I know most of you have probably heard most of the arguem...

[centroles]

I know most of you have probably heard most of the arguements both for and against the notion that vintage has a high barrier of entry and it's own growth is stifled by it. You probably already made up your minds on this so I won't press the issue and I kindly ask that you refrain in engaging in that particular debate here. There are plenty of other threads for such a discussion as the overwhelming majority do seem to express atleast some concern.

I'm curious to hear though, do you think vintage would be slower, more accessible and less comboish if the dci restricted the number of restricted cards per deck? Would this improve the format and make more decks and especially more budget decks viable? What is the right number of restricted cards per deck, three?, four?, five?

MaRo has promised that Wizards would increase the support for vintage if the reliance and need for power cards was lowered. And encouraging Wizards to design cheap and effective cards for all the colors that specifