people who collect cards to have sets etc with the intention of either just enjoying the sets to look at, or people who see the cards as an investment) driven out of magic.  I think they help exacerbate the problems that makes Ric Flair mad.  If you take collecters out - then prices more greatly begin to approximate actual card utility mulitiplies by relative rarity.

Stephen Menendian

[Zherbus]

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

It isn't. In New England, the people who are really fully powered with full sets of Drains, Workshops, and Masks are so spread out that I would really doubt the scene would be half as successful as it is. When I started p10 proxies where I live, an unexpected 30 people showed up to play the format. Soon, other places started doing the same thing, only altering it to a 5 of any proxy rule. Since all locations have done this, there is an active interest in the format which includes probably near 75% of the playerbase being relatively new to the format (under 1-2 years experience).

If you look at the sanctioned tournaments locally, there is really a showing of weak metagame development where some guy with Keeper that runs Jade Statues and Planar Portal is a regular winner because maybe 2 other people are powered (New England people know what I'm talking about. Just compare Hadley, Concord, and CT with Brockton, Ma).

Dulmen, Origins, and Gencon have increased in quality because there is more active interest in Type 1 (which I believe to be partially due to the success of this site) and it will pull people from all over who are hardcore, and hence spend more resources (time begging/borrowing or buying power) to complete their decks.

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

I don't really know how to answer this, possibly because I don't know what you are getting at. My first instinct is to ask you how it hurts the game. I think I know what you are going to say, but I'd like to explore this more with you.

Assuming you mean that having more viable strategies makes for a better game, then sure I agree. If you ask me, aggro will never be a dominating force because in the 30whatever sets that are in print, they have a whole lot of efficient anti-aggro strategies and removal. I don't know if I am convinced that color inbalance is to blame.

[Azhrei]

I think that a couple things are being overlooked:

Vintage is a niche format. We are not what needs to be readily accessible to Joe Random to make WotC any money. We don't generate income because we don't buy packs for the purposes of T1. I think that I have bought a grand total of ZERO packs in the last FIVE YEARS. WotC makes NO money off me, because I play Vintage exclusively. If I need cards, I buy singles off eBay.

Magic is an expensive hobby because of the card pool and rarity. Vintage has a higher rarity and a higher initial cost. Anyone who is willing to spend money can have a set of whatever-- Workshops sell for $100+ because people are still willing to buy them at that price.

As far as color balance goes, this is impossible to break from based on the idea of a color wheel. Certain colors have certain mechanics, and not all mechanics are created equally-- card drawing, for example, is the best mechanic possible in this game, along with mana acceleration and resource denial (in various forms). Lo and behold, blue, black, and artifacts are the most powerful choices. That's not a problem with Vintage, that is basic game theory and you can apply it to Magic or to Monopoly (e.g. buy everything you land on if you can afford it and you win later) equally. The only way to balance the colors would be to make the colors indistinguishable from each other-- print a red Necropotence and a white Sinkhole, maybe a green Counterspell-- or even better, make everything colorless so that Urza's Lands reign supreme. I think we all agree that doing this would be dumb.

Colors are unbalanced because different colors have access to different strategies. All strategies CANNOT be created equal-- that's game theory as well. My strategy in Warcraft of creating as many peons as possible to keep my resource level high is going to be better than your strategy of not spending money on peons because they can't fight. Give it a good ten minutes and you'll get overrun. Strategies cannot be equal-- drawing cards is always going to be better overall than attacking repeatedly. That's not a flaw, that's just how the game MUST BE, not because of anything to do with Magic but because of fundamental game theory that applies to any game, most real life situations, and anything games can imitate.

Why was chess used to teach kings about war?

Game theory and strategy.

[K-Run]

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

I think the slow and expensive card searching/buying is a fun part of the game. Isn't it exciting to buy a piece of power? Or to finally find that last Chains of Mephistopheles you couldn't find anywhere? At last, you'll be able to crush your opponents with it! That's an overlooked fun part of the game IMHO.

As for the "inaccessible" word, well it's really a subjective term. Type 1 is not "inaccessible" at all for the one who's really willing to get the cards.

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

That's something people just decided to accept. It would be impossible to errata all the color imbalance mistakes WotC did. The only hope is that future sets will contain broken cards in weaker colors. But even then, they got better at designing cards so that's highly improbable.

