MaRo on VintageI think he did a decent job of editing his...

[thefram]

MaRo on Vintage

I think he did a decent job of editing his old article answer most of the questions floating around this forum.

-thefram

[Smash]

Its the same as his last article 6 months ago, with like 3 new lines in there.


Wow,   has reached   quality.

However, I wish people here would understand

Quote
I think I summed up this point well, but let me stress that proxies is another dead end for Type I crusaders. To be blunt yet again, it just ain’t going to happen. (And for those English majors that cringe when I use the word “ain’t”? Bwah ha ha ha.)

In summary, both reprinting Type 1 cards and allowing proxies fly in the face of Wizards’ other responsibilities. I am trying today to find areas for discussion. And elsewhere, I will present opportunities to do so. But not here. Neither reprinting nor proxies are open for debate.

Every week this comes up for debate. Its not happening, so give up.\n\n

[Jakedasnake]

I think he did an okay job. He basically answered most of the questions the Type 1 community had. Not great, but acceptable.

[rozetta]

Notice his chart indicating the popularity based on number of tournaments in each format stops in 2001? It's 2003 now, and in the past 2 years, the popularity of Type 1 has surged dramatically, especially in terms of the number of tourmanents. You only need look at the "upcoming events" calendar on this site to see how many tournaments occur per month. And that list doesn't include all of them (we have 1 or 2 Type 1 tournaments here per month with a participation of about 30 people, for instance).

Also, I've noticed the number of people attending these tournaments has been rising. As an example, there are generally always more people attending type 1 tournaments here than (non-Pro Qualifier/Grand Prix/whatever) type 2 or extended events - often twice the amount. Look at central Europe where they have monthly tournaments in Germany with almost 100 people, in Spain with over 200 people, etc. And in the US, there are often tournaments pulling in over 100 people.

Why was this data not included in the new article?

I know there are a lot of different opinions about having "PTQ" style Type 1 events, and whatever I or anyone else says won't change those opinions. How I see it, the same people who show up and borrow cards to play in our type 1 tournaments are the same people who show up and borrow cards to play in extended "PTQ" events and type 2 events, in many cases. These would undoubtedly be the same people who would do the same thing if there were Type 1 events of that status. Furthermore, people's interest in our format would be reinforced and some people who have not yet chosen to acquire cards to play it would have an incentive to do so, and those who only "dabble" might take it more seriously and go to the level of acquiring more serious cards.

In my opinion, the subject was, again, glossed over. Mark had only one new thing to add to this old data:

Quote I got slammed a bit for that last parenthetical sentence. Many Type I players feel that the downward slide is the effect of Wizards not supporting the format, not the cause.

It's a real shame that they are trying to avoid the point here.

[Dr. Sylvan]

And here I was expecting him to explain what niche R&D saw for the format. Too bad; maybe next time.

For an article this community is going to take very seriously for a long time, I felt quite underwhelmed. What we got was a "still no reprints" statement and a request to email him survey responses. I'm really counting on Randy's article now, and maybe some kind of Feature by a non-regular writer like Forsythe's B&R mailbag column. MaRo really dropped the ball by rehashing an old article with a few lines of statements saying "I'm still right".

[Elyas Machera]

The attitude he takes for this article just gives it a bad vibe.  The entire time I get the feeling that he thinks he is wasting his time writing about type 1.  Come on, He didn't even bother to write a new article.

At the same time, I'm not sure what I wanted.  Any attempt at a Metagame analysis would just get him flamed.  Any deck analysis would be even worse.  So what is he supposed to do?

I guess all that all I really want to see happen is for them to at least acknowledge the huge increase in non-sanctioned tournaments.
Also, an attempt to dispel some of the myths around type 1(such as the consistent 1st turn kill) would be very nice.

Well just have to wait and see what the rest of the week is like.


Edit: Dr. Sylvan posted while I was typing.
@Dr. Sylvan: You’re exactly right.  I want some info about R&D and how they did/are going to develop Type 1 cards.

[Bastian]

What did you expect from him? As you said a metagame analysis would be a nuisance since he really doesn't have any knowledge on that. The reprints issue is more than explained and I agree with them. As much as I'd love to see old cards reprinted that would be at the cost of the money people already invested in the game. Who knows what impact would it have for them to have the cards they paid hundreds for reprinted? Definitly not a good one.

