I have spent some time this weekand playing some competet...

[jawman16]

I have spent some time this weekand playing some competetive magic and reading old type 1 articles and have had some ideas that I thought I would share with the rest of the community.
    I saw a post in the Extreme-Vintage forum by Steve that asked where all the good playes went.  The article went on about how basically no good players actually play type I anymore.  Steve went on to say that he didn't understand why anyone would go into a tournament playing a sub-par decklist or deck for that matter.  The posts that followed basically tore him apart (as they should have).  I have read many of his posts and I have come to some conclusions about people who take type I "way" too seriously.

A.) Is it that hard to understand that people like variety??  People like fun??  People enjoy finding out if their own deck (something we see very little of ne more ie. netdecks) can actually win.  This is why not every single person is going to play Welder MUD every fucking week.  This leads to my next conclusion about the "way too serious type player"

B.) You are disillusioned as to what type I "really" is.  Type I will never be close to type II in organization.  There will never be a PTQ for TI.  Type I is not how to sideboard in the Stax v. Hulk matchup.  It is not about hours of playtesting to see if a 5 fetchland base is better then a 4.  Type I is, and always will be, local tournaments where people use creatures, yes they still exist, or other fun cards to enjoy a game of INTERACTION.  A game between two people.  Type I in general has no set metagame (I hate that word) like Type II does and it never will.  Sure New England might be close to this ideal metagame but that is a very small area of players.  Not everyone can afford to make the ideal deck.  Thats why people play sub-optimal decks.

C.)As my last point alluded to, not everyone has a full playset of every card ever made.  I am the proud owner of a fullset of moxen, Timetwister and Ancestral.  That is a lot of money and I have no problem paying the money because it is an investment.  I will not pay $350-$400 for an Unlimited Black Lotus though.  That is ridiculous for ONE card.  Now if I, a person who is more then happy to spend over $100 of this game, am too cheap to buy a Lotus what do you think the avgerage player who doesn't have the option to buy power is going do about getting expensive cards???  Not everyone can afford to buy Workshops, Masks and Bazaars to make your Uber-Decks.  Therefore people make do with what they can afford.  Hence why people play something other than what you, the elitest type oner, thinks they should be playing.

   So now that I have shared my thoughts on some certain players I have ran into, I want to address WotC's influence on our game.  Give them a break for once.  They have given you great cards to work with lately (Chalice, Scepter, Spoils, Fetchlands).  All hear these days is that they never print any cards for Type I.  Do they print a lot?  No, of course not because there is no money in it but they do give us some fun stuff every set.  Look, it's there.  But there is one gripe I do have with WotC.  They have NO IDEA as to what to ban/restrict.  I, like all of us, am waiting for Randy's article on Type I.  No matter what it says I still think they really messed up this time around.  Long was not as good as everyone made it out to be.  Sure early on it owned but if properly prepared for it was not that dominant.  Also if they think chrome mox is fast mana they obviously are bed partners with some Stax players b/c there is absolutly no reason why Workshop is unrestricted.  Its ridiculous.  The card needs to bite the dust, period.  

On a closing note what would you say if they printed a card that read the following
3cc Sorcery. Draw 10-15 cards.  If any of those cards are still in your hand at end of turn, remove those cards still in your hand from the game.

Should it be Restricted/Banned???  Give your answer to this question in your posts.  If understand what I am getting at dont say it in your post because I am curious to see what a lot of people think about the theoretical card at first glance.

[Eastman]

Jawman I have to say that I don't appreciate the overall negative tenor of your post. There is constructive criticism and then there are random n00bs bitching haphazardly because this is the internet. When you say things like this:

Quote I have read many of his posts and I have come to some conclusions about people who take type I "way" too seriously

you make me think you're in the latter category. Smmenen and I may have our differences, but we both understand that Magic is a hobby. Just because we happen to know more than average about that hobby doesn't mean that we take it too seriously. I take my hobby seriously AS a hobby, as I 'm sure Smmenen does. I try my damndest to win the round but I'm not going to cry when I lose.

I should also mention that I've become a competitive and constructive Vintage player without ever owning a piece of power. Most tournaments allow 5 proxies, and if you're not an asshole it isn't hard to borrow anything else you need. I play fullly powered decks in tournaments quite regularly.

I also don't understand the distinction you place on Black Lotus as being 'ridiculously expensive' when it costs only about twice as much as other power, which you don't deem overpriced.

I don't understand your motivations for starting this thread, or what you're looking for outside of the defenses of those who you're maligning. You make it hard for me to take what little worthwhile discussion exists in your post seriously.\n\n

[g0dzillA]

In his post asking where all the good players have gone, Smennen's underlying paradigm regarding Type 1 can be summed up as: "Type 1 is a format requiring just as much skill and strategy as Standard or Extended, and the Type 1 community will benefit from a strong pool of serious players who approach the format competitively."

