The state of the format

[Acolytec]

I have always been on the side that inexpensive decks should be able to compete equally to the expensive ones in t1.  This, however, has unfortunately never been the case, pretty much since keeper became the first "best deck" in the format.  I should know- when I played t1 competatively for awhile, I ruthlessly won over 80% of my matches simply because I played a broken blue deck (online).  Unpowered?  Well it was just over before you even drew your hand.

Let there is no illusion - unpowered decks cannot compete with the fully powered ones.  If everyone who played t1 was cool with a limit 8 proxy rule, then that would be the idea method of fixing things - I can make just about any cool deck that I'd want to play with 8 proxies (I do not own power, and never will, simply because it is unfair to play power against non powered decks when playing for fun - and none of my magic crew will ever own power either).  5 proxies is good, but you will still be at a disadvantage against full power.

Another random point- running hate is not enough for cheaper decks to compete.  It is nearly impossible to successfully hate the best deck in the format without also running expensive cards (example: keeper, pre-restrictblue, tog, etc.)

Another illusion is that t1 is cost effective.  In type 2, you can trade for the newest deck elements.  It costs a ridiculous amount of money to make a stax deck for the first time.  And you really cannot compete in t1 until you have accumulated a large number of expensive cards.  Also, t1 is just as vulnerable to environment changes.  Resrictions murder entire deck types.  And sometimes the advent of new decks kills off an entire archetype (suicide sucks now I am told due to stax, etc).

To those of you promoting restrictions: If you want to restrict cards for all of the best decks in the field, please do not forget mana drain to screw over keeper.  Getting rid of stax, mask, and combo simply means keeper (which -gains- from increased restriction) will then kill all inexpensive decks.

Reprints would rule.  I would say this even if I had spent 2000 dollars on t1 cards.  More players is better than a sunk cost.

[Ric_Flair]

I am sorry.  I mentioned a quote without providing its historical context.  I quoted: "Ban everything until Necro is good again...Then ban Necro."

The quote, from Chris Pikula, refers to Combo Winter.  The cards that were the offenders were primarily MoM, Academy, Bargain, Replenish, Survival, and Recur.  They simply wanted to point out that without those cards and Necro the decks would be more competitive and fun. And this would help recapture the people that were lost because of the crappy metagame.  

I think that this applies, but in a modified sense, to T1.  WoTC needs to ban Academy, restrict Workshop, and look into Trix.  They need to not be afraid of banning cards.  Its going to happen eventually.  

Finally, even though JP said it, I must disagree vehemently with his comments about zero chance of a reprint.  Everything is impossible until it happens.  We all thought that Serra would never come back, or Counterspell would be cut, or [fill in the blank with a surprise move]...and it did.  So even if it seems unlikely, it could always happen.  And if the bottom line is what they are concerned about it would certainly be good for their bottom line.  It would not hurt them and only have a minimal impact on the secondary, non-gouging dealers.\n\n

[LoA]

I've noticed two distinct ideas in this thread.  First, that unpowered decks should/shouldn't be able to compete with powered decks and, second, the general state of the Type 1 meta is/isn't reaching critical mass in regards to the number of broken spells (making more and more decks combo-esque).

I don't think that unpowered decks should be on equal footing with powered ones.  I do think that unpowered decks (the right one in the right meta) should be viable, but not optimal.  This has nothing to do with card prices and everything to do with the spirit of the format.  "This is Type 1, broken stuff happens."  Diluting the card pool to resemble 1.5 will, in the long haul, weaken the format.  The appeal of Type 1 is the sheer power available and the diverse strategies and deck possibilities inherent to the largest card pool in the game.