Just a remark : apparently, you don't like Type 1 at all. Did you ever try T1.5? You have an unlimited card pool and the format is much less luck-driven, as restricted cards are banned. I think you would like it.

As an aside :

A fun Magic game is the one you don't know the outcome of before it ends.

To achieve that, you have to play with people of your Caliber, defined in Magic under 3 aspects : card availability, playing skill and deckbuilding skill.

If you can't compete vs the people you play vs, it's because one of the forementionned aspects is lacking.

To counter a lack in playing skills, well, you have to play more and watch how good players play, etc. That's the most personnal solution of the three.

To counter a lack in deckbuilding skills, well, you can simply netdeck. Experience pays off, too.

To counter a lack in card availability, you can play a format allowing easier-to-get cards. You can also talk about allowing proxies in your playing group.

The tournament scene in Magic is filled with people having high marks on all of these three aspects. Find people who have the same average you have, and you'll have fun playing Magic.

[kl0wn]

Quote (Ric_Flair @ Aug. 26 2003,06:27)@ 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 in no way attacking you by making that statement (notice the "I'm not taking shots here" statement, which means "I'm not attacking you"). I am simply bringing the nature of Type 1 out into the open. The format is about big cards, big plays and high price tags. It always has been, even back when the control mirror was all you really needed to worry about. The only differences between Type 1's dark ages and now are that :

1) More people are playing, so the cards are more difficult to get.

2) More people are innovating, so decks are more refined and lethal.

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

I don't see an inaccessible card pool. I see a card pool that requires effort to access. Of course, this is coming from someone who has just about everything he needs to play the game competitively, but that's because I made the choice to shell out the cash for the cards. Also: I don't ebay and I rarely trade online, so it really is difficult for me to find obscure cards. I'm not complaining. That, again, is the nature of the beast. Type 1 should be that way. A full set of power inspires awe in those who don't own them, it always has. It should be an adventure to collect your power, you shouldn't be able to just walk down to the local dealer and buy it.

Also, if you'll notice, I used to clean house with Parfait before I became fully powered (this was also before proxy tournaments were the norm). I made due with what I had access to at the time and I feel as though I'm a better player for it. I also won my fair share of tournaments against powered players.

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

It doesn't. But again, that's the nature of the beast. Considering that you're playing with almost every set that's been printed over the course of the past ten years, certain colors (and strategies) are bound to come out on top. That's Type 1. Just like blue will be horrible in Type 2. I don't complain that blue will suck sour frog ass in Type 2 when Oddyssey rotates, because that's the format. Those are the boundaries that I have to work within (or try to break) and if I really want to play a blue deck to a winning record, then I'll play it in a format where blue can be played to a winning record.

Quote
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.

Learn to hate intelligently. You will be rewarded. I played "Sligh" a couple of weeks ago and finished in the money. I didn't lose to a deck that was worth over $100.

For the record, this game can't be about pure skill as long as the phrase "sufficient randomization" appears in the rulebook.

Quote
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.

I draft quite frequently, actually. I'm also fairly good at it. My penis also has a good 10" on yours.



Just to remind you, I'm not attacking you in any of the statements I made...just replying to your reply to my reply.

[Smmenen]

I would go even further than Azhrei in connection with the "color" wheel of type one.  Who cares about the t1 color wheel?  The ability to add colors is FAR to easy.

Look at friggen GroAtog.  19 Mana sources in a four color deck.  No one cares about color balance, becuase you will just take the best cards from each color and mix and match anyway.

Steve

[Rico Suave]

I'm not going to deny your points against the format, I'm just going to say that T1 has it's own feel to it.  I think it's important that each person finds the format that best fits his/her style.  It's exactly like choosing a deck for a tournament, picking a deck that fits your playstyle is just as important as how you play it.

Besides, Draft and T2 are boring in comparison, but that's only my personal preference.  Don't rob me of the format we love just because you disagree on preference.  Really, if we were to go through the changes you recommend, what reason would there be for me to play T1 anymore?  Would it have any attraction which the other formats would not?