It seems clear that Steve approaches Type 1 with the aspirations of its becoming equally as professional and competitive as the better supported formats. I'm certain he recognizes the reality that this is not currently the case, but his arguments are made with this ideal as a foundation. It's true that if people don't take the format seriously, and don't play it as competitively as possible, then yes, it always will be the "casual format". It seems to me that Steve would simply like to see it grow into something more.

In essence, I doubt very much that you both disagree on the current reality - i.e., the format is currently comprised mainly of uncompetitive players who are more concerned with having fun than competing professionally. Arguing this is moot, because it's obvious. Steve's underlying assertion is that the format can and should evolve into serious competition on par with Standard or Extended, and that this would be a good thing. If you disagree with that, then argue what it should be, not what it currently is.

Regarding your final statements about the recent restrictions, I find it odd that you argue against the cards that were restricted because of Long on the basis that the deck could be prepared for and wasn't dominant, and yet call for Workshop's banning, when decks based around it have seen less prevalence in Top 8's than Long did. Workshop decks are good, but they are not format distorting.

[jawman16]

I guess I should have been more specific as to my thoughts on the restrictions.  Long was good yes.  I played it for awhile and had success but eventually people prepared for it and it was not very effecttive game2-3.  I do think LED was the right choice but Burning Wish.  Long with 4 copies of Burnign Wish is still a good deck but it is not nearly as explosive without the acceleration that LED provided.  Therefore I think that a restriction of LED alone woul have been fine.

I, like many, would love to see a professional type I league or at least one Championship tournament every year.  But with this said it does not change the fact that Type I is, as you say, a casual format and always will be.  I take the game very seriously but not so much that I get disturbed when I play against a sub-par deck or see an aggro deck win a tourney.  Often times I play these decks for fun and variety.  I enjoy to see different decks.  That is why i play Type I and not Type II where everyone is playing the same deck they foudn at StarCity the week before.  

Ive been playing this game for up to 7-8 years off and on and have seen many changes happen.  I just dont understand how people feel they have the right to place themselves on a pedastool in a format that is predominatly social in its roots.  Type I tournaments are a fun time to meet new people and share a game that we all love.  What fun is it to always play the same deck that involves very little interaction??  These are just my opinions though.  If you are a more serious player dont get offended by anything I say because I am speaking only on what I have observed.  Thanks for the discussion.

[Illuzion]

Quote (Eastman @ Dec. 06 2003,20:02)Most tournaments allow 5 proxies, and if you're not an asshole it isn't hard to borrow anything else you need.

Most?  In the past 6 months, I've played in California, Washington, Montana and Mississippi and I've yet to see a vintage tourney that allows proxies.  In fact, in the last several years, I haven't bumped into any vintage tourneys allowing proxies whatsoever.  Personally, I like it this way.

As for borrowing power... you don't have to be an "asshole" for this to prove difficult in certain locales.

[Ephraim]

Although Jawman has come across rather abrasively, I think I have to agree with his final conclusion.

Quote posted by Jawman16
I just dont understand how people feel they have the right to place themselves on a pedastool in a format that is predominatly social in its roots.

I take this attitude a step further, although I'm less vehement about it. Magic is a game. Games are social. I have difficulty understanding how people can take so seriously a pastime that is predominantly social in origin. You might make an argument that because modern Magic has evolved to the point where people can play it professionally, it is not strictly a game. However, even at that, it is not like poker, a game that was built around money and gambling. The ability to win rewards for successful gameplay is an artificial addition that I feel detracts from Magic.

To illustrate, in my efforts to get into Standard, I have been raked up one side and down the other for my insistence on playing "substandard" decks. To make use of WotC's player classifications, I'm a Johnny/Spike. I enjoy winning, but if I can't do it on my terms, it isn't worth doing. This doesn't mean that I take the game less seriously than other people - merely that my focus is different. I think that all of Magic would benefit from a swing in the demographics toward people who play for fun, rather than people who play only to win. In this, I suppose I have exactly the opposite attitude from that espoused by Smennen.

[Razvan]

Quote Magic is a game. Games are social.

Soccer and Hockey are games too. So why are (especially in hockey), players ready to die for their sport?

If it's all just social?

You have to understand that there's several levels of this. At the highest-level tournaments, people aren't there for their social quotient. As you go down, you'll find less competition, and more and more "social" behaviour.

Quote  I enjoy winning, but if I can't do it on my terms, it isn't worth doing

I said that too, when I was losing. I didn't when I was winning.

I wouldn't cheat to win, and any victory that's dishonest is a hollow one. But being competitive is NOT wrong.

Steve M. is a bit harsh when it comes to things like this. He's a hardcore competitor at heart. That's his gig, and that's fine, he can be however he bloody well likes.

If you have too many bleeding-hearts... it's gonna suck.