Other than that he didn't explain at all the reason not to allow proxies and that he really didn't write an article from scratch, I agree with everything else he said.

[jhaggs]

I think all in all it was a pretty good article.  Going from almost no attention to having an entire week of T1 articles is very encouraging.  I thought Rosewater's peice was a sign that they are keeping an eye out for the format.  Hell, he even suggested that if we could demonstrate that more and more people are playing the format that they would consider spending more resources on it.  I thought this was very encouraging because it opens the door for future changes if interest is increased.

[jAcKiNaBoX]

the  real question is do type one players want r&d to spend more time on type one. i believe that it would eventualy turn type one into a powerd type two which is personaly not what i want to happen.

i thought the overall tone of the article was rather grim basicaly not saying anything new and the whole "recycled article" thing was pretty dissapointing

[cssamerican]

Quote Since this article was last posted, I tried my hand at designing some cards for Type I. The little experiment was called Mirrodin. I'm still not sure of the outcome, but the process proved quite interesting. It's quite the challenge to make cards that are relevant to a format as high-powered as Type I without creating bombs in Standard or Extended.

I do agree that it is tough to make cards for Type 1 that are not bombs in other formats. For example in Type 1 they could have made Troll Ascetic just cost GG, and only made it G to regenerate. It would have been really good, but we would not be crying that it was overpowered. In fact, a lot of people would probably be happy because it would probably help the budget player more than anything.

Quote 1.) Did Mirrodin change the Type I metagame? If so, how?
2.) What cards in particular are being played and which ones instigated change?
3.) Are the Mirrodin cards being played in Type I fun?
4.) Are the Mirrodin cards being played in Type I interesting to play?
5.) Would you like to see more sets designed with an eye towards Type I?

1.) No, not really...Before someone attemps to flame this answer, Long was killed by restrictions not Chalice of the Void. Budget was unable to place in top 8s with any regularity before the printing of Chalice of the Void.
2.) About the only cards that are really seeing play is Isochron Scepter and Chalice of the Void. And the latter is going to see a lot less play with Long gone from the enviroment. Even though it probably will remain in Workshop Prison decks forever. Am I missing any card that impacted the enviroment?
3.) Well, the Isochron Scepter could be classified as a fun card, I guess. Chalice of the Void is a very un-fun card, no matter how you look at it.(Oooooh...I just countered have your deck)
4.) Chalice of the Void is interesting in that it is another layer of thought that has to go in to deck construction, and any fun card is interesting to play.
5.) Yes...But if this is the best R&D can do it sucks.

Begin Rant
Here you got a guy who has a large impact on card design, and he by his own admission says the following statements.

Quote I still make no claim to understand the Type I metagame. But this time let me say something bolder. I do not believe I should be expected to know it.

Quote I tried my hand at designing some cards for Type I. The little experiment was called Mirrodin

Know how in the HELL, are you going to make good cards with Type 1 in mind when you even say you no nothing about Type 1, other than what cards are legal!

Quote If you care about Type I design, I strongly urge you to respond. I can only learn that which is taught to me.

Somebody please send this guy the link of TheManaDrain.com » Other Stuff » Fantasy Card Creation » TMD FCC Set v1.0
At least then we might get something half way decent.(In other words, maybe they can get some good ideas from that set)

And what pisses me off the most about this article is this guy's attitude. He didn't even write a new article. He thinks he did us a favor by printing Mirrodin. He beleives he should not have to know anything about the Type 1 metagme, and he shows how much he cares about the Type 1 community when he is asking us what cards in his beloved set were freak'n popular. Hell, if I was proud of a set that I designed with a specific format in mind I would not have to ask my readers which if any of the 306 cards were good cards and fit well in the enviroment. Why? Because I would do some damn research before I created the set, and I would have did some follow up research to find out if all my assumptions on how cards would interact in the enviroment panned out.
Rant Over!

[pernicious dude]

Quote but let me stress that proxies is another dead end for Type I crusaders. To be blunt yet again, it just ain?t going to happen.

Every so often in Hadley, we discuss doing our own sanctioning.
There's enough of a scene in the Northeast to support it,
with rankings and all,
and then we could allow five proxies.
Maybe it's time.

[Milton]

Take a minute to ask yourself this one question!

What do you want from Wizards?