[DigDug]

I'm confused.  People used to complain about the cost of Type 1 keeping them from playing good decks.  Apprentice is free and New England now has proxy tournaments.  People are still complaining because they'd rather have the real cards, even though they can play the best decks in the format anyway.  I'm the one to pity.  I have the cards and nowhere to play.

[Azhrei]

Oh, by the way, as deckbuilding improves player skill becomes less and less important. My dream is to one day design a deck that requires zero player interaction to achieve victory and plays itself so well that the old Microprose AI could handle it every time.

There is nothing I can think of that is pure skill. Natural advantages always play a role, whether it is height, card pool, or intelligence-- Kai Budde will lose 100% of his games if he's only allowed access to 59 mountains and 1 Force of Nature. Likewise, no matter how great a skier I am, I am not going to win any races without a pair of skis. You have to have the right equipment to play a game, period. This is why you don't see too many legless people on the cross country team.

Smmenen does make a good point: Why is anyone bothering trying to make mono-colored decks anymore? Give up on PoP and make your deck GOOD.

 

[kl0wn]

Quote (Azhrei @ Aug. 26 2003,10:21)Smmenen does make a good point: Why is anyone bothering trying to make mono-colored decks anymore? Give up on PoP and make your deck GOOD.

You know Sligh smashes Hulk, right?

[Azhrei]

Um, no.... JP and my testing independently with Ankh Sligh is something like 90% in favor of Hulk, with Goblins doing better but only marginally so.

[jpmeyer]

Sligh is the second best matchup for Hulk after Parfait.

[kirdape3]

Ankh Sligh is horrible.  Goblins is much better, and even then it's something like 40/60 for you.  If you play the deck that you posted in Kaplan's thread, then of course you'll win.  However, you're the only one that I can think of that will play it, and the deck will only beat Hulk and possibly the combo decks.  I'd be like OMGFIGHTMERIGHTNOW.

[jpmeyer]

Quote (Rico Suave @ Aug. 26 2003,13:09)I'm not going to deny your points against the format, I'm just going to say that T1 has it's own feel to it.  I think it's important that each person finds the format that best fits his/her style.  It's exactly like choosing a deck for a tournament, picking a deck that fits your playstyle is just as important as how you play it.

Besides, Draft and T2 are boring in comparison, but that's only my personal preference.  Don't rob me of the format we love just because you disagree on preference.  Really, if we were to go through the changes you recommend, what reason would there be for me to play T1 anymore?  Would it have any attraction which the other formats would not?

Ultimately, there's really just a decision that has to be made.  You have to either keep Type 1 a niche format and leave it to eventually choke on its own bloatedness OR you need to eventually make drastic changes somewhere along the line.

[Ric_Flair]

First off, I know that this tirade I have been putting forth would seem to indicate that I hate the format.  This is the furthest thing from the truth.  The reason I so sharply criticize the format is because these few problems prevent the wider Magic community from partaking in the joys of the ultimate card pool.  

I love Type 1.  About a year ago, board with Tog mirror matches, I stumbled across TMD and I took a look around.  To my surprise Type 1 was still alive.  Not only was it alive it was thriving, compared to when I last played competitively (when the split the formats in Type 1 and Type 2).  People have taken decks and ideas to extreme limits and in the process created impressive and powerful decks, that in my mind represent the final evolution of many of the game's most common strategies.  Vintage is where deck idea go to be perfected to the utmost.  As soon as I could I started assembling the best budget deck at the time--Sui.  I finished the deck, sans Power, at PT Boston last year.  I have had it sleeved ever since.  I have recently finished another powerless budget deck Anhk Sligh, without SB.  I am currently working a Fish deck and I am missing two MisDs and two Psionic Blast, which I expect to pick up at PT Boston this year.  I love the format.  That is why I post.

In my mind Magic is among the best games of all time.  The perfect Magic tournament, to me, would be one where each player has to play each format: Sealed, Draft, Block, T2, T1.x, T1.5, and T1.  I personally try to carry with me at least one complete deck in each format.  My tweaked Sui deck sits next to my Tinker deck, a U/G deck, and a MWC deck.  I bring at least these decks, along with a draft set everywhere I go.  If they play Magic, I have deck that I can play with them.  I am truly a format agnostic.  I want to play the game.  Plain and simple.  I love to trade too, but in my mind that is entirely different thing.