This brings me to the second point: critical mass.  If the format gets to the point where there is a single deck, or archetype, that so dominates the field all other options are second tier, then something needs to change.  I'm not sure we're there yet.  RectorTrix is a great deck and probably the best pure combo deck out there.  However, assuming one knows enough about the rules, it's not too difficult to play against.  Yes, it will get "I win" hands, but any combo deck in Type 1 will do that--that's been the case for years.  Stax has the same explosive potential and, imho, more resilience than RectorTrix, but is fairly easy to hate out with cheap cards.  Moreover, it's expensive to build, even with proxies.

"But wait!  That means the guy who can afford to build Stax will be at an advantage over the guy who can't!"

"Have you ever played Magic before?"

Winning at tournament is about a lot of things, and one of them is access to cards.  Proxies help here.  So do friends with extra cards.  And so does owning the cards.  If I went to a Type 2 tournament this week, I would get destroyed.  Maybe 10% of my collection is legal in Standard and I know I don't have a viable deck within those cards.  But if I were to complain about not being able to play in the format I doubt I'd recieve too much sympathy.

"Buy the cards."

"Trade for the cards."

"Play a different format."

"Build a cheap rogue deck and hope."

All of these are fair answers to my desire to play Standard, yet when Type 1 players say the same things, they are called elitist and told that the prices of power cards are too high to get into the format.

That level of entitlement is crazy.

No one has a right to play in any format.  I'd love to play Standard, if only because it would mean I could play more often and closer to home (although I have a decent situation in regards to Type 1).  But I don't have the cards and I don't have the money to get them.  I could trade for them, but that would mean parting with cards I use for Type 1, which I'm not prepared to do.  I make due with what I have and enjoy it.  Driving around in a Z4 looks like a lot of fun and I'd really like to be able to do it, but that fact of the matter is I have a Celica with over 100,000 miles on it.  Desire does not translate to right.

All that might hurt the general Type 1 playing community, and that would be unfortunate.  At least around here (New England), I have seen a massive increase in Type 1 tournaments and interest in the last 3 years or so.  Proxy tournaments are much more popular than I thought they would be, and that's a Good Thing.  I have no reason to believe that proxies will, someday, no longer be an effective tool in evening the field.

If games come down to going first, then something is wrong.  I actually think this will happen less often in the post-GAT world as Stax is still fairly rare in real-life tournaments and RectorTrix is fragile in the early turns to disruption.  Someone mentioned booster draft as the format to play if you want your cards to interact, and I think that's fair advice.  The interaction I like about Type 1 is social; the higher average age does a lot for the forma

[Toast]

I really think a good solution would be to restrict the number of restricted cards that are allowed in each deck. This way it will be much more difficult for an unstoppable combo deck to emerge because it's resources would be limited (assuming degenerate cards were regularly restricted)

 If decks were only allowed to run 10-15 restricted cards (haven't tested to see what the right number is yet) I feel it would be fairly easy for the format as a whole to be preserved regardless of the expanding card pool. The best part is the powerful cards that define the format would not have to get banned.

It would even give wizards more versatility with their restrictions as restricting a broken card that only wants to be run as a one of anyways (future sight, z orb...not that they nessessarily should be restricted) would actually put a minor price on running the card.

current restricted counts(might not be entirely right)

Trix- 15-18
Keeper- 15-16
TnT- 12 or less
Tendrils- 24-26
Stax- 21-23
UrPhid- 12-13
HulkSmash- 13-14
Academy- 30-31

most of the current decks we know and love would be virtually unhampered...a few would have to adapt a little(they are sorta on the broken side anyways barring maybe academy) Overall I think it would be good for preserving the format. Do I expect everybody to like it....no, but I do think it is a fairly good idea.

[Triple_S]

While I think the game is coming down to some extent on what you have in the opening hand, a good knowledge of the metagame and the expected field can help a good player understand if their opening hand is worth of keeping or not.  For example, I certainly keep a one land hand in the current meta with the large number of Stax decks running around.  Even with artifact/creature based mana acceleration you become too vulnerable to a 1st turn sphere.  A couple of examples.  In a tournament in Fairfax VA (which allowed proxies) my opponent is running a Workshop deck that accelerated to large Torches for the kill and the key card was Metalworker (as he had killed his previous opponent very quickly).  The correct play was to keep my somewhat land light hand that included Tinker so I could tinker an off color Mox away for Trisk to kill his first turn Worker.  In a later round, I was playing vs a Stax deck piloted by Thorme and keeping the same hand penalized me when he dropped a first turn Sphere.  