[Toad]

Quote (jawman16 @ Dec. 07 2003,04:36)B.) You are disillusioned as to what type I "really" is.  Type I will never be close to type II in organization.  There will never be a PTQ for TI.  Type I is not how to sideboard in the Stax v. Hulk matchup.  It is not about hours of playtesting to see if a 5 fetchland base is better then a 4.  Type I is, and always will be, local tournaments where people use creatures, yes they still exist, or other fun cards to enjoy a game of INTERACTION.  A game between two people.

This really depends on which kind of player you are, Timmy, Spike or Johnny. The way I enjoy Magic is about how to sideboard in the Stax vs. Hulk matchup, and to see if 5 fetchlands is better than 4. It's been more than a year since I have not played Magic with Casual decks, even with friends. The only creatures I've been using lately are Goblin Welder, Metalworkers, Xantid Swarms and soldier tokens. I often play Magic during the week ends with my friends. I play Keeper, wMUD and Long. They play Keeper, Vengeur Masqué, Landstill, Stacker, etc. We have a competitive approach of Magic even when we play for Fun. Of course, we don't have winning in mind here, but I can't imagine me playing with Green fatties. Steven has the same approach I have. We work together on deck with Competition and Tournament winning in mind. There are really 2 world which are often mutually exclusive in Magic, and things can be the same in T1. Personally, I really don't like the first rounds of every tournaments, when you can face random players with random decks. Why? Because I don't find it interesting. Even if he's playing with a nicely built deck. Things i appreciate the most in Magic are Control mirrors, because they are really skilled dependant. Mindlessly tapping mana to drop creatures and swing with them is not what I want to do. And even if I only play strong Competitive decks with friends, Magic is still a game of interaction. Against Keeper with Long, I don't plan on winning on turn 1 anyways.

Quote (jawman16 @ Dec. 07 2003,04:36)Also if they think chrome mox is fast mana they obviously are bed partners with some Stax players b/c there is absolutly no reason why Workshop is unrestricted.  Its ridiculous.  The card needs to bite the dust, period.

I already have posted my thoughts on that lots of times, so I won't be long. Chrome Mox is restricted because it's free mana artifact that helps Combo. Workshop is not restricted because it uses a land drop and has a significant drawback (artifact mana, which prevents it from being used in a Combo deck). Furthermore, Workshop decks are not dominant, and will probably never be. You really can't compare Mishra's Workshop and Chrome Mox.  Dark Ritual is intrinsicly more powerful than Workshop, because it suffers no drawback and is a Combo helper.

[jawman16]

@Toad.  I understand where you are coming from and what you do for the game is great but I am trying to represent the majority of players in our format.  These are the people who do not own power or many of the other cards needed to make a keeper deck, or a stax deck.  They are just as much a part of Type I as we, the powered players, are.  When the average player sits down for a game they would like to win yes but it is not the most important thing to them.  They want to have fun.  Tournaments are different but on a friday night at my friends house I dont want to play a keeper mirror or even worse a tog mirror.  I want to enjoy the game.  Now if you enjoy the things that you have talked about on a regular basis then more power to you but the majority of type oners play the game for fun.  Whatever that word means to them.  And to most it is about enjoying a social/competitive activity between friends.  Not playtesting a single change in a mana base for hours on end.

[jazzy kat]

Do people take this game too seriously? Probably, maybe I am one of them but either way, I don't care. Unfortunatly, I spent too much money on my power wrt my financial resources and made too many sacrifices (not using my money for other things) to be happy when I lose at a tournament.

If I am at a tourney and I play you and you have a "bad deck" I beat you, appreciate your originality and move on. If you have a "good" deck then I beat you and move on. I don't give a shit if you play island.dec at a tourney, I am not going to say you are bad or good, cause I don't care. I want to win.
 
However, when I am not playing for money, I play some of the most asstastic decks in the world. I love playing with the old cards, especially ones that we have deemed "bad" i.e. living artifact, island of wak wak etc. I have to giggle when I use bad cards in ways that make people infuriated (multiple living artifacts on their moxes, when I have juzam out  )
. But I still try to use my brain to win with different and obscure cards that I threw in a deck. Which brings me to why I play casual: to mentally engage myself (the most important part) and to mise every last bit of my skill by playing without stupid mistakes and improving myself.


EDIT: WRT workshops, are they broken? I think so.
Are people winning with them that much? We should do some statistical analysis to see the percentages vs. the rest of the field. If they are much higher than all the other decks then there is probably a problem. Otherwise don't worry about it.
As of now, I haven't seen the statistics of win vs. # played so I don't know yet.

[Garth One Eye]

@ Razvan:

You really can't compare a CCG with a contact sport...  If the day ever comes when Magic players throw down their cards and duke it out, it's over for society as we know it...  

