The state of the format

[jntemp777]

I have been avidly following this thread since the beginning.  Phantom Tapeworm brought up some very valid points and his arguments are strong.  As an avid fan of Magic, I would like to see the popularity of type 1 continue to grow.  Many members have argued very fiercely and frequently about how wrong Tapeworm has been.  However if Tapeworm is completely off the mark, his original post would not have generated so much discussion so quickly.  

More importantly, for a moment let us assume he may have a valid arguement.  

If that is the case, then what are some possible remedies?  
DicemanX proposed a new set of card restrictions.

Quote (dicemanX @ June 30 2003,16:59)If we want to put a limit on early game broken plays, which we can all agree will most likely decide the game, all we really need to do is restrict a whole slew of cards. For instance, let's say that we restrict:

Survival
Mishra's Workshop
Illusionary Mask
Academy Rector
Meditate
Cunning Wish
Intuition
Future Sight
Psychatog

Are these the answer?  If so, are there some cards that should be added/removed from his list?  If DicemanX is way off, then are there other solutions?

[walking dude]

To anyone who thinks luck of the draw is huge now all I have to say is "where is your memory?" In some was luck matters more, but in many ways luck of the draw matters less now.
Decks like tnt mean less suicide. And classic suicide with sinkholes and nulls rods had an insane number of "opps I win" hands. Playing anything but redundant aggro against suicide there was a high chance each game that your mana would be gone and you'd have no game. Even barring the cracked LD hands, hymn with a little luck has ended more games on the early turns than I'd care to remember.
Today broken is mox workshop jugg. 3 years ago broken was ritual duress hymn. Or waste consult waste. Broken is more expensive now than it used to be, but its certainly no less luck dependent.
As a combo player I'm much less threatened by first turn jugg than first turn hippie. Things depend on your perspective.


Edit: Another thought about short memories. Three-four years ago the only and I mean the ONLY way a deck ever beat keeper played by a good player was if
1.   It packed hate and
2.   The keeper player was metagamed against other keeper players and didn't bother to defend against the hate.
I remember how inbred the NG metagame was back then. The reason it could be so inbred was that in the hands of good players keeper just did not lose. People seem to always talk about a golden age when budget decks could dominate and win. I remember those days and they were never there.\n\n

[Azhrei]

Amen! Nothing has changed except the broken decks just as much faster, and there are more of them.

Also, regarding Sligh:

Sligh is only good in a metagame where creature decks are not present. To say that Sligh needs to be present is ridiculous-- Sligh is good for beating Keeper. It's sub-par against a lot of Suicide builds, and anything using Survival of the Fittest should ruin Sligh.

I contend that when Sligh is good, then the only good deck is Keeper. That's not healthy at all.

[Bastian]

I'm unaware if this has already been said, but restrictions are not the answer as they make the format narrower. What we are left with is to hope that the next sets bring new cards good enough to make an impact and allow new decks to become viable. (Which is farfetched, but Wizards said they were going to make Mirrodin cards having type 1 in mind, right?)

Let's hope that Mirrodin and beyond start bringing out decent cards to make cheaper decks, old or new, a reality.

[Crater Hellion]

Restrictions do not make the format narrower, lack of restriction where it should be present is what makes the format narrower. Extremely good cards being playable in 4-of's effectively ban at least hundreds of other good cards on the cusp of being playable because their much better, unrestricted counterparts edge them out in tournament playability.

[Dante]

Quote (Crater Hellion @ July 02 2003,10:36)Restrictions do not make the format narrower, lack of restriction where it should be present is what makes the format narrower. Extremely good cards being playable in 4-of's effectively ban at least hundreds of other good cards on the cusp of being playable because their much better, unrestricted counterparts edge them out in tournament playability.

Right.  That is what type 1 is about.  If the "hundreds" of other almost-playable cards are what you want to play with, the 1.5 and extended formats are perfect for this.

Dante

[Bastian]

I explained myself wrongly and you're right. It's not restricting cards that are too good that make the format narrower. But still, besides Psychatog I cannot see any card worth being restricted right now in type 1. And even so... tog decks won't be so powerful from now on with the restriction of gush.

[Ric_Flair]

I think that the state of the format is fine, so long as you know what the format is.  Restricting a bunch of tier one cards is not the solution.  That would simply change the format to 1.5.  