At this point it is truly too early to tell if the t1 metagame is healthy or not...GenCon will be a good barometer of the format's health.  I would expect that any necessary restrictions would happen after that (though I hope none are necessary).

[Radagast]

Since people have been misusing the term "critical mass" (or rather, using it with a different meaning than was originally intended, thus having the effect of confusing the hell out of everyone who uses the intended definition), here's what it means: when the cards on the restricted list are alone enough to make a completely unstoppable deck. At that point, there is nothing you can do without altering the definition of Type I, since restricted cards cannot be restricted again (and if you want bannings, refer to my previous post -- a better solution would be to clean up 1.5). If Type I continues existing for all eternity, this will eventually happen purely due to probability;  each and every mistake R&D makes takes us a step closer to that point.

As for budget decks, I believe they can be perfectly viable (not optimal, mind) if anyone decides to work on them; but expecting  2-3 year old decks that weren't exactly the best even in their own time to be able to compete now is ludicrous. However, most deck designers (myself included) like to concentrate on powered decks, as they have much more options available (for example [oversimplification warning], moxen let you play spells a turn faster, ergo letting you play spells which are a turn slower); and therein lies the problem.

[Smmenen]

Look.  Just becuase someone at Wizards says they will never ban or reprint a certain card - that doesn't mean it is the truth.  Who knows what will happen in ten years.  If format exigencies REQUIRE bannings in order for the format to survive, I would imagine they would reinstitute it as easily as they removed it.  

These things aren't set in stone.  Buehler and Maro won't be there forever.  Things change.

Steve

[Ric_Flair]

Quote But wait!  That means the guy who can afford to build Stax will be at an advantage over the guy who can't!"

"Have you ever played Magic before?"

Winning at tournament is about a lot of things, and one of them is access to cards.  Proxies help here.  So do friends with extra cards.  And so does owning the cards.  If I went to a Type 2 tournament this week, I would get destroyed.  Maybe 10% of my collection is legal in Standard and I know I don't have a viable deck within those cards.  But if I were to complain about not being able to play in the format I doubt I'd recieve too much sympathy.

"Buy the cards."

"Trade for the cards."

"Play a different format."

"Build a cheap rogue deck and hope."

All of these are fair answers to my desire to play Standard, yet when Type 1 players say the same things, they are called elitist and told that the prices of power cards are too high to get into the format.

That level of entitlement is crazy.

Okay this is crazy.  TOTAL AND UTTER NONSENSE.  If Magic is a game AT ALL it should be about skill, not wallets.  The game is desgined and pushed to be an intellectual sport similar to chess.  Imagine if you had to pay $2000 to get a Queen?  Would that be fair?  No.  Would that make the game interesting? No.  

As for the comments about the expense of Type 2, it is obvious that LoA has not played in a while.  First, the best deck in the format is U/G a deck filled with commons and uncommons.  It can be assembled with ease and virtually no cash.  And it wins.  It is the cheapest of the major decks to make and it is one of the best.  Imagine if Stompy could compete with Keeper, TnT, and Stax?  That is what is happening in Type 2 right now.  Even if U/G is not a good example, Goblins ain't too price either and it does fine.  As does Tog and Slide.  Only Wake, R/G, and Mono-Black Zombies are pricey decks.