Since the game is my focus, and the game is best when the most people can play, I want to do as much as I can to make every format as accessible as possible.  Vintage is the worst offender.  Every deck in the GenCon Worlds was at least $500.  Most were well over $2,000.  At this point the game is being played by such a small percentage of people that could play that the premise of Magic is all but ruined.  In any true test of skill, which Magic is, skill and skill alone should be the determination of one's success.  As a profit making venture, Magic has to change this formulation a bit, but still, $300 cards that are necessary (Ancestral) are clearly detrimental to the game.  

As for the sufficient randomization thing, that is bogus.  If everyone is truly randomizing their decks, which as players we have an obligation to do and make sure our opponents do, then everyone has an equal chance of getting mana screwed or whatever.  Over the long haul those that are more skill will win more.  Look at Kai's success or Finkel's.  They get mana screwed too, but they play enough and are skilled enough that random bad draws don't matter.  In the long run, random bad draws do not matter--they negate each other.  If both players have the same chance of getting bad draws, the one that is the most skilled, in the long run, wins the most.

@klown

Quote I don't see an inaccessible card pool. I see a card pool that requires effort to access. Of course, this is coming from someone who has just about everything he needs to play the game competitively, but that's because I made the choice to shell out the cash for the cards. Also: I don't ebay and I rarely trade online, so it really is difficult for me to find obscure cards. I'm not complaining. That, again, is the nature of the beast. Type 1 should be that way. A full set of power inspires awe in those who don't own them, it always has. It should be an adventure to collect your power, you shouldn't be able to just walk down to the local dealer and buy it.

Why should it be this way?  I thought the point of the thread was to step back and take a look at the state of Type 1 in light of the B/R moves made 6 months ago.  In the snippet of a conversation with Tinsman and Buehler, they said that the format is unbalanced and stagnant. This is the main reason why.  Unless you are happy playing a niche format with few opponents, then you have to see the insanity of having a format based on cards that only a few can get a hold of.  If you like the adventure aspect go look for gold dabloons.  If you like a skill based challenge play Magic.  Why can't you awe players with your play skill and deck construction instead of a clutch of Power?  

It strains the foundations of language and logic itself to claim that something that is 5,000%-10,000% more expensive than the average card (.10 for a Volcanic Hammer and $500-1,000 for a Black Lotus) is not inaccessible.  If this is not inaccessible what is?  Moon rocks?  Seriously you cannot contend that the cards are accessible and at the same time contend that you like the long and arduous process of tracking them down.  Either they are accessible or they are not.

BTW did you see that movie with me and Traci Lords in it?  No?  Oh that's right she was too scared...I forgot.  (Just kidding, though I like the random penis insult that seems work into every argument between men).

@Smemmen

I have misstated what I perceive to be the problem.  The color balance is not the real issue.  More to the point is the fact that by making certain colors so good and others no so good the themes and mechanics prominent in the bad colors are automatically eliminated as viable strategies.  In my mind Extended seems to have the best luck in having multiple viable strategies.  Aggro can win, control can win, and combo can win any time at any tournament.  Also any of the half-steps in between can win as well.  Almost all of the colors are well represented and thus their inherent themes are viable.  Look at the white weenie tutor deck or the Tinker deck or Sui.  Any color, any deck type, any strategy at any time can win.  Ideally Type 1 should be this way.  I think that my two suggestions--limited the number of Restricted cards per deck and/or unrestricting Black Vise--would go a long way in making this the status quo in Type 1.  People acknowledge that broken things happen in Type 1, but seem to prefer when those broken things are in control or combo decks.  Why not give aggro some teeth and give any aggro deck 4 Vises?

@ Everyone

Let's not forget why we play Type 1.  This is the perfection of Magic.  Where broken cards balance each other out and further uber decks that take deck concepts to the extreme.  But when some of those broken cards are impossible for the average person to get on a regular basis the format is not about perfecting decks, but spending heaps of cash.  

How about this:  Yawgmoth's Will is recalled and everyone must turn there copies in or quit the game.  Then after this WotC rereleases 5,000 copies of Will to people that know how to use them, but you are not one of these people.  Want to play now?  Is that fair?

NOTE ONE MORE POST AND THEN I HIT THREE HUNDRED!  Yipee!\n\n

[DigDug]

I like the fact that you're building multiple decks in each format.  If I had more money and time, I would build decks other than T1, T1.5, and T1.X.