@ Jawman:

I get what you're saying.  I think it's an individuals choice as to where and who they want to pay.  I really don't enjoy playing with hard core "Spikes" because I love the game too much.  I like to hav FUN first and foremost, and yes, winning is fun, but not at the expense of bringing in the same tired net decks in every week.

   said it best when he classified a lot of Type I players (myself included) as "casual Type I"
 
That's part of the beauty of Magic, as it can support all three (or a mixture of all 3) archtypes: Timmy, Johnny, Spike...

[Mox Monkey]

I think in this game, we each choose our own level of involvement. If the amount of time spent playtesting is too much for your average player, then so be it. with that said, i do no think you could fault a person for wanting to play against a field of players with similar motives, skill, and commitment. Most of us here in TMD put an above-average amount of effort into perfecting our gameplay (or instead of reading posts we would be curing cancer or something) and I think that we are entitled to be able to compete with players who share our love of the game. for an example, i competed in a Black Lotus tourney a month or two ago (8 rounds breaking to the top 8) and within the first 4 rounds I:
1. Had to Explain TWICE why standstill's card draw resolves  
    before the spell that triggers it.
2. Had someone call a judge because i used flooded strand to
    get a dual land.
3. Played against both an elf and sliver (w/ no counters) deck deck
4. Had someone call a judge (and engage in a 15 minute argument) because I told him that Basalt Monolith had eratta preventing it from Looping infin. when he played a power artifact on it.  

I dont think that steve was meaning to be stuck up or elitist by wanting to find a group of GOOD players to spend his time with, and i agree that there is a tiome and a place for everything. if these occurances had happened at FNM, i would not have been annoyed by them, FNM is all for the love of fun and the game, but in a big tourney with people coming from all over Texas to compete, i expect a certain level of seriousness and competition. If the whole tourney had been like the top 8, we would all have leared alot more and I would have been alot prouder to be able to say I Top 8'd.  

Just my 2 1/2 cents...

[Razvan]

Quote You really can't compare a CCG with a contact sport...  If the day ever comes when Magic players throw down their cards and duke it out, it's over for society as we know it...

It would be funny, but no, that wasn't my point.

There's people that play hockey for fun... no checks, no slapshots, no wrist-shot zingers... essentially how you would play if you were playing with girls, or new players. (not to discriminate against girls, but you shouldn't body-check them).

Then there's the competitive hockey, where all's for keeps. It's still fun, just... well, there's no crying.

That was the point. The level difference.

Same goes for magic.

edit: incidentally, I played hockey a few times with one of the women from Canada's Olympic Hockey team (she's married to one of the guys that plays with us)... and she taught us all the meaning of being utterly outplayed... we just stood around while she did the craziest moves you can imagine... so maybe... who knows?

[BreathWeapon]

No matter what you do in life, you will always have two types of people. The individuals who have the knowledge, desire and understanding to excel at anything they choose ... and the patzers that will hold them in contempt for it. Thats the true misfortune that all Athletes must accept within their chosen sport, the ridicule of the casual player.

I really do think this chalks up to Freudian Penis Envy and it really is sad. Everybody complains that Pro-Athletes are paid ridiculous amounts of money, but yearn to be one themselves. Did it ever occur to you that they can do something you can't ... and thats what warrants their reward? To a lesser degree, the same holds true in Magic. I find these comments are most often made by "Lesser Intellectuals" who have no attachments to the non-mental sports spectrums, i.e., short, scrawny, stupid people or fat malcontents.

[Garth One Eye]

@ Razvan:

Sorry about the misunderstanding;  perhaps a better example and to stay on topic point would be to compare a casual game of Chess (no clock, relaxed atmosphere) to competitive Chess (like on ESPN 2).  Magic has both Tournament and Casual play, it all depends on what floats your boat.  

[Triple_S]

Jawman:

There was a t1 championship, it was at GenCon this year and featured a very diverse t8.  The search feature here is t3ch.

[Ephraim]

@BreathWeapon:

I would hardly say that I hold competetive players in contempt. I don't experience the appeal of competition and victory at all costs, but I can well understand where it comes from. Certainly, my level of dedication to competetive gameplay is less than most of the people here at The Mana Drain.

I am neither fat, scrawny, nor stupid, but I enjoy both casual sports and casual Magic more than I enjoy the more competetive versions. I play to win, but it is not my ultimate goal. In Magic, I would rather lose creatively than win uncreatively. This is my preference. I impose restrictions upon myself ("I will not play a deck that is too similar to the current trends") and do the best I can within those restrictions. It provides a greater challenge and fuels my desire to be creative. I win fewer games, and while I would certainly agree that this makes me less competetive, I don't think it's fair to describe me as being not serious about the game or as a "Lesser Intellectual"

[Riggy]

@Ephraim

Quote In Magic, I would rather lose creatively than win uncreatively.