Also the ability to trade for T2 cards makes the format far more accessible.  If a new player has $60 and a good store to go to they can buy packs to draft, draft a few good rares, trade them for crucial rares, and get commons and uncommons for free or virtually nothing.  They get draft experience and a good deal quickly.  This could NEVER happen with T1.  Trading for Power without old cards (usually other Power) is a near impossibility.  That means that cash is the only quick route to the NECESSARY cards in the format.  A new player needs to spend at least 6 months trading for the low priced cards and some serious cash for the much needed high priced cards.  There is no such thing as a newbie making a top deck in a month's time barring the expenditure of lots of cash.  It just can't happen.  

ENOUGH WITH THIS LUNACY THAT MONEY IS WHAT MAKES A PLAYER GOOD OR THAT TYPE 2 IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN TYPE 1.  BOTH ARE SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

[Fever]

Collectible Card Game


Money is a factor, both in Magic and in life. Vintage is more expensive than Standard, that makes sense, doesnt it? Since our beloved format uses cards that are ten years old, it is normal for there to be a higher cost associated with it. Do i wish that anyone could compete in Vintage, no matter than cost? Of course i do, but that isnt reality, and it will remain a fantasy most probably until the death of this format.

[Ric_Flair]

It is also a trading card game (TGC).  Note the common element: GAME.  If this were simply about collecting there would be no Pro Tour.  There would be no 10th Anniversary.  Magic would have died a long time ago.  Its continued success is premised on and because of its game elements.  And guess what--those formats where money is a factor have fallen out of favor, are no longer on the Pro Tour, and receive less support in general.  The essential element of Magic is the game aspect.  Pure and simple.

[LoA]

Quote
Only Wake, R/G, and Mono-Black Zombies are pricey decks.

So, if we had a format where decks like LAS were often played, but there were other, expensive decks open to the field, that would be okay?  Yes, the price difference is different, but this is a result of the seconday market.

Quote
If this were simply about collecting there would be no Pro Tour.  

True, but without the secondary market there would be a lot fewer stores at which to play and buy Magic.  It would be nice if Magic was all about luck and skill and nothing about card collection, but that simply isn't the case and never has been.  Cards do matter.  How many times have you read a tournament report with a footnote something like "Total jank, don't own the 4th CARDNAME"

Quote
ENOUGH WITH THIS LUNACY THAT MONEY IS WHAT MAKES A PLAYER GOOD OR THAT TYPE 2 IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN TYPE 1.  BOTH ARE SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Yikes, you must've been pretty steamed by something I said.  

Too bad I didn't say either of these things.

Money doesn't make a player good.  If Stax is the perfect deck for your meta and you can build it, then you have some advantage there, but that's no substitute for a number of other factors that go towards winning at Magic.  Cardpool helps, but it's not the factor that determines "good."

Type 2 is probably more expensive if you're planning on playing serious Magic over the course of many years (trying for the Pro Tour, being on the gravt train).  If you want to build a few decks, then clearly Type 2 is cheaper.  If you're goal is to spend as little money as possible and you don't have initial start-up cash (eqv), then Type 2 offers you the best chance to be competitive.  (Note:  If you play in an unpowered meta, this won't be the case)

[Ric_Flair]

Sorry for the hostile tone.  Its just that the same arguments are made over and over and they are silly.  Type 1 is and always will be more expensive than Type 2 (until Power is reprinted).  And the number of expensive cards a player has in his deck is largely related to his or her success in the format (considering only those people that put in the requisite time and possess a relatively equal amount of skill).  As between two equal players the one with the more expensive deck wins in Vintage.  In Extended, Block, and Type 2 that is not the way it is.  This is the format's biggest weakness, even before broken cards, the B/R list, and critical mass.  Money should have no correlation to success.  This is what makes true competition great.  The son of cobbler or the daughter of a fireman can be great with practice, discipline, or work.  

Sorry to LoA specifically.