-More playable cards?  How about Mindslaver?  Chrome Mox?  Scepter?  Glided Lotus?  Spoils?  The blue card drawer with the artifact discard that I forget the name of?  Challice of the Void?  That's seven cards that I saw in play at one time or another at yesterday's tournament.  Seven in the most recent set.  Compare that to any other recent set in regards to playability and you have a fine T1 set.

-More high-profile tournaments?  What about GenCon?  Origins?  We have very high profile tournaments in Eurpoe now.  Tournaments are increasing in number and attendence.  And MaRo really can't do anything about that.  It's about us, our little community creating a buz and developing interest.

-Proxies?  Ain't gonna happen.  Let's find a way to move on from this.  Become a better collector.  Invest in your game, hobby, whatever you want to call it.  Teams can share power.  There are ways to design decks based on available card pool.  Or, sanction your own tournaments and allow proxies.  

-Reprints?  Ain't gonna happen either.  Move on.

-Less expensive power?  MaRo has no control over the secondary market.  Not his fault.

-Extensive deck analysis from MaRo?  Why would you want that?  That's what you are here for, isn't it?  That's why you playtest and develop and network ideas.  MaRo can't give you that.

-More attention to our format?  Fine, that's what we are getting.  How is this bad?  Why criticize Wizards for this?  The truth is that MaRo writes an article, basically stumbles over himself saying he is sorry for misconceptions and many in our community bash the shit out of him.  Why?  

So, for everyone who is bitchin' about MaRo and Wizards ignoring us, answer me:  What the hell do you want?\n\n

[RidiculousHat]

Quote (cssamerican @ Dec. 15 2003,13:15)For example in Type 1 they could have made Troll Ascetic just cost GG, and only made it G to regenerate. It would have been really good, but we would not be crying that it was overpowered.

Imagine that in type 2 or extended.  That would be utterly ridiculous.  It's really hard to make a creature good enough for t1 that's not hideous in other formats.

Quote 1.) No, not really...Before someone attemps to flame this answer, Long was killed by restrictions not Chalice of the Void. Budget was unable to place in top 8s with any regularity before the printing of Chalice of the Void.

Mirrodin created Slaver.dec, Spoils Mask, Chronic and made Stacker 3 work.  It also made every deck change based on Chalice to some degree.  Keep in mind also that Long is still legal as we speak and has been for the past couple months that Mirrodin has been usable.  It hasn't top 8'ed anywhere, though, mostly due to Chalice.

Quote 2.) About the only cards that are really seeing play is Isochron Scepter and Chalice of the Void. And the latter is going to see a lot less play with Long gone from the enviroment. Even though it probably will remain in Workshop Prison decks forever. Am I missing any card that impacted the enviroment?

Slaver?  Spoils of the Vault?

Quote 5.) Yes...But if this is the best R&D can do it sucks.

Keep in mind that type 1 still doesn't make them any money.  They're supposed to design for the relevant PT and standard formats-- limited, block, extended, etcetera.  And you glossed over multiple cards that have changed the environment-- this is the best they've done in a while.  They did type 1 a favor by printing the powerful cards that they did when they certainly didn't have to.  The only other set to really shake up the environment like this recently is Scourge and that's just because storm is fundamentally broken.

Quote Here you got a guy who has a large impact on card design, and he by his own admission says the following statements.

Quote I still make no claim to understand the Type I metagame. But this time let me say something bolder. I do not believe I should be expected to know it.

Quote I tried my hand at designing some cards for Type I. The little experiment was called Mirrodin

Know how in the HELL, are you going to make good cards with Type 1 in mind when you even say you no nothing about Type 1, other than what cards are legal!

The metagame is different from the format.  He's trying to make cards that are powerful enough to affect even the oldest cards and it's not too hard to see that a Chalice for zero shuts out moxen, among other things.

Quote And what pisses me off the most about this article is this guy's attitude. He didn't even write a new article. He thinks he did us a favor by printing Mirrodin. He beleives he should not have to know anything about the Type 1 metagme, and he shows how much he cares about the Type 1 community when he is asking us what cards in his beloved set were freak'n popular.

His job is not to care about this community.  His job is to make cards that will keep the game selling.  Did you even read why he shouldn't have to know every facet of type 1?  Keep in mind that type 1 players spend the least amount of money on the game after the initial secondary market investment.  It makes little difference to Wizards if the type 1 community is happy due to the negligible cash difference, but if they make a set that doesn't sell to your average FNMer, heads will roll.