If you play Type 1 you need to accept the following facts:

1) The format is very swingy, and to a certain degree playing decks is secondary.
 
If someone drops some Moxes, a land a Zorb, and Balances down to one card (Ancestral) there is a very high chance that the game is over.  There are too many powerful cards to make the format more skill testing.  If I get that hand, 99% of the time, I win, no matter the deck or the opponent.  The fact that such enormous swings are possible means that designing a deck is more important than playing it.  Shaving off that one excess card to squeeze in brokenness is often the difference between victory and defeat.

2)  Type 1 is about funds.

Anyone who says Type 1 is the cheapest format is a crackhead.  There is NO WAY that a person can make an optimal deck without Power, and Power ain't cheap.  Budget decks with a Lotus are automatically better.  Thus building even the cheapest optimal deck requires at least $400.  Traditionally people claim that Type 2 changes so quickly you can easily spend that much in a year.  The fact is, though, you would only spend that much if you bought every single card you needed.  In reality most people trade for the bulk of their Type 2 cards, while Power is virtually impossible to trade up to, if you start with a pool of only Type 2 cards.  It can be done, but not easily.  In foreign countries it is all but impossible.

3)  Type 1 is where broken shit happens.

Given the power level and size of the card pool, the triple Mox, Land, Zorb, Ancestral hand is not impossible.  Deal with it.

If the format ever wants to progress beyond its non Pro Tour status, then these two problems must be addressed cough::reprints::cough.  Otherwise there will never be another Type 1 PT.  I, for one, am not too sad.  I love the format the way it is.  WotC support is not all it is cracked up to be.

[Matt The Great]

Quote (Ric_Flair @ July 02 2003,12:49)3)  Type 1 is where broken shit happens.

Given the power level and size of the card pool, the triple Mox, Land, Zorb, Ancestral hand is not impossible.  Deal with it.

When the stars align, every dog has its day. Or something.

But when those opening plays start becoming more common - Stax can do that kind of thing, conservatively, twenty percent of the time - then people start really, really disliking it. They hate it, and unpowered decks could not even emulate it if they wanted to. And that's a BIG turnoff for the format.

[Phantom Tape Worm]

@ hanzalot:

Quote

Quote
Very soon the days of "you too can play type 1" will be gone.  When new players no longer feel they have a shot at competing, their interest in attending tourneys will dwindle.

 


Very soon I really don't think so. I think many metagames allows budget players to compete (at least mine do). And if they really like type 1 why would they quit instead of trying to obtain power (start by selling their type 2 decks)?

In my metagame (where most players are powered AND are playing the top decks in the format) budget players really can't compete.  The games end (or effectively end) far too quickly for their decks to develop enough to put up a fight.  The point is that these players will never really like type 1 because they are going to be left with a sour taste in their mouths after they get waxed in the first three turns.  So these players will never get power because they were turned off to the game in the first place.  And of course without new players coming in...what happens to the format?

Quote

Quote
My sentiment's about legend's statement "when sligh is not competitive something is wrong with the format" i think are very appropriate.

I don't agree but it doesn't matter since sligh is still competitive or at least just as competitive as ever. Neither TnT nor Stax crushes sligh.

Sligh has a horrible matchup vs Hulk AND trix AND mask, all of which are top decks (TnT is no longer at the top).  For sligh to be ok vs one of those and terrible (laughably so) at the rest....nevermind this is getting off topic...just know that budget decks are not viable in a metagame of top decks.  And this is bad because it will have a negative impact on the number of players that will attend tourneys.  

Moreover, sligh is a good benchmark deck.  It is fast, but not unfairly so the majority of the time.  It provides a game to its opponent where that player at least feels as if he has some role in the outcome of events.

And maybe that player who was playing agaist sligh never really had a chance at winning, but at least he felt as if he could have won because he got interact with his opponent.  The same cannot be said about a good stax/trix/mask/hulk opening hand.

Quote

Quote
If this trend in deckbuilding continues, ie. decks more focused on going broken fast and therefore winning sooner, we may lose many of the most attractive features of this game.  Most notably the human element of magic, in game playing.

But some of us think that the coolest thing about type 1 is when someone thinks up a new great (and broken) deck. It seems like you aren't that interested in deck development. This might be inaccurate but it is my interpretation of your comments.