[David Hernandez]

I agree with Steve.  I'd LOVE to see reprint's of the power cards.  I even think the DCI should allow the Collector's Edition's to be played in sleeves as if they were part of a playable set, and NOT be considered "proxies".

how about this for a Wizards special set: In every box of the  "Power Print" set, there is a guarantee that the packs will include a full set of power 9, a LOA, and a Mishra's Workshop.  So if you bought a box, you would be guaranteed of getting a full set of power cards, and if you only bought packs you would have a very high probability of pulling a key card.

it would be the most popular set they ever printed, and they would make 10's of millions of dollars.  I'd buy a case.

--Dave.

[Prospero]

I said it the last time this post was up, and I'm glad to see that Fever had something else to say about this:

    "Critical Mass" is a load of horseshit.

    "Critical Mass" is something that would only occur if Wizards didn't pay any attention.  While we're neglected, they do have the sense to keep the environment stable.  According to everyone's definition, "Critical Mass" has been reached several times in the past.  Everyone's definition of "Critical Mass" boils down to a deck that is lightning fast, very reliable and consistent, and manhandles the metagame.  There have been decks that were those things - and their key components are still restricted/banned today.  Does anyone remember when Tommi Hovi won with Academy in Rome?  The deck killed you on turn three or four at the latest - and it was extended.  Here's the list as I remember it:

4 Mox Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Mana Vault
4 Voltaic Key
2 Scroll Rack

3 Powersink
3 Abeyance

4 Windfall
4 Time Spiral
4 Stroke of Genius
4 Intuition
3 Mind over Matter

4 Tolarian Academy
4 Ancient Tomb
3 Volcanic Island
4 Tundra
2 City of Brass

    I remember the deck because I played it.  It was the most horribly broken thing that I've ever played.  And while I loved watching my opponents faces contort, I'm glad as hell that more than half of the key components were banned in T2.  That deck should never have happened.  What did Wizards do about a deck that was lightning fast, horribly broken, and consistent?  They banned many of the key components.  And what did they do to the Type One version of the deck?  They only restricted:

Tolarian Academy
Crop Rotation
Windfall
Time Spiral
Lotus Petal
Hurkyll's Recall
Mana Vault
Stroke of Genius
Mind Over Matter.  

    Will everyone look at that for just one second?  That's nine cards that went on the restricted list, or were sure to stay there because of one deck.  How can anyone say that Wizards hasn't paid the necessary attention to us?  Will everyone please stop looking for Wizards to give us the attention Type 2 gets?  We're never going to get it, so get over it.  

    I've been playing Magic since 1994, but I wasn't in the States in time to ever get Channel/Fireballed.  So I don't remember just how broken the deck was at the time, but I'm sure that it was no fun to play against.  To all of the "Critical Mass" advocates - can someone please let me know how many Channels I can play in my Type One deck?  Keep those two examples in mind, because here's the third, more relevant one:
    Wizards printed a whole boatload of cards in Scourge that looked like they'd be great for T2 and Extended.  When they realized that Mind's Desire was absolutely ludicrous, and essentially un-counterable, they restricted it.  Why?  Because it would destroy the environment, it would bring us back to a combo winter.  They saw "Critical Mass" as you call it, and they purposefully avoided it.  Mike Long pointed out that Wizards doesn't usually have a "June Banned/Restricted" list.  But they did this time.  And they did because they wanted to keep the environment in control.  
    Does everyone remember very recently when Berserk and Hurkyll's Recall were unrestricted?  Can anyone honestly tell me that Berserk has unleashed the "aggro summer" that some of you were predicting?  It hasn't - because as much as WOTC doesn't care about us, they still know what they can and cannot do.  Just how they knew that they had to restrict Gush - because the intelligent members of our community calmly explained the ramifications of an unrestricted Gush on our environment...  
    And for those of you who are "budget" Type One players, find proxy tournaments if you have to.  They're more common now than they've ever been before, and I'm sure that you're all capable of abusing the five or so proxies that you'd get.  If you really care about Type One enough to play all the time, read all the articles that are posted, think and adjust your deck to the metagame, then go out and spend the extra money to buy the power that you need.  I have a full time job.  I have a car.  I have to help my mother out with bills.  But you better believe that I'm able to take some of the extra money that I've got, and spend it on the things that I enjoy.  If you don't have a job, get one.  Type One is only more expensive than Type Two if you only just got into Type Two.  If you've had to buy four of's of the following (or trade for them)  you'll see what I mean:

Cursed Scroll
Tradewind Rider
Morphling
Masticore
Powder Keg
Opalescence
Replenish
Rishidan Port
Dustbowl
Lin Sivvi
Urza's Rage
Undermine
Absorb
Pernicious Deed
Spiritmonger
Call of the Herd
Shadowmage Infiltrator
Upheaval
Nantuko Shade
Bloodstained Mire
Flooded Strand
Wooded Foothills
Polluted Delta
Windswept Heath
Akroma

    Everything on that list was worth at least 6, and some of it was trading as high as 20 in its heyday.  Until recently, you could get pretty much any mox in fair shape for 120.  Type One is actually a cheaper format if you play for an extended period of time.  Yes, you could argue that you could trade the old stuff for the new stuff - but who ever really wanted to do that anyways?  I couldn't trade my Tradewind Riders for Morphlings.  I couldn't trade my Lin Sivvi's into Absorbs or Undermines, I had an unbelievably tough time getting rid of my Urza's Rages and I won't be able to trade my Akroma's (on other rares that are pretty much playable only in block) for whatever the next big rare is.  
    For those of you who say that the pool of power is slowly decreasing, I think you're wrong.  The older players who get out sell their cards for the most part.  This means that their power gets recirculated into the environment, and that, essentially, the same amount of power is roughly available.  Yes, its tough to find, and no, its not getting any easier - but its still out there.  If you want it, get it.  If you don't want to spend the money on it, please stop complaining about not having it.
    To everyone out there that's been going nuts, please, calm down, take a second, and read and think about what I wrote.  It makes sense.  Please stop predicting doomsday.  The format isn't going to shit.  Later,

Prospero

[jpmeyer]

There's a difference between an investment and these wild runs that have been going on in the last year.  I started knowing what cards were actually worth in around '96.  From '96 to '02, power was appreciating at a rate of really just around 4% a year.  That's perfectly reasonable, and if you looked hard it still wasn't really that hard to find say, a Mox Emerald for around $90.  But then in the last year, most power prices have practically doubled.  That's obscene.  Even though they say they won't do it, I still really wouldn't be surprised if the prices recovered very quickly if there were reprints.  Quite a few Extended staples that are big in Type 1, like Force of Will and the duals, dropped by over 50% in some cases, but the market recovered in only around 6-9 months.  There's also the Birds of Paradise factor, where foil versions of Birds of Paradise can stand toe-to-toe with their Alpha/Beta counterparts.

The only possible feasible reprint solution that I could see would be after Extended rotates again in 2005.  At that point Saga, Tempest, and Masques will have left along with 6th and 7th edition.  At that point there would be a solid enough card base that there would be solid material in every rarity slot to allow for reprints.

[Fever]

Actually Prospero, you got me wrong. I was commenting on the fact that a lot of the people were using the term without even realizing what it meant exactly. I have been talking about a so-called "breaking point" for months among my group, and i still believe that it is inevitable. You see, for this to be avoided, Wizards would have to print litterally NO playable T1 cards over the next dozen expansions, which is unlikely.

However, unlike some, i do not believe we are at that point yet, or even that we are close. I just acknowledge the fact that the nature of this format will inevitably lead to its demise. If the DCI takes some drastic action to avoid this in the coming years, then more power to them, but i dont see that as a likely scenario.

[Dante]

As someone who feels that if you want to compete, either get the power or don't whine about it, I would be all for reprints, despite my set of beta power and every other expensive card.

Magic really stopped being a collectible long ago, somewhere around Ice Age, due to the increased print runs (definitely after fallen empires).  Even if things were reprinted, that doesn't change the rarity of old cards, only the value.

I think first and foremost, most of us just want to play Type 1.  If reprints would help type 1 grow and be healthy for the format, I say go for it.  I want to play.  If someone quits magic/type 1 because WotC reprints power, they're not a real player in my mind anyway, who cares if they leave.  More than enough people will flock to the format who actually want to play.

As for dealers getting screwed and supporting the stores that allows tournaments and enviroments to play, think about this - if Wotc printed a "chronicles 2" set or something along those lines with the older cards (i.e. power cards as rares, etc) and introduced it in addition to the normal yearly sets, don't you think those would sell?  Damn straight.  The stores would EASILY make enough money off selling boxes of the stuff (don't tell me that most magic players wouldn't buy at least one box) to counter any loss of value the originals had on the secondary market.  And if there are individuals who play the speculative market with the power cards and they lose a lot of value, well, sorry, that's why it's speculative.  In scenario like this, just about everyone wins - Wotc sells cards, stores sell cards, players can get into type 1 more easily, type 1 has an influx of players.  The only people who don't win are those who play the speculative market and whiners.

Dante

[BigChuck]

Many of you speak about how high the prices are, but you have to take into account this fact: No one is forcing you to play magic. You have to realize that there are a large number of players who are devoted enough to the game, that they are willing to spend considerable money on it. It is the same case with anything. Take the business world for example. If you are competing with another company to make a product, and one of you is willing to spend more money then the other, then it is very likely that the one who spent more will be more successful. Of course, that isn't always the case, and it also isn't always the case in magic. The company spending significantly less money still has a chance to win out, but they have to be smart and crafty to do so.

I understand how high the barrier to entry is, and while it is a shame, it's still there, and isn't likely to change in the near future. The simple fact is, if someone is willing to put more time, money, and effort into something then you are, then don't they deserve to win?\n\n

[Fever]

Quote (BigChuck @ July 09 2003,10:14)The simple fact is, if someone is willing to put more time, money, and effort into something then you are, then don't they deserve to win?

Does a 14 year old with barely half my skill or understanding of the game deserve to beat me simply because his daddy spent 3 grand to buy him a deck? I would say no.

Now, you may respond "you should beat a 14 year old scrub no matter what the decks", but thats just false. If im playing Sligh, which is about the best i can afford, and he is playing Trix, i have next to no hope of winning even if he is the vastly inferior player. Some decks, like Stax, require more playskill, but even so it doesnt change the fact that losing to a scrub just because he also happens to be rich does not make for a fun time. This is why i stopped going to  T1 tourneys, i have no desire to lose to players who not even my equals simply because they have more cash than i do.\n\n

[BigChuck]

Maybe, but how often do you see that? For the most part, everyone I know either traded for, won, or bought their power. I have yet to meet a person whose family dropped down that kind of money for them to play, and while you might be right that he doesn't deserve to beat you, it doesn't change the fact that those people make up a very small percentile of the people with power.

[dicemanX]

Many state that Magic should be more like chess - ie an intellectual endeavor where everyone is on equal footing as far as not having a financial barrier to entry.

But you must realize that to be competitive at a high level in chess requires a *significant* financial investment. You have to drop a ton of cash for books, coaching, entry fees for tournaments (which are typically $100+) to gain experience, money for travel to major tournaments, etc. Not to mention that chess has a steep learning curve that it takes literally many many years to build yourself up to a high level. You can minimize the financial barrier if you happen to be some sort of prodigy, but the majority of chess players simply do not have such luxury.

If you want to play chess casually and not invest the time and money to compete at a high level, you can easily do so. Same thing in T1 Magic. If you wish to play casually, you do not need to invest very much to play. But if you wish to be competitive, it might require a bit of an investment, and a bit of time. If everyone had access to everything (ie through reprints), T1 would become boring really fast. Magic doesn't take very long to master, and coupled with the rapid proliferation of information over the internet people with good play skills would have access to all of the top level decks. Tournaments might come down to 20-30 players with 1-2 Keeper, 10 TnT, 10 Stax, 10 RectorTrix. What fun. Coin flipping every round.

[Dante]

Quote (dicemanX @ July 09 2003,13:23)Magic doesn't take very long to master, and coupled with the rapid proliferation of information over the internet people with good play skills would have access to all of the top level decks. Tournaments might come down to 20-30 players with 1-2 Keeper, 10 TnT, 10 Stax, 10 RectorTrix. What fun. Coin flipping every round.

You're kidding right?? (on several counts

Magic doesn't take very long to master??

What exactly is the problem is a large contingent of people who have good play skills and access to cards to build any deck they want?  I thought that was the type of atmosphere we were striving for here.  If that happened, winning big tournaments would come down to (in no particular order):

1. luck - opening draws, mana draws, topdecking, etc (but these always have been and always will be a factor).

2. player skill - not just knowing the rules and tactics, but knowing how each deck works, knowing the different matchups, predicting the local metagame, knowing how to properly sideboard in key matchups,  etc.

3. Matchups - again, decks have good and bad matchups, but this will always be a factor, regardless of reprints.

Compare that to what we have now, where you have all of the above factors in addition to some players having an advantage because they have access to power and others don't.

Now tell me how the first scenario is worse than the second??  It means a higher percentage of matches will be more competitive, meaning more games where play skill (see list above) is an issue and generally more fun for everyone throughout all the tournament rounds.

It may possibly mean that with so many more people testing decks, that 4-5 decks will rise to the top as "tier 1" type decks due to the accelerated amount of testing.  How is that different than what we've had for years now - a set of decks that generally do well, a set of decks that are generally slightly above average but have the ability to pull out wins or Top 8 here and there and everything else.  All that would do is get rid of the "everything else category"...

Dante

[David Hernandez]

This goes along with the comments in another thread.  The discussion was along the lines that there are 2 kinds of skill, plus the addition of "luck".

There's skill in deckbuilding, and there's skill in playing.  In Chess, everyone has the same pieces.  One chess player (who kicked my sorry butt) said to me "there are only 64 squares...there are no secrets there".  Chess is a level playing filed, yet player skill and experience win games.

Magic is the same way.  That's why when i pilot a deck against an opponent with less experience, i can often win, even when my deck is weaker.  you've probably had other players say to you "I dont get it, when i play it, it doesnt work, but when you play it, it works great".

i think that if everyone owned a full set of power, you would still see certain players at the finals consistently.  I would like to see everyone have an opportunity to build decks using the power cards in order to help make the playing field more level. I mean, how interesting would chess be if you have all the pieces but your opponent cant play with a Queen or Rooks?

even so, in the current environment there are decks that win a lot of games that run only a couple of the power cards (or NONE of them).  Examples? Nether Void (both mono and B/g) and Ankh Sligh.

I have a Nether Void deck that runs only a Mox Jet for power, and it rocks.  My Ankh Sligh doesnt have any power at all, and it gives all of my power decks trouble.

As others have stated, in the current situation if people want to play T1 they will either have to make an investment in some power cards, or they will have to play Sui, Void, or Sligh.

--Dave.

[Ric_Flair]

I want to second Dante's comments.  We are striving for, and the state of the format should be aimed at, an environment where skill is the paramount deterimining factor in success.  Luck and matchups will always be an issue, but if we even out access to cards, results have PROVEN that skilled players win more.  Look at Kai Budde and Jon Finkel, both people operating in an environment with access to every card, or in Type 1 Roland Bode, who with access to every card or virtually every card, consistently produces winning decks.  Magic in general and Vintage in particular need to be about skill in deck design and in playing.  Not about Mr. Suitcase.

[Fever]

This is going around in circles.

Closed.