As for the card availability, think of it like this:
Saturday, a woman by the name of Lima Azimi from Afghanistan ran a 100m dash in the world championships.  Being poor, she was running in spikes and using starting blocks for the first time in her life.  Being a conservative Muslim, she wore baggy pants and had to be coerced into wearing a t-shirt.  She ran a personal best, but still finished 40 meters behind the winner.  She didn't have some of the tools to compete; she would have refused others because of religious convictions.  She's the nice little kid playing random.dec in a field of Hulk, Keeper, and Tendrils.

[K-Run]

Type 1 is not the normal way Magic is supposed to be played. It's the format of design mistakes, inexperience and imbalances.

It's fun though. It's like using a souped-up car in a racing game. It's not supposed to be played like that, but going around the rules is fun.

WotC is not going to reprint cards that were poorly designed. They have other things to care about. They keep supporting the format, a bit like Blizzard continues to support Warcraft II players, even if the game is outdated. But do not expect them to put additionnal money in T1/Warcraft II.

[Eastman]

1. We've got a healthy format. Type 1 is growing in popularity. Type 1's growth will probably level off when power prices get impossibly expensive. None of this is a problem.. we all enjoy this format for what it is.

2. Five proxy tournaments have really fixed a lot of the entry problems for T1. IF these tournaments become popular/lucrative enough then Wizards will do something to try and cash in on what has been to them a dead format (see: Gencon+). All of these things are good for the format.

3. Portal ought to be legal. It is part of the nature of the format to allow portal. Regardless of any specific cards in the set... the DCI ought to take the time to do the oracle rulings just out of respect for the format and the game.

Quote Ultimately, there's really just a decision that has to be made.  You have to either keep Type 1 a niche format and leave it to eventually choke on its own bloatedness OR you need to eventually make drastic changes somewhere along the line.

4. I see no evidence that this is the case. I've read a lot of similar posts in the past and I'm yet to hear any logical reasoning for these being the only two possible results. I do not see nor have I been told of any outside forces pressuring the format towards any kind of crossroads i.e. 'bloatedness' or 'eventual changes'. In fact, I don't even know what you really mean by either of those statements, though I must confess 'choke on its own bloatedness' does conjure up some amusing images of a very fat choking Ancestral... is that why he's screaming?

[Ric_Flair]

Here is the scenario for "bloatedness."  By bloatedness I took JP to mean the state when Vintage is no longer playable because costs and deck designs have made all but a few strategies possible.

I thing there are a few culprits.

Factor 1: Budget decks die. Anything is splashable.  

Blood Moon, Back to Basics, and Wasteland are not enough or worse yet none of the decks that run these cards in a prevelant way can win in the face of multicolored decks.  Think about this fact--combo can win all in one turn EVEN with a B2B on the board.  

This not only increases costs of entry (dual lands, though cheap, are expensive en masse).  Furthermore it blends the colors together in a way that makes it difficult for more basic strategies work.  Cheap budget aggro decks are worked out of the game--Permanently.  

GAT was an example of this.  The deck's core was so brutally efficient that nearly all other aggro decks were extinct.  Furthermore, silver bulleting GAT was difficult because it could add nearly any card to the deck or SB thanks to the ease with which new colors are added in Vintage.  

Without a real cost being assessed against multicolor strategies these new rainbow decks become nearly impossible to hate out of the environment.  They can simply dip into another color, add a patch, and keep rolling.  If the core of the deck, like GAT powered by Gush, is good enough these patches will do little to slow the deck down.  Furthermore the efficiency of the deck will not be decreased because once on foil strategy is hated out the patches for the new foil strategy can be swtiched instead of added.  Thus the deck will maintain a high level of effectiveness.  I think that Carl Winter's Hulk deck proves this point.  With little to no disincentive to adding new colors a Green Red card was added to what is essentially a Blue Black deck, with little loss of efficency.  Being able to splash any card, even gold cards, makes foil strategies, necessarily weaker.

Factor 2: The arms race gets crazy.

Decks like Stax and Rector are pricey.  