The best part about Type I is that creativity is rampant. Innovation is a must b/c certain decks do tend to dominate the format. I play in a heavy combo meta, so within a week or two or Mirrodin's release, I found that a welder deck with Pentavus and Mindslaver could do wonders (pentavus feeds slaver so well).

A few weeks after that, I read threads about slaver.dec and was pleased to see that many of my thoughts and ideas were present in decks being formulated by more advanced players. People around the world get to work with (almost) every resource that has ever been printed. There's nothing to say that creativity means you'll lose. It just forces your opponents to be creative in their responses. Slaving a tog player and dropping their hand and graveyard to tog and then not swinging is pretty darn funny. People went into the tournament laughing at my deck, and left laughing at what my deck could do, and thinking hard about what to do the next week.

Creativity means nothing though if you're not a good player.  

@BreathWeapon

I'm not sure this is Freudian Penis Envy so much as someone getting in over his/her head and finding him/herself overwhelmed. About 8 months ago, I made the change from being a casual player to being a competitive player so I can kind of relate. You either step up and be both creative and competitive, or you go back to playing green fatties.

[Ephraim]

@ Riggy:

Alas, cost is by far the biggest barrier to my entry into competetive Type I. I play a little of competetive Type II a little of competetive limited. Creativity in limited is hard, since your options are limited, but in my Type II decks, I will go out of my way to play a rogue or budget variant of a current favourite, just to see what I can do with it. I'm I'm playing "Type I", casual is all that I can afford, in terms of both time and money.

[Cyber_Sophist]

"I really do think this chalks up to Freudian Penis Envy and it really is sad. Everybody complains that Pro-Athletes are paid ridiculous amounts of money, but yearn to be one themselves. Did it ever occur to you that they can do something you can't ... and thats what warrants their reward?"

Well, pro-football player's may be able to do something I can't but I can also speak a coherent sentence, something some of them may not be able to do, yet I am not paid millions for this amazing talent.
What I'm trying to say is that peoples beef about the money paid to athletes is not so much Penis Envy as a problem with the fact that the athletes particular ability is so respected and well rewarded while ability in say, academia, is not. This is in addition to the fact that its criminal for ANYONE to be making millions of dollars while other people are homeless and living on the streets.

[Luk5000]

WOW!

I have never seen so much whining on this site.  There is a whole lot of bitching going on.  What are you asking or demanding for here?  Mabye Zherb shouldn't have made the TMD user category so he wouldn't have to listen to so much goddam complaining.

Anyway, I think Mtg is a fun as hell game and I personally am glad that there are people who put a lot of time into it.  Hell if they feel like testing a lot to make good decks that win more power to them.  They sure will kick your whiny arse.

Luk5000

ps: Crazy Con 2 was played recently and there was a very diverse top seat.  You should take a look.

[jawman16]

Wow.  I didnt know my comments would get people so riled up.  

Quote  really do think this chalks up to Freudian Penis Envy and it really is sad. Everybody complains that Pro-Athletes are paid ridiculous amounts of money, but yearn to be one themselves. Did it ever occur to you that they can do something you can't ... and thats what warrants their reward? To a lesser degree, the same holds true in Magic. I find these comments are most often made by "Lesser Intellectuals" who have no attachments to the non-mental sports spectrums, i.e., short, scrawny, stupid people or fat malcontents.

In response to this I must say a few things. A.) I am 18 and was a 3 year letter winner in division I high school football.  I can run a marathon competivly.  So any more thoughts on my mental and physical toughness???

I will say again that I do not have a problem with the players who want to playtest for hours upon end.  Thats great.  But when all you do is worry about how you are going to reach a fundamental turn 1 I believe you are missing out on much of what the game has to offer.  There are so many opprotunities to enjoy the game outside of a lotus, workshop, sphere, metal worker opening.  

I am a competitive player myself.  I love to play this game and I love to win.  I like many of you get angry sometimes when I loose a match I should never loose.  I like most MD'ers regularly read up on the latest changes in the format.  But in no way do I feel the need to copy every single thing I see.  In no way to feel insulted when I play against a green deck.  Hell, I play a Verdant Force deck that is very fast.  Is it the greatest deck in the world???  Of course not.  Does it loose to most tier 1 decks??  Of course.  But the fun i have off a second turn verdant force with deranged hermit back up is awesome.  

I dont know why every seems to think I was picking on Steve.  I have much respect for him as a player and deck designer.  I have been on the receiving end of his decks and have much respect for him as a player.  This said I disagree with a lot of his idealistic statements about the format.  But guess what???  It's just that.  Disagreement on opinions.  Its not law.  Its my theories on how I enjoy the game vs. the more serious one.

If I ever get around to going to a origins, gencon tournament I will probably devote a good amount of hours to paytesting but until I need to I see no reason to waste my time (in my eyes,to some its not a waste) when I can have 7/7 green creatures shitting out 1/1's every turn.