Quote Hell, if I was proud of a set that I designed with a specific format in mind I would not have to ask my readers which if any of the 306 cards were good cards and fit well in the enviroment. Why? Because I would do some damn research before I created the set, and I would have did some follow up research to find out if all my assumptions on how cards would interact in the enviroment panned out.

He did research on type 2 and extended-- the bannings for extended came out a month after the PT and show proper understanding of that format.  Notice, though, that the people who design the cards are not the ones who break them.  Who would've imagined that Sutured Ghoul would've been in a combo deck that kills on turn 2?  Who would've figured in development that Worldgorger Dragon would be ridiculously broken?  When you're working with thousands of cards and you're not supposed to know the metagame, there's no way you can possibly figure out what's going to be ridiculous.

Also, I think I should just add this on-- proxies definitely do not belong in DCI tournaments.  If they allow you to make proxies, they are basically telling you that it's okay not to buy their cards.  If you don't have to buy the cards and you can just proxy up whatever you want, you are giving them no money whatsoever.  If everyone proxies just because it's cheaper and easier, Magic would go under.  That's not really what anyone wants.  And if they only allow proxying of certain expensive cards, the secondary market would lose thousands because the cards they'd paid $300 for would now be worth $30.  Every dealer with type 1 cards would lose a large amount of money and there's no reason for Wizards to make them.

[Traveler]

Many top decks are based on cards that have been released in the last 2 years.  I think there is plenty of new cards impacting type 1 for them to not need to design with an eye towards the format.  

1. Hulk/gat  only exists because of psychatog.
2. dragon obviously only exists because of worldgorger.
3. long.dec used storm cards and burning wish.
4. tps also uses storm
5. madness is odyssey block

Other decks like keeper have incorporated new cards into them, but these 5 decks would not exist in any form without the past 2 years of sets.  I think type 1 players are too hard on Wizards.  If they design cards for type 1, you get chalice which no one seems to like.  They should just keep doing what they do, and let type 1 abuse their mistakes.  

I suppose that is why type 1 is a sore spot for r&d.  The top decks showcase their errors.

[Valmeki]

Quote Here you got a guy who has a large impact on card design, and he by his own admission says the following statements.

Quote I still make no claim to understand the Type I metagame. But this time let me say something bolder. I do not believe I should be expected to know it.

Quote I tried my hand at designing some cards for Type I. The little experiment was called Mirrodin

Know how in the HELL, are you going to make good cards with Type 1 in mind when you even say you no nothing about Type 1, other than what cards are legal!

A valid point.

Quote It's really hard to make a creature good enough for t1 that's not hideous in other formats.

Gorilla Shaman comes to mind.

Quote What do you want from Wizards?

I guess:
recognition of the format as clearly the most interesting in magic
and then an attempt to explain why
obviously not from someone who doesn't play it

it would seem that
-basically-
critical mass of good cards > deliberate, balanced game design

[Frost]

-More playable cards?  How about Mindslaver?  Chrome Mox?  Scepter?  Glided Lotus?  Spoils?  The blue card drawer with the artifact discard that I forget the name of?  Challice of the Void?  That's seven cards that I saw in play at one time or another at yesterday's tournament.  Seven in the most recent set.  Compare that to any other recent set in regards to playability and you have a fine T1 set.

Actually, Milton the number at Dreamer's was higher.  There were people there who were running Gliimervoid, Pyrite Spellbomb and that new Uktabi Oragutan from Mirrodin.  Not to mention Goblin Charbelcher being played Friday night.

Personally, I think Wizards has done a better job concerning Type 1 than they have in the past.  And they are getting better.  They are inviting us to show them our interest.  They need concrete evidence in the way of DCI sanctioned tournaments, not proxy tournaments.  MaRo is asking for our opinions as to which cards are working.  To me this shows that the designers are interested in the types of cards that we want to see and play with.  Without tournament decklists (like they get for extended, block and Type 2) this is the only way for them to know.  Rather than criticize them constantly (and MaRo in particular) for not knowing I suggest everyone e-mail them to let them know what did work, what didn't work and what we want to see.

[Raziel]

Truth is I rarely go to Wizards or Starcitygames to read their articles. But I was interested enought to go and read this one.
He says it all right here.