What happens when Power gets more expensive?  Let's look at Workshop.  After Workshop was unrestricted Dave Price built a deck for the Invitationals.  It did okay, but not great.  Then Stacker comes out and it is slightly more expensive, but a better deck than the incohate variant Price made.  Then TnT comes out and Workshop decks can splash Blue Power.  And the price goes up and the deck gets better.  Then Stax comes out and more expensive cards are added and the price goes up and the deck gets better.  By this time demand has hit and Workshop is a $100 card.  Masks had a similar evolution.  

The format naturally gravitates towards more expensive decks because the expensive cards, on the whole, are very good cards.  As more of the pricey cards make it into more decks their prices go up and the spiralling arms race ensues.  What happens when the next Workshop or Mask is rediscovered?  What if they undid the dumb ruling on Mirror Universe that neutered that card?  There were be a new $100 plus card.  

Factor 3: Waiting for Donate.

With every set combo only gets better. Illusions of Grandeur was an awful card and then a tool came along called Donate and made it the best kill in the entire game.  For 5UU a control player could generate a 40 point life swing.  There are a ton of cards, combos, out there waiting for their Donate.  WotC cannot test every card in combination with every other card.  It is impossible.  So with more sets being made the chance that another Donate slips through the cracks is not merely a likelihood, but a certainty.  The question is: How long does it take the Vintage community to find it?  

Eventually though it will be found.  And there is nothing WotC can do to stop this short of making no more cards or putting a limit on the number of restricted cards per deck.  This sort of restriction would help because of the nature of cards that get restricted.  Invariably these cards are cards that convert resources to efficiently.  These cards are the hallmark of combo decks.  With less of these to work with the critical mass necessary to make combo work is more difficult to achieve.  For a case in point look at Long.dec.  It is almost all restricted cards.  

Without some sort of radical change to the format as a whole or the B/R list Vintage WILL get bloated.  I personally think that round after round of restrictions is not the answer.  It is a stop gap measure.  A more radical change is necessary, like the one mentioned above.  There is nothing we can do to stop these three factors, unless some major change takes place.  It is only a matter of time.  And to those who say they like the format this way--do any of you remember losing on the first turn and second turn consistently in the unrestricted Academy days?  This is no fun for anyone.

EDIT: Sorry I had to leave and post this comment unfinished.  I will now correct/complete what I was saying.\n\n

[Eastman]

@1 why/how does the format get this way? Why is this change bad?

@2 The prices of power will go as high as demand takes them. I see price increases as a sign of growth (which  I consider positive) in the format because they signal an increase in demand.

I play a 5 proxy tournament deck with only those 5 pieces of power. I realize that a multicolor mana base is a requirement for the sort of deck I want to play and I purchased the necessary duals. UL duals are not prohibitively expensive.

[jpmeyer]

The problem ultimately though is that the format can only grow to a certain point, at which time people will just refuse to buy "power" cards.  People might be willing to spend $100 on a Mask or Workshop now, but what about $200?  Sometimes you can get away with just the 5 proxies.  GAT was great for that.  What about when Mana Drains start approaching $100?  I guess at that point you would just have to up the proxy count even more.

[Smmenen]

Quote (Ric_Flair @ Aug. 27 2003,08:17)Here is the scenario for "bloatedness."

Factor 1: The format eliminates monocolored decks.  Blood Moon, Back to Basics, and Wasteland are not enough or worse yet none of the decks that run these cards in a prevelant way can win in the face of multicolored decks.  Think about this fact--combo can win all in one turn EVEN with a B2B on the board.  

This not only increases costs of entry (dual lands, though cheap, are expensive en masse).  Furthermore it blends the colors together in a way that makes it difficult for more basic strategies work.  Cheap budget aggro decks are worked out of the game--Permanently.
.

I'll go even further.  Long.dec WILL win with a BLood Moon on the board.  I have played games where the Blood Moon Helped me.  I could then casting Burning Wish - saccing Lion's Eye Diamonds, getting Yawg Will playing lots of Rituals and Chrmoatic Spheres, etc.  

Long.dec doesn't care about Blood Moon, at all.


Steve

[VideoGameBoy]

Quote (Smmenen @ Aug. 27 2003,09:06)

Quote (Ric_Flair @ Aug. 27 2003,08:17)Here is the scenario for "bloatedness."