Not at all, i love deck development!  I love coming up with something new and unique and testing it against the field.  I've been a rogue deckbuilder for most if not all of my entire magic career.  And i love this game and all of it's nuances and subtleties, both in the developmental stages and the in game stages.  And what i don't want to see happen is for our format to degenerate into what everyone has always said it was.  We are currently in an environment where you can win or lose with increasing regularity on the first turn.  Read the introduction to Smmennen's article on stax and you can see what i mean.

All the "type 1 is just about mox, lotus, channel, fireball" myths that we, the type 1 community, were trying to speak out against for so long are becoming truths.

And regardless of what Azhrei says, this has not always been the case.  Certainly not to the degree it is at now nor to the degree it is headed.

Quote

Quote
If we want our format to succeed, we must be prepared to do what is best for it in the long run.  Let us take the necessary steps now in order to ensure that type 1 has a future.  

This is a praiseworthy attitude and I'm sure no one disagrees with you here. I just really can't see what it is were supposed to do - stop making broken decks? Write wizards begging for reprints or bannings? I think it is very hard to be proactive in this matter.

That is the reason for this post.  Once it is agreed upon (or mostly agreed upon) that there is infact a problem, i would like to try to brainstorm for some solutions.  Once we are in agreement upon the solutions, then we can propose our entire argument to WotC.  We can change things, we have in the past.







@ walking dude: The main probelm is not that broken didn't exist in the past, but that broken is increasing (beyond anything in the past) among the top decks.

You're right, sui did just have the "oops i win factor", but it has never been on the same level as the decks we are seeing today.  Today's top decks are faster AND more resistant to disruption than sui could ever be.  And these decks are incredibly powerful, but how much is too much?

This is type 1, we want, no, we demand a certain amount of broken from the decks we play.  It's part of the appeal.  The question is where do we draw the line?  What are the acceptable levels of brokenness in this format?  And how do we know when we get to that point?






@ Ric_Flair:

Quote I think that the state of the format is fine, so long as you know what the format is.  Restricting a bunch of tier one cards is not the solution.  That would simply change the format to 1.5.  

You're right, restricting a bunch of tier one cards may not be the solution, but it would definately not change the format to 1.5.  Broken things would still be possible since those tier one cards would still be available in the format.  And as we all know, even with a deck like keeper which is mostly one of's (mox, mox, mox, land, zorb, balance, ancestral) you can still do some very broken things.  It's usually just less common.

Quote If you play Type 1 you need to accept the following facts:

1) The format is very swingy, and to a certain degree playing decks is secondary.

If someone drops some Moxes, a land a Zorb, and Balances down to one card (Ancestral) there is a very high chance that the game is over.  There are too many powerful cards to make the format more skill testing.  If I get that hand, 99% of the time, I win, no matter the deck or the opponent.  The fact that such enormous swings are possible means that designing a deck is more important than playing it.  Shaving off that one excess card to squeeze in brokenness is often the difference between victory and defeat.

Things are swingy yes, playing decks is secondary yes, i will concede that too.  But the problem is that things are getting swingy to the point where there is no room to swing back.

Think of a game of magic like a turn based tug-o-war.  In type 2, or block, or limited the tug is small on each turn.  The game has a pace that is pretty even for each side.  In type 1, one side can pull extremely hard during its turn.  And the otherside can do the same.  These are the huge swings in game you are referring to.  Sometimes, and this is rare, one side can pull so hard that it just wins coming out of the gates.  The problem is that these days this quick super swing is becoming less rare.

This can be perhaps better demonstrated through a boxing analogy.  Type 2, limited, block etc are the light, feather, banter weight classes etc.  where type 1 is the heavy weight fighting.  The light wieght classes typically have very long bouts and often have to rely on T.K.O.ing their opponents because they can't hit hard enough to knock them out cold.  On the other hand Evander Holyfield, heavy weight mind you, has had over 50 K.O.'s over the course of his carreer.

I accept and enjoy the fact that we are in the heavy weight class.  My problem comes as a result of (and i guess this would be appropriate if i'm working with the boxing analogy) advancements in sports medicine technology that allow us to hit each other harder; and there is no end in sight to these advancements.