Quote Alas, cost is by far the biggest barrier to my entry into competetive Type I

 This is the one truth above all else.  Until power is under $50, type I will never have a set metagame like standard does.  This is a fact.  As some of you pointed out in earlier threads.  There is variety out there and I think that is what makes the format so much fun.

[Smmenen]

Quote (Triple_S @ Dec. 08 2003,12:14)Jawman:

There was a t1 championship, it was at GenCon this year and featured a very diverse t8.  The search feature here is t3ch.

About that search feature - this entire discussion and debate has been had in SEVERAL threads before so I refuse to engage in it - look in the Community and Rumors forum last month.

If you want to play casual, play casual - the DCI exists for one purpose: tournament rules.  It makes T1 policy for Tournaments.  yes, Tournaments.  It doesn't make t1 rules for casual players who play for fun.  You don't speak for the majority of type one players.  You speak from the perspective of your metagame - which I've played in before.  I have played you twice and in your store and it was one of the more under-developed t1 metagames.  My SCG article also dealt with this issue which said basically that issue in how certain metagames would "dry up" as the cost of growing type one.

Steve\n\n

[jawman16]

You are absolutly right about my local area.  It is very underdeveloped.  There is no question about it.  But there are good players none the less.  Jason Lanese??  I heard you had a little run in with him?  I heard you chickened out a challenge from him?  Then when you finally took him on with your 3 best decks to his you lost??  So yes is the Akron area the most powered type I metagame.  No.  But good players are there.  But I have played other places lately.  Cincy and a store in Pittsburgh for example.  I found basically the same thing holds true there as well.  The majority of the people there didnt have power and played pet decks.  Sure, later rounds I played the better decks but most of what I have said held true.  Granted, again these are only a few more places but I still believe Type I to be mainly played for fun.  
Let me be more specific on this.  Type I is not the DCI.  Type I is not "just" tournaments.  Type I is the ability to play with any card you ever want.  When you play a game at your friends house with Goblins of the Flarg it is a type I game.  You do not have to pay money and turn in some number to play this format.  Now if you are a Type I tournament player of course the game is not casual.  This is a whole different beast and should be treated as such.  No tournament ever should be casual and if you get pissed b/c you got romped upon then stick to having fun playing type I without the parameters of DCI rules.  
About the search engine.  I am well aware of how it works.  I have seen the many threads that resemble this one.  But I am a grunt at this website.  I cannot get my views across in those threads.  Hence the point of this one.

[Sytupal]

Obviously most players cannot afford power and/or there is none circulating in the area.  That is why proxy tournaments are starting to show up more and more.  These tournaments make Type 1 a competitive/casual format combined.  

     The casual aspect allows someone to go to a tournament with a rogue deck, something that is not listed on the internet, not in everyones heads as a OUTRAGEOUSLY good type 1 deck, and is certainly not something expected.
The tournament aspect of it allows you to put in cards you don't own that will improve the deck, have fun with your rogue deck, do well with it, and show people that type 1 isn't just about combo winters and decree of justice with force backup.  Winning or losing, type 1 is very tournament heavy and it's something to be accepted.  

     This may just be me, but when i decided to play almost solely type 1, i knew that tournaments would increase and deck competitiveness would also increase.  I knew this because of the power nine, because of oldschool control blue with force backup, because of suicide black, and because of all the other tournament decks out there.  

     All wizards/dci extended/type 2 tournaments aside, it always seemed that these formats would be less competitive and not as much fun.   The greatness that is type 1 compared to the other types is that in order to be the best you need to beat the best, whether that's players or netdecks, or local tournament champs.

    Casual play is you sitting at home with friends, casual play is you playing every cop maindeck in WW.  casual play is not sitting here on The Mana Drain saying that obviously people like variety and not always play the best decks everywhere.  - uhm. yes thank you, known, but a lot of the time it takes a hell of a lot of skill to play the "Best decks, which makes them fun"

     I came to The Mana Drain finding the best "heads" in the game of Magic, type 1 or 2, putting thoughts together and presenting decks that were the best.  Why are threads like this being brought up in a site like this?  If you don't enjoy this aspect of the game, don't point the finger at one person here, and don't expect to get good replies back on a subject such as this.

[Mage of Dreams]

Quote (not to discriminate against girls, but you shouldn't body-check them).

I'm not sure where your from but out here in California body-checking the girlies is a full time occupation!  

And now back to our regular scheduled thread.....

Steve does tend to come across in his writing as an arrogant jackass (in my humble opinion) but thats part of his charm. He also has a good grasp of tournament play. Overall he is a very polarizing writer, and a debate as to if this is good for the format would be an interesting one.
He is an excellent source as to what the current deck builds might look like in a given tourny. However if your looking for budget or rogue builds his articles are alot less helpful, so read his stuff accordingly.