Quote This category while Type 1’s biggest obstacle is also Type 1’s best opportunity. If there is in fact an untapped Vintage crowd out there, let us know. Ask your local tournament organizer to sanction Type 1 and Type 1.5 events. While playing lots of Type 1 on Apprentice means very little to us, an upswing of Type 1 play on the local level will give us the message that there is untapped potential in the format. Talking about how you play is good. Showing us that you play is even better.

This a quote from    himself. There looking at the bottom line. Go out and ask your local stores to hold Sanctioned T1 tournaments. As fun as proxy events are, they don't show up in the weekly results sent to Wizards. Sure you'll never see Proxies printed or another CE set. But one could someday see T1 Championship decks printed with gold borders if we all go out and support Sanctioned events. Just something I've been saying for a long time. And believe me it's not easy. I can't get 8 people to show up for the Matchplay (S.F. Neutralground) events.

[Ephraim]

Quote Quote  

Quote What do you want from Wizards?

I guess:
recognition of the format as clearly the most interesting in magic

A little bit overzealous, there, aren't you? I'd argue for casual as the most interesting format in magic. It's like T1, but without the prerequisite: "has access to $1000+ worth of cards" to be any fun.

I totally sympathize with MaRo's position. How many hours a week do really serious players spend analyzing the type I metagame? MaRo has an obligation to his employer to spend most of his time analyzing the metagames of the formats that actually make WotC money.  Furthermore, all of MaRo's time can't be spent analyzing metagames, he then has to take all of that information and integrate it into designs for new sets. He has to set priorities and I wholeheartedly agree that if something has to take a back seat, it should be Type I. Discussion over MaRo's article seems to have established that it wouldn't be possible to really knock the power off its throne. So from the point of view of somebody who doesn't own any power or play Type I competetively, I think WotC has the right idea. They can't fix the problem with Type I, so better to leave it alone and concentrate on minimizing the mistakes they make in formats that do regularly evolve (which helps to flush out past mistakes)

[BrokenDeck]

Everyone says that type one is ignored because it generates no revenue for Wizards.  Why should it be like that?   Imagine if they just printed a couple of cards like this:

3G
Sorcery
Destroy all non-basic lands.

or:

1RR
Enchantment
Whenever a player plays an artifact, destroy target artifact that player controls.

Those kind of hate cards would have relatively little impact on type two (except for hurting affinity, which is too powerful either way for the format), but would impact type one greatly, and at the same time make budget more viable.  And at the same time, type one players would be buying more new cards, making WotC money.

[Ephraim]

Brokendeck, are you being facetious? I don't know about the second card you posted, but the first card you suggested already exists - it's called Ruination. I couldn't find anything matching the second card, but my searching resources are limited, at work.

[Goblin Headbanger]

I believe the tournaments in MaRo's chart were all sanctioned tournaments.  Sure, There are a lot of Type I tournaments going on, but how many are sanctioned?  How many don't allow five proxies?  I'm betting it would take a dramatic upswing in the number of sanctionable tournaments (no proxies) to generate any real interest in supporting the format.  I think that's made crystal clear by the "no reprints, no proxies" section of the article.  I guess my question is, how many no-proxy tournaments are going on?

[walking dude]

Quote Keep in mind that type 1 still doesn't make them any money.

That’s not actually true. I’m going to wind up buying 4 chalice. Given that there are around 75 rares in the set, some one is going to have to buy and crack open 300 packs of mirroden to sell me those chalices. Now, selling me chalice is not all they are going to due with those packs, but its still 32 worth of pack buying. If someone drafts once a week that’s a little bit less than a month of magic purchases. Plus, I’m going to buy more singles than just chalice. The singles market gets wizards more than you think. Drafters draft as much as they do because they know they can recoup a lot of their costs selling their cards on the singles market. The drafters may get credit for the sales but from an economic standpoint a non negligible about of driving force is in the singles market. Type 1 players are probably a low % of the total singles market, but per person I suspect they buy a decent number of cards.

[Dr. Sylvan]

We are also the loudest bunch of whiners in the entire Magic community, and have opinions on everything up to and including sliced bread. Seriously, I think that's why we're getting increased attention, along with the increased pure number of players. We just make so much noise that they can't ignore us, especially since we have this tendency to write a disproportionate percentage of SCG articles and fill their email inboxes every week...it's like a few thousand people typing with caps lock on right into their brain. It's a good thing we've started to tell them they're doing a good job, because otherwise those poor unfortunates might've started to believe our bitching.