The frequency with which our bouts are decided on who gets their knockout punch in first is increasing.  And these attacks come so fast and so hard and with such finesse, often they cannot reasonably be defended against.  Sure in the past there has always been the occasional fight where Mike Tyson K.O.'s the guy in 38 seconds, but this was the exception, not the rule.  

AND in order to take advantage of these new medical breakthroughs (play the top decks), you have to pay out the nose cause they ain't cheap.  So those competitors that might have been interested in entering the heavy weight class, tend to think twice about what they are getting into.  Now combine the price tag with the fact that the bouts are becoming more and more about who gets that first punch...and you can see that you're not gonna sell a lot of people on joining the sport.




My goal is to see that this format gains popularity and acceptance.  I think the best way to achieve this is by:

1) committing to making budget decks viable

2) maintaining an acceptable level of brokenness, but not crossing that threshold (this is very trickey)

3) changing the banned/restricted policy so that a critical mass of the restricted list is never reached.

[Smmenen]

I think we should be clear on what we mean by making budget decks viable.  I am all for non-powered decks being viable (or at least low powered decks), but I will not endorse the wringing of a format to make a deck viable where the player won't even buy dual lands.  

Frankly, I don't think a deck that is cheaper than a Type Two deck _should_ win a Type One Tournament.  That simple.

Second, Perhaps, just perhaps, if combo does really well this next few months - if it manages to steal sufficient wins to knock out the best control players simply becuase there is a critical threshold of brokenness, then perhaps GAT was good for the metagame.  Just a random thought.

Thirdly,  I hope to see Stax break some dreams.  I used to LOVE locking people down in a cold icy prison of countermagic with snakes active on the board.  I hope to see more dreams crushed in an artifact prison that jumps out and engulfs the game by turn two.

Steve Menendian

[Matt The Great]

When people say "budget decks" they don't mean dual-less. I'm sorry if I gave off that impression. When people say "budget" they usually mean "unpowered," or at least not requiring more than one or two "ultra-rares" like Power or Workshops or LoA. Something like Suicide, which is certainly improved by adding power, or Fish, which definitely wants an Ancestral but the deck doesn't just fall apart without it. Decks like Stax and TNT really do just fall apart without Moxes and Workshops.\n\n

[Azhrei]

Since when is Sligh a benchmark? Sligh loses to anything with Wall of Roots-- that's right: Sligh loses to Stupid Green Deck. Sligh is generally good against ONLY Keeper, because Sligh sucks when blockers exist. Sligh loses to White Weenie, even. Sligh as a benchmark is AWFUL. People are nostalgic about Sligh because it was a hate deck, but now it can't hate everything.

Stompy died because a deck called TnT came around and it could actually BLOCK. Plain and simple. Sligh is fading because there are decks that can block AND don't lose to PoP, which I nickname "Red Viability."

Look, the format is really good. You have two options:

1) Many good decks, which are all powered and expensive. Decks that could kinda win maybe now can't as much at all. All the top decks are fast, but they are equally so which negates the advantage and draws games out longer. The only time speed is noticed is the rare gawdhand which always has been able to happen, or when a good deck meets a bad deck. Bad decks don't get lucky as often.

2) Budget decks have a better chance, and Keeper regains sole control of the format. Everything is either Keeper or a hate deck. Keeper still wins everything.

Personally, as long as no 1-2 decks become COMPLETELY dominant (Necro or Keeper? of pre-restriction) I don't think it matters how fast things become as long as their are equally good options. Because you only start with seven cards, there is a point at which you can only get so much mana and cards off the start, and I think that unless new Moxen or Ancestrals get printed, we've really topped out on what can happen on the first turn barring actual problems like Memory Jar, Mind's Desire, etc..

If the boxer recieving the punch is strong enough, they can take the punch and return fire. If both fighters are strong enough to survive the initial onslaught, you have a match... but the King Hippos of the world get their shit ruined. Like always, but with a pretty red spray this time.

[Os-Vegeta]

Quote My goal is to see that this format gains popularity and acceptance.  I think the best way to achieve this is by:

1) committing to making budget decks viable

2) maintaining an acceptable level of brokenness, but not crossing that threshold (this is very trickey)

3) changing the banned/restricted policy so that a critical mass of the restricted list is never reached.

I'm pretty much in agreement with what you're getting at, and I really think that if we're going to get anywhere in this discussion we have to tackle the big fish now instead of doddling by focusing on all the smaller issues that have been brought up in this thread.  