Factor 1: The format eliminates monocolored decks.  Blood Moon, Back to Basics, and Wasteland are not enough or worse yet none of the decks that run these cards in a prevelant way can win in the face of multicolored decks.  Think about this fact--combo can win all in one turn EVEN with a B2B on the board.  

This not only increases costs of entry (dual lands, though cheap, are expensive en masse).  Furthermore it blends the colors together in a way that makes it difficult for more basic strategies work.  Cheap budget aggro decks are worked out of the game--Permanently.
.

I'll go even further.  Long.dec WILL win with a BLood Moon on the board.  I have played games where the Blood Moon Helped me.  I could then casting Burning Wish - saccing Lion's Eye Diamonds, getting Yawg Will playing lots of Rituals and Chrmoatic Spheres, etc.  

Long.dec doesn't care about Blood Moon, at all.


Steve

I said as much long ago in the link on my sig, Smmenen:

Quote (VideoGameBoy @ June 26 2003,13:23)Believe it or not, Blood Moon isn't a total loss if it hits, but it can indeed be crippling in some situations - artifact mana and Chromatic Sphere make this deck extraordinarily resilient to nonbasic hate, though.  Blood Moon can in fact play right into your hands, since another key aspect of the engine (much more risky than the Brainstorm/Chromatic Sphere route) is casting Burning Wish/Demonic Tutor/Demonic Consultation/Draw Sevens and then saccing LEDs in play in response to pay for the fetched card(s)/float mana for additional spells down the road.  As you play the deck more and more, it is axiomatic you will see more aspects to the LED engine (it can even be used with multiple Brainstorms as opposed to Brainstorm+Chromatic Sphere).

[Eastman]

Quote (jpmeyer @ Aug. 27 2003,12:04)The problem ultimately though is that the format can only grow to a certain point, at which time people will just refuse to buy "power" cards.  People might be willing to spend $100 on a Mask or Workshop now, but what about $200?  Sometimes you can get away with just the 5 proxies.  GAT was great for that.  What about when Mana Drains start approaching $100?  I guess at that point you would just have to up the proxy count even more.

Well you are right JP... as is the format can only grow to a certain point.

Eventually the prices will get high enough that the demand, and card values, will level off.

I don't agree that this is a problem however.

[Smmenen]

I definately think that is a huge problem and here is why.  As the prices go up, it becomes more lucrative for dealers and collectors to become increasingly involved.  And they suck.

Honestly, if the format I love went to the toilet, I hope the poeple most hurt are the collectors.  They suck us dry and WE make their collectibles valuable.

Another thing.  The main justification for proxies (Which I FULLY support) is that it is based upon the assumption, that if a person plays vintage enough, and likes the format enough, over time (say 2-3 years) they will covert those proxies into real cards.  That mindset of expecting to eventually get power allows a person to more fully invest themselves in the format.  When I got back into magic in 2001, this is exactly what I did.  

If the cards keep going up in price, it will make it more difficult to acheive that goal and thus make the format worse for lack of increasing competition.  So that's the thing - even if demand levels off - that is bad for our format, even if it is balancing.  We want to be a state of steady growth.

If the prices keep going up, I might start a campaign to allow proxies of a certain list of cards in sanctioned play.  Don't allow collectors to benefit from OUR work.

Ste\n\n

[Eastman]

We have to accept that the format's growth will be limited by card availability.

It's tough to draw the line on proxies...is there a point where allowing additional players to enjoy the game becomes detrimental to the format? I don't think so but many players do.

I don't see the format's popularity eventually leveling off as a huge problem (there is a lot of growth yet to be done...), and it is one that those who don't like proxies have probably come to accept.

My differences with some of the opinions espoused above depend on the strength of the options we have as being uniformly negative. YES there is a choice to be made, but I do not believe it is between having the format change entirely and having it 'choke on it's own bloatedness'.

The crossroads we will eventually approach will simply be between the status quo (and nothing WILL change from what we enjoy now unless we make it) and an intentional increase in the availability of some of the more expensive cards.

What I think would be really interesting is the results of our keeping growth going by allowing additional proxies. If a proxy-filled format became very popular it would be extremely intriguing to watch Wizard's reaction, don't you think?

EDIT
PS: Type 1 is very different from the other formats and is EXTREMELY interesting. Deck building AND playing are dramatic and intellectually stimulating in Vintage. The vast body of knowledge required for understanding this very complex format is available here on TMD. These are the mechanisms for the growth we are experiencing.\n\n

[dandan]

What a fun thread!

Ric_Flair is asking the right question but is drawing the wrong concusions from the evasive answers. Type I's biggest problem is entry-level accessability. It costs a lot of money to start to play Type I (assuming you didn't start in 1994). This limits the number of players who can play competitive Type I (note that this is a far lower lmit than the theoretical maximum imposed by actual card quantities).

The 'support' of the status quo in Type I is due to the fact that the format is undergoing a noticable revival, with the help of the mobilisation of hardcore Type I players (that means you TMDers!), Wizards and refugees rom old Extended. Most players want Wizards to reprint Type I cards but accept that this is unlikely when Magic is still a thriving game, as it would be a major deviation from the direction Wizards have stated they want to take Magic. Assuming no reprint, the use of proxies is the next best solution. Most players accept that Wizards, as a company that makes money from selling cards, are very reluctant to openly sanction the use of proxies of their cards in competition. They are currently taking no action whatsoever to stop the spread of the use of proxies.

Right now there is a far greater level of cooperation between Wizards and Type I players than ever before. Type I is growing as a format. The metagame is varied and changing.
I believe that most reasonable people accept that Wizards are doing just about everything that they can to support the format and that this support can grow in time, possibly to a point where Wizards can accept official use of proxies.

We are heading in the right direction, now is not the time to complain about the speed of change.

P.S. (mainly at Azhrei) I think many people misunderstand Wizards and Type I. Wizards have stated that the average Magic player plays for 3 years then quits. Clearly the average Type I player plays the game for far longer than that. There is a very strong correlation between liking Type I and continuing to play Magic. Whilst you and many other Type I players do not buy many cards from Wizards, you still buy cards from people or companies that buy cards from Wizards, you still contribute to the amount of money spent on Magic. Type I players are also likely to draw others into the game, and help these players to overcome the initial cost of starting (the infamous Mr. Suitcase freebie starter decks). If I were in charge of Magic and my sales and marketing people were not looking very very closely at the community of long term hardcore Magic players I would squeeze their necks until Magic had a sixth colour.

[SpikeyMikey]

Quote (MoreFling @ Aug. 25 2003,08:44)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.

Well, for one, that's because nobody was playing with a good version of dragon back in the day.  Everyone got so caught up in tweaking the deck with stupid stuff that it got worse and worse from it's inception.  That's neither here nor there, really, just pissed about the entomb restriction.  However, there are very few if any combo decks that you can call stupid.  While there may not be an extreme amount of interaction with the other player, the amount of choices you have to make in a given turn with a combo deck is huge.  You want to talk about decks that are easy to misplay?  Fuck keeper, keeper is a breeze.  Play neo-academy.  Play dragon.  Write down what you do each turn, and at the end of the turn, go back and see where you fucked up.  If you can't generate at least 3 stupid counters per game, you're not looking hard enough, or you're the michael jordan of vintage.  Minor little play errors can kill.  

Long time ago, I was playing a game with WG Dragon, shortly after the deck came out.  I was going off, with 4 cards in hand, I vamped for Cunning Wish, Bazaared, then I wished for Stroke, Stroked my opponent for 80, and had it misdirected.  Had I made the right play, I'd have vamped for Whispers, gone thru my library, and had the 3 remaining FoW's as backup.  No reason not to do it that way, just simply made a mistake.

In any case, you *can* randomly win with combo.  By the same token, you can randomly win with Sligh, you can randomly win with Hulk, you can randomly win with a precon as far as that goes.  A player that's skilled with a deck will win a lot more than random scrub...  I cannot agree with you that control is harder to play than combo.  Control, while less forgiving of mistakes, perhaps, than aggro, is more forgiving than combo.

[Fever]

The difference is, with Tog or Sligh or whatever, random wins are not your main way to beat your opponent. While any deck can have this sort of "oops, i win" hand, most decks dont RELY on it in order ot achieve victory. Decks like Burning Academy seem to have a consistent randomness(!) that decides whether they win or lose. Not sure if that made any sense, but well... it did to me.