Quote A.) Is it that hard to understand that people like variety??  People like fun??  People enjoy finding out if their own deck (something we see very little of ne more ie. netdecks) can actually win.  This is why not every single person is going to play Welder MUD every fucking week.  This leads to my next conclusion about the "way too serious type player"

This is a self defeating question, variety in decks come from players with various tastes, people who take the game serious are a part of that variety. Fun works the same way, just as you don't find his style fun others may not find casual games or decks fun.
At a card shop I used to hang at I always had my b/g/r land destruction-poison deck. After testing or tourney play with the serious decks the unwritten code was you had to play against the poison deck if you hadn't lost to it yet. It took almost a year but every reg. in the shop had a loss to it. It didn't matter how many times it lost, it was all about the inside joke that we had all lost once to a "fucking poison deck".
You can't find that fun everywhere but it was a great combo of serious play and fun stuff too. Another thing to keep in mind is that reading serious articles can help the rogue builder alot by showing what needs to be beaten.

Quote B.) You are disillusioned as to what type I "really" is.  Type I will never be close to type II in organization.  There will never be a PTQ for TI.  Type I is not how to sideboard in the Stax v. Hulk matchup.  It is not about hours of playtesting to see if a 5 fetchland base is better then a 4.  Type I is, and always will be, local tournaments where people use creatures, yes they still exist, or other fun cards to enjoy a game of INTERACTION.  A game between two people.  Type I in general has no set metagame (I hate that word) like Type II does and it never will.  Sure New England might be close to this ideal metagame but that is a very small area of players.  Not everyone can afford to make the ideal deck.  Thats why people play sub-optimal decks.

This is probably true and will remain so as long as the DCI is an organ of WotC, instead of an independant organization. However T1 and MTG in general is, in reality, whatever any given group of players make it. It varies from shop to shop, city to city, state to state, country to country. Actually T1 seems in many ways to most closely resemble Richard Garfield's original vision of the game. The unavailibility of cards because of rarity has been replaced by cost and or accesibility.
The optimal deck lists ect. are an illusion. Every deck will have bad matchups, and cards/combos that are "sub-optimal" can be pure gold in the right circumstance.
 But hey, some people think praying to invisible men in the sky is a good thing, who am I to judge.

Quote C.)As my last point alluded to, not everyone has a full playset of every card ever made.  I am the proud owner of a fullset of moxen, Timetwister and Ancestral.  That is a lot of money and I have no problem paying the money because it is an investment.  I will not pay $350-$400 for an Unlimited Black Lotus though.  That is ridiculous for ONE card.  Now if I, a person who is more then happy to spend over $100 of this game, am too cheap to buy a Lotus what do you think the avgerage player who doesn't have the option to buy power is going do about getting expensive cards???  Not everyone can afford to buy Workshops, Masks and Bazaars to make your Uber-Decks.  Therefore people make do with what they can afford.  Hence why people play something other than what you, the elitest type oner, thinks they should be playing.

I think it stands to reason that the audiance that they are targeting has these cards or are in an area where proxies are used. I mean hell, you don't read a manual on a Porsche and bitch they didn't mention your Volkswagon. You read the Volkswagon manual.
I agree that there is a lack of good budget/rogue articles, perhaps someone should take up the cause!!

I think I'll pass up on your WotC comments, all I know is that after reading so many posts on ban this and restrict that I for one am damn happy their running the show.

Quote On a closing note what would you say if they printed a card that read the following
3cc Sorcery. Draw 10-15 cards.  If any of those cards are still in your hand at end of turn, remove those cards still in your hand from the game.

I think it would have to read "at end of turn remove your hand from the game"
At first glance with a 3cc it would most likely be restricted (I agree with the current ban policy). I mean hell this makes Memory Jar look like Concentrate. A higher cc would definately be in order.

In the end remember, the variety that your calling for includes those elitists your talking about.

[jawman16]

Good points Mage of Dreams.  You beat me to the punch on the point that type I is whatever a specific area makes of it.  It is not a set format.  It is dependent on locale.  
       I have, as I said before, mad respect for the more advanced type I players.  They do great things to advance the knowledge on our game.  But sometimes I believe they ignore some groups of players.  But if they only want to focus on the powered/serious player then they have that right and should not have to differ from it.  
       The whole point of this thread was to voice some of my "opinions" on the game as I see it.  If you got offended along the way then you take things too personally.  If you think I am some noob who plays lame decks all the time then you've again misunderstood.  I just wanted to see whats others opinions were about the game.  This is the only place I can do that hence the decision.  So in closing I have made some observations to sum up this mess of a post.  
       Type I is what you want it be.  If you want to playtest and win every game you play, you can.  If you want to play silly decks you can do that also.  This is what makes MTG such a great game is that it grants us, the player, so many options.

[Smmenen]

Quote (jawman16 @ Dec. 09 2003,09:40)You are absolutly right about my local area.  It is very underdeveloped.  There is no question about it.  But there are good players none the less.  Jason Lanese??  I heard you had a little run in with him?  I heard you chickened out a challenge from him?  Then when you finally took him on with your 3 best decks to his you lost??  

As a factual matter i'd like to clear this up.  Jason split with my 2-4th best decks.  He played Stax, Reanimator, and his nether void deck (which he was playing with Vindicate.???)  I destroyed his Reanimator deck again and again and I split Spoils Mask and lost with Stax.  Specifically, I started out with Kevin's Crazy Stax, played one game and lost and concede.  Second, I played Spoils Mask and did very well with it - split against his void.  Then i played Dragon and pwned him repeatedly.  I didn't play long becuase it is heads above my other decks and I just wanted to see what he was playing.  Jason is decent but lacks what I have - good team-members and good test partners which you can focus and play against on a frequest basis.  BTW, Jason is ranked like 12th in the State, far below Kevin and Myself - and Ohio is a pretty shitty state for T1.

Type One is NOT about the ability to play whatever card.  That is called Casual.  Type One is a tournament format.  If you want to play with every card don't follow the banned list.  Type One is not a philosophy, its a format designed and managed for DCI play.

Steve\n\n

[Traveler]

I just don't get Smmenen's ideology.  Everything he's been complaining about in type 1 also occurs on a pro tour.

While type 1 has a large card pool, what can be played is dictated by limited print runs.  Everyone at a 110 person tournament doesn't have 4 bazaars to have had dragon as an option even if they determined it to be the correct metagame call.  They may be missing a timetwister and substitute in a suboptimal card.  This happens all the time on the tour.  Someone wants to play tog, but just has madness.  Further, they can't find that last logic so in goes an extra counterspell.  This is far more common in PTQs than in PTs, but it does occur.  Perhaps this is why a vindicate is in a nether void deck.

Second, Smmenen complains about pet decks constantly.  Zvi is known for playing turbo land.  I think Smmenen has to realize that people have play styles and the best deck on paper may not be the best deck in their hands.  Zvi is very good with turbo land.  For him, it is a good call.  This is also compounded by my first point that switching from keeper to dragon is a very expensive task, and requires a different view of the game.  Changing keeper to as close to teir 1 as you can get it may be some players best chance of winning as opposed to playing the 'best deck'.

Speaking of best decks, there are always people playing tier 2 and 3 decks at Pro Tours and especially PTQs.  There were lots of zombies at the last OnBC qualifiers.  This is a natural part of the metagame.  To expect all type 1 players to play the best decks or the top tier decks is ridiculous.  Why would type 1 players only play 2 or 3 'best decks' while every other format plays many decks?  The not so good decks exist as a result of the best decks.  They are the decks that own one of the best decks but lose horribly to one of the others.  A person makes a metagame call to run a certian teir 2 or 3 deck hoping for a metagame full of their best match up.

Finally, play skill and rogue decks are also an issue.  The guy on his first tour isn't going to win.  He has to know it, but he still shows up.  Its arrogant and rediclous to imply that people can't play an event if they want, even if their deck isn't good.  Final Fantasy in New Orleans did OK and the guy had a good time.  There is nothing wrong with that, and it is part of the metagame.  If TNT is dead, and someone wants to run it, its a rogue deck.  People don't test against it, and their answers aren't there for it anymore.  It gives the deck an edge which is why peope like to go rogue.  TNT winning now may be due to people not having tested against it.  That is a healthy metagame.

A metagame is never just 3 best decks.  OnBC proved that with the last GP won by a rogue hate deck.  A rogue hate deck is never the most powerful deck, and never will be a 'best deck'.  However, they emerge in metagames and keep them interesting.  Given time, that seemingly simple format would have been quite hard to predict as more hate decks emerged.  

I think dragon has had such success lately because people are so scared of long.  They hated long out but forgot about the dragon.  The Jan 1st metagame will see a weakening of dragon as more hate is thrown its way.  Then it will no longer be a 'best deck' despite perhaps having the most raw power on paper.  It will be a teir 2 deck that is played when people think the meta has forgotten about the dragon.

I feel a philosophy about a type 1 metagame and player base that requires it to be more cometitive and rigid than even the pro tour is flawed.

[Razvan]

@Mage of Dreams:

Quote I'm not sure where your from but out here in California body-checking the girlies is a full time occupation!

Body-checking, not body checking! There's a subtle, but important difference. If you body-check a girl, she probably won't let you body check her  .

--

I think steve mentionned at some point how the meta game is a mess, and he would feel confident taking ICT into a tournament   . First of all, that's confidence.

Second of all, I love it like this. It takes more skill to build the decks (how do you sideboard, or predict the hate?)... it takes more skill to play, it's more dynamic...

Iz good!