1 - Well, if budget decks are going to remain viable and competitive, change is necessary (I'm not saying adding a secondary color is necessary in every deck, either).  They can't stay virtually the same forever, and there really aren't many deckbuilders out there who focus on decks like Fish, Sligh, and Sui.  

2 - This is what we really have to watch.  I completely agree that a typical game in Competitive Vintage should not get to the point where turns one and two are the only ones that count, let alone that they end up being the only turns in a typical game.  My only question is one I wish I could answer myself: How can we prevent this from happening years from now?  

3 - Changing the banned/restricted list...  Can you elaborate more on this, like specifics?  I mean, this really is kind of vague, and on top of that it's not like just anyone can really influence Wizards to change the B/R list, though it has been done in the past.

[Akuma (gio)]

Quote Second, Perhaps, just perhaps, if combo does really well this next few months - if it manages to steal sufficient wins to knock out the best control players simply becuase there is a critical threshold of brokenness, then perhaps GAT was good for the metagame.  Just a random thought.

This point gets to the heart of the matter as far as I'm concerned. GAT was GOOD for the environment. I played GAT only ONCE in sanctioned tournament play, and that was due to the fact that it was about to be destroyed by a restriction.

GAT allowed people who were not rolling in Power 9 and Workshops and all those other expensive cards to COMPETE. PERIOD. Plain and simple. I think the people who complained about GAT were usually those people who had all the power and were not happy when some dude sat across from them with a relatively inexpensive deck and OWNED them.

I own all the power cards necessary to build any of the so-called top tier decks, and I did not have a problem with the occasional loss to GAT. GAT, contrary to popular belief, was not harmful to the environment. Here is something to think about:

FACT: If people had equal access to decks like Stax, there would be an outcry far greater than GAT created. Let's face it, Stax is an excellent deck on par with GAT, not less than, equal to. Not to mention that playing against Stax is about as much fun as watching paint dry.

Please don't say that I'm bitter that GAT got neutered because now my scrubby self will have to go back to trying to use my feeble skills to compete with all those highly skilled players I could not beat before the advent of GAT.

Take a look at the Origins tournaments. GAT won on Thursday (according to Steve's report), but did not win after that. Steve made Top 8 on Saturday and Sunday but did not win, and he is widely regarded as one of the better Tog players. Only two GATs per Top 8. Sound like a dominant performance to anyone? Don't think so.

In the end, I don't care, I will play whatever I feel like playing at the time. I just think it's upsetting to lose a competitive deck to a bunch of whiners that refused to adapt.

[dandan]

First of all I think it needs to be said that the format is in the greatest state of flux that I can ever remember.

Look at Keeper. There is Paragon Keeper, Your Mom, Power Artifact variants, hell KroOathian variants.
Look at what was once Academy. Classic, Tendrils/Hurkyl's, Burning Wish variants
TnT, Stax, RectorTrix, Hulk

All of them changing to meet whatever is the flavour of the day.

The top decks are all expensive and are all changing. The cheaper decks cannot change as quickly as their weapons are more limited (being generally monocolour). However once the metagame settles (IF it settles) then the budget decks can then level their sights on one or two decks and 'hate' them (why do expensive decks have metagame cards whilst budget decks have 'hate' cards?!). As has been pointed out, budget decks can and do do well in certain metagames. They can't hit a moving target though.

There is a problem that all of the current top decks are expensive. However this merely highlights the long term problem of Type I - to expand as a format there needs to be a major change of policy regarding either proxies or reprints.

I cannot remember a time when I couldn't see the outcome of a Type I match within the first 3 turns (at least with a 90% accuracy, broken stuff happens). I reserve my judgement about the current state of our format, some bad stuff but a lot of good things too.

[Deletehead]

I apologize in advance if I re-invent the wheel with my opinion
but my attention span is WAY to short to read all the above stuff. Anyway, I think brokenness is what magic is all about.
The whole basis of the game is warping the rules to suit one's
purpose. I don't have power but my friends let me proxy it
and we usually just end up playing about 5-10 matches, getting stupid drunk, and arguing theory 'till closing time. I've
always beleived magic was more about deck design than play
skill. From the first year I started playing I was writing down my decks and playing Solitare to get to know every aspect
of them. I feel like this is a viable way to test as
the other decks I'll face are in my experience almost impossible to predict no matter how much research one
does into the metagame the best players will always come
up with something new, and even if they're playing a broken combination it's the support cards and sideboard that put
the truly succesful decks over the top. Someone above mentioned that Groatog was good not because of the Berserk/Tog combination but because it could support that
with FOW, MISD, and daze which it draws with whatever brokenness it happens to be holding at the time. I got my ass handed to me several matches in a row by my
friend Mike's GAT deck until I started using R/G and flinging
every bolt and critter I could at his Togs until he had no choice but to Mind Twist himself trying to survive. I think
un-powered decks can compete if designed correctly, R/G
beats with River Boa and the Odyssey block cards (Mongrel,
Rootwalla, Lavamancer) is a perfect example in my mind but
there are other options too like Replinish, Sui-black, Parfait,
Enchantress, and even Sligh (even though I think it sucks
ass compared to R/G) that will in fact compete if they are
well-built powered or un-powered vs. anything you can put
up against them. As far as play skill is concerned I would say
that it comes hand in hand with working hard on a deck until
you know what to do in virtually any situation, Keeper is a perfect example of this. I wouldn't take Keeper to a tourney
if you payed me (well okay maybe if you payed me) because
it doesn't suit me as an aggresive player where someone like
Rakso would just go to town because he knows every card
by heart. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Magic is
all about deck design and the time your willing to put in to
disover, refine, and exploit whatever you have to work with.
Because of this I applaud the players with Power that are
willing to let us po' folks proxy stuff. This is the absolute
best way to keep things healthy (That or unrestrict Fastbond,
Vise, and Necro   ) and I totally disagree with re-printing power cards as proxing stuff is in my mind the
perfect compromise to keep a tourney competitive.
The metagame is just fine and getting even better as Wizards actualy prints better cards instead
of absolute crap like the Dark, Chronicles, and Fallen Empires (If it weren't for Revised  and Ice Age I would have quit
in my first couple of months) and maybe even runs some
more sanctioned tourneys. So anyway I'm pretty happy
as a new player and excited to see what's next as Onslaught is turning out to be WAY better than I thought initially...

[jpmeyer]

On the subject of "budget" decks, I personally don't even see the point of playing the format if you aren't using power.  Years ago I decided that if I'm not going to have access to power, I'm going to play some Type 2 or draft.  If I wanted to play Sligh I'd play OnBC--where it can also goldfish turn 4 (with the possibility of turn 3 with a perfect hand)--and win a lot as opposed to losing a lot.

People say that Type 1 is growing in popularity, and it's true.  But I can't see how taking the entire appeal out of Type 1 would make it better for entering players.  There's no way I'd play Type 1 if decks across the board were just nerfed.\n\n

[MoreFling]

in response to jp, and totally aimed at tournament play only.

A big reason to play T1 in tournaments is because the tournaments in general are more laid back, the players are nicer, and you get to see a lot of cool cards and decks, and there are more interactions. It isn't all about winning. It's actually sad that a lot of the comments here about budget decks and "lower-tier" decks are aimed at that.
It isn't all about winning.

[jpmeyer]

But if it's not about winning then why are you entering tournaments?

[bebe]

Not that I will playing in a tournamernt anytime soon but ...
The deck that won our last tournament beat a fully powered Trix, Tnt once, and GAT on the way to the finals. It was an unpowered  ( and a bit unorthodox - had grim lavamancers ) Fish deck splashing red. We were all fully powered and i do not think we lack experience in Type 1.

I actually tested Sligh prior to the start of the tournament and although it was fun seemed to lose a turn early 60% of the time against GAT and Trix - never played the TnT. Sligh is no benchmark.

I agree that power is a huge factor increasing the likelihood of explosive draws. But I have seen budget decks win three times now here in Toronto -
Sui
Pandeburst
U/r Fish

Had someone brought a good Funk deck (Deeds are awesome today's environment and a great equalizer) it would have done very well also.  

GAT can be hated out and has been here two out of three tournaments. Now its gone. There is no truly dominant deck. Trix beats itself ( believe me when I say I only lose matches when my deck poops out on me), Keeper can be had with difficulty, and Hulk is good only because it is so damn consistent and redundant - not unbeatable.

JP is correct but that is not the whole story. Yes, P9 decks will do better overall without a doubt. And yes, we should not neuter the environment with too many bannings and restrictions. look at the hulabaloo over Berserk - most decks still run single copies only. But you can play a budget deck - that is minus P10 - and compete. My budget deck does use FoWs and Mana Drains ( the only deck I kept and I'm keeping it under wraps for now). I rely on B2B, Energy Flux and Kegs to screw with power decks along with free counters and good counters.

I find it somewhat amusing to call today's environment a combo oriented field. It is in fact quite diverse. GAT did screw the standings up but it is gone now and even GAT had really bad match ups ( note Trix - which loses to itself). Prior to GAT Keeper was doing quite well until metagamed against. There is a new deck out there waiting to be discovered right now.

We need to be more inventive and less conservative in our approach to building new decks. Look at Devos' Mask. Seemed a pile of crap until you actually played it.

Magic can be fun.

[Bastian]

JP: morefling already answered to that question. Read his post again  

Carl's Masked Avenger is one of my favourite decks EVER. I loved how he mixed up a deck using both mask and survival. Brilliant!  \n\n

[Pimpz0r]

Type One is broken.  Type One has always been broken, and Type One will likely always be broken (at least it had better be, or I quit).  The format is not approaching the combo-winter-like state that many of you seem to fear.  If you guys don't like playing in a format with such broken plays, perhaps it really is time for you to move on to another format; a format where you CAN hard cast that Verdant Force.  The only time restrictions and bannings need to be called for are when one deck is so violently explosive and imbalanced that the metagame degrades and is composed of nothing but that deck and various decks designed to hate it.  This is not what we have right now.  We have a very diverse and healthy metagame, with a wide variety of competitive tier one options.

To be competitive in Type One, you need power.  At the moment, power is expensive.  So to be competitive in Type One right now, it's gonna cost you a little bit.  If you don't like that, go play another format.

Trying to dumb the format down by not building broken decks and focusing on budget decks will do nothing.  If we stop building broken decks, somebody else will start.

There does seem to be an increasing intrest in Type One lately, and this is definately a good thing.  Right now, things seem to be fine, as if somebody is interested in buying power, they can find it.  I think we will run into a problem farther down the road when there is no longer enough power to go around.  At some point, there just won't be anybody ebaying Moxes, and as a result, it will become increasingly difficult for new players to join the format.

I for one would like to see one of two things happen: either they reprint the power in some way, or find a way to allow proxies in sanctioned play.

[skirge5]

A budget player realy has very little chance to go broken as it has been put. Brokeness requires cards that cost alot. However, the budget player isnt going to just die. The problem is the lack of dedication put into the makeing of a budget deck. That, i feel, is where the newbie format is going to become very important. The players in the format can work together to make the budget deck into what it needs to be, but first they have to understand what to do about it. The numerous number of topics that have popped up for making unpowered versions of popular decks is realy not the way to do it right. What they need is someone like legend realy. Legend liked to play sligh. It was his deck. So he tested it, and created many good versions. He also did this with Sui, and blue control, but blue is more power based. However, Legend is quiet now. Someone needs to step up and take his place, so to speak. Someone needs to sit and do some enovating to keep it up with better power. The card pool is huge, there should be a way to defeat whatever deck is causing you trouble.

Despite what that post does, i do not believe that we should just flip off the unpowered players and tell them to build there own decks. We (and by we, i mean i mainly, because i do not do much to help) should help them with it. Sometimes, it is good to test the weaker decks, just to see if they can bloom into something.

[Methuselahn]

I think the area that needs improvement the most is the banned/restricted list.  Moreso, the people who govern it.  This list defines the balance in the general metagame.  

WotC has clearly and logically stated that they focus on the other formats which make them more money.  WotC just doesn't have the resources like the people here that have dedicated a large portion of their magic lives to type one.  "We", the tmd community for example are the ones "in the know".  "We" should be deciding the fate of the restricted list.  "We" should be the ones on this commitee.  How to go about deciding who would be another debate however.

[Pimpz0r]

I think the current banned/restricted list is fine.  What many of you perceive to be problematic in the current banned/restricted list may actually be concern on the list in the future.  I agree that at some point, we will reach this "critical mass," and I agree that something will have to be done-at that time.  Wizards has done well maintaining balance in the game through use of the banned/restricted lists in the past, and I see no reason why we should doubt their ability to continue to do so.  If a few or a great deal of cards need to be banned in order to keep Type One alive, I am sure they will do so.

We all know that Wizards admittedly dedicates less time to this format, because it makes them less money than other formats.  I do, however, find it encouraging that Wizards would comment on the existance of cards designed for Type One in Mirrodin.  In the past, Wizards has listened to our advice in making changes to the banned/restricted lists.  I think the most important thing we can do, as the premiere Type One community around, is continue to offer our advice to Wizards.

It has been mentioned many times in this thread, and I am sure elsewhere, that Wizards should reprint some of the power cards, or allow proxies in sanctioned play.  I think before we are hasty enough to call for such things, we need to carefully evaluate the impact such decisions would have, both on the metagame, and in the value of the cards.

If Wizards was to reprint some or all of the power cards, they would obviously have to do it in a way that would not destroy the balance in other formats that they have worked so hard to create.  The cards would either have to be released in a special Anthologies like set, or be given out as promos in some way.  I am uncertain what Wizards policies are about reprinting cards as promos; but we all know they print a great deal of out of print cards in foil versions (Jackal Pup, Capsize, Impulse, etc).  It is my basic understanding that cards are permitted to be reprinted as foils without disregarding their policy (not that ANYBODY wants foil power nine floating around).  Perhaps somebody else has some knowledge of these matters?

How would reprints of power cards affect the metagame?  How would reprints of power cards affect the value of our originals?

The second option is to allow proxies in sanctioned play.  Would this have a positive or negative impact on the metagame?  Would it affect the value of the real thing?

[Os-Vegeta]

Quote The format is not approaching the combo-winter-like state that many of you seem to fear.  If you guys don't like playing in a format with such broken plays, perhaps it really is time for you to move on to another format

You are missing the point completely.  Nothing's wrong right now, at least in my opinion.  Down the road, we may run into a nice amount of trouble a la a "combo winter" situation.  That is the whole point of this thread.  Nobody's complaining about the current environment.  

Quote In the past, Wizards has listened to our advice in making changes to the banned/restricted lists.  I think the most important thing we can do, as the premiere Type One community around, is continue to offer our advice to Wizards.

This does sound like the right direction to go as far as addressing banned/restricted policies go.  In any case, what will end up needing to be changed and how to go about giving this "advice" to Wizards is something that will be very difficult to decide.  

Quote It has been mentioned many times in this thread, and I am sure elsewhere, that Wizards should reprint some of the power cards, or allow proxies in sanctioned play.  I think before we are hasty enough to call for such things, we need to carefully evaluate the impact such decisions would have, both on the metagame, and in the value of the cards.

The impact on the metagame could be something to think about, though I'm not sure if it truly will be a large one other than more access to power cards, but as far as the value of the cards goes, I really don't think there is anything to be concerned about (see my post on page 3 of this thread).

[Pimpz0r]

Quote

Quote The format is not approaching the combo-winter-like state that many of you seem to fear.  If you guys don't like playing in a format with such broken plays, perhaps it really is time for you to move on to another format

You are missing the point completely.  Nothing's wrong right now, at least in my opinion.  Down the road, we may run into a nice amount of trouble a la a "combo winter" situation.  That is the whole point of this thread.  Nobody's complaining about the current environment.

I'm not missing the point.  Several people have expressed concerns regarding the current metagame, not only the future of the metagame.

[Zharradan]

Players should never be in charge of the b/r lists because you cannot gurantee that their decisions will be unbiased and impartial. Look at Gush... when it got restricted there were a lot of posts of the form "nnooooooo. Well, okay, I understand that it had to happen - but noooooo". Do you think that the players themselves wolud have made the restriction? I doubt it. They were having too much fun smashing face with GAT.

It is not our job as players to keep the format fair and balanced. It is our job to break it as much as possible, to aid our goal of winning games.

[Pimpz0r]

I have an idea for those of you who have concerns about unpowered players not being able to compete.  Everybody should pick an unpowered project deck to develop, and we can start a thread for each one in the Vintage forum.  Start each of the threads with "Unpowered," so we would have a series of threads dedicated to the development of unpowered decks, like "Unpowered Fish," "Unpowered Parfait," etc.

Those of you that would rather not waste your time developing unpowered decks, don't.