This just goes to show you that in real life, all you have to do is complain and things come your way. =)

[RidiculousHat]

Quote (walking dude @ Dec. 15 2003,16:08)

Quote Keep in mind that type 1 still doesn't make them any money.

That’s not actually true. I’m going to wind up buying 4 chalice. Given that there are around 75 rares in the set, some one is going to have to buy and crack open 300 packs of mirroden to sell me those chalices. Now, selling me chalice is not all they are going to due with those packs, but its still 32 worth of pack buying. If someone drafts once a week that’s a little bit less than a month of magic purchases. Plus, I’m going to buy more singles than just chalice. The singles market gets wizards more than you think. Drafters draft as much as they do because they know they can recoup a lot of their costs selling their cards on the singles market. The drafters may get credit for the sales but from an economic standpoint a non negligible about of driving force is in the singles market. Type 1 players are probably a low % of the total singles market, but per person I suspect they buy a decent number of cards.

I will agree that type 1 players buy some cards, but compare that to type 2 where people have to buy new decks every two years or block where singles must be purchased in large quantities every year.  It just doesn't make sense for them to market mainly to the type 1 crowd when type 2 is so much more profitable to them.  A type 1 card here or there isn't a problem, obviously-- that's what they've been doing recently and I see no problem with it.

[cssamerican]

I have to admit I did leave some cards out...But my point was before Mirrodin was released it was being bragged on that it was a set designed for Type 1. Now after its release it is still being bragged on as a Type 1 set, but other than Workshop based deck how many cards are useful? Then how many more cards is that than the past couple of sets? The reason I exlude Workshop based decks is because any set that has that many artifacts will have some good artifact cards even if they are overcosted when you can cast or weld the cards in play at such an accelerated rate. And I beleive this would have happened regardless of what format they had in mind when they designed the cards. Do not misunderstand me, I liked Mirrodin just as much as Scourge and Onslaught, but I do not like that Mirrodin is being advertised as "We threw you Type 1 players a bone" because I would venture to say Onslaught had more Type 1 cards than Mirrodin. The fetchlands alone will be remembered as having a bigger impact on Type 1 than anything in Mirrodin.

I guess what I am saying is...If you want to tout that your making cards for Type 1 thats fine, do some freak'n research, learn about the Type 1 metagame, and create some cards or effects that will really make a big splash in Type 1 and really shake things up. Wether its cards that make it easier for budget players to compete, or wether it is effects that can make a profound impact in the game. Either way I think to be able to tout something as a Type 1 set you need to create a couple amazing cards, a few good cards and a lot of playable cards. Not some overpriced artifacts that only Workshop decks can play, or a new version of an old card like Spoils of the Vault and call it a set designed with Type 1 in mind. Maybe I am wrong, but that is the way I feel about it.

[bebe]

You're wrong. Chalice of the Void and Isochron Scepter are not used exclusively in Workshop decks and Spoils although a reprint, is fantastic for budget combo. There are a number of other cards that we are looking at that might emerge as staples in few decks as well. Granted that Workshop decks gained a lot odf playable cards but it certainly needed the boost as TnT and Miud were having trouble. Oh yes, lets not forget the Charbelcher which is still waiting for the perfect setting.

[cssamerican]

bebe: In my first post post I gave all the credit to Chalice of the Void and Isochron Scepter as being the good cards in the set. I can't stress this enough I am not saying the set was bad...I am just saying I am getting annoyed by people saying what more do you want they threw Type 1 a bone with Mirrodin. Because I do not see how this set has a bigger impact than say...Onslaught.

[jpmeyer]

I told Maro in my email not to listen to Type 1 players.

[Mage of Dreams]

Quote I told Maro in my email not to listen to Type 1 players.

Thats possibly the best idea yet.

[RidiculousHat]

Quote (cssamerican @ Dec. 15 2003,17:53)I am just saying I am getting annoyed by people saying what more do you want they threw Type 1 a bone with Mirrodin. Because I do not see how this set has a bigger impact than say...Onslaught.

Uh, the cards are being played?

Onslaught did not create any major archetypes except for Goblins while Mirrodin did.  Belcher combo, Spoils Mask, Slaver.dec, Stacker 3, Chronic, etcetera-- all new archetypes.  I think it's hard to miss how Mirrodin has changed the format-- while it may not be as influential as Scourge, it certainly pushed the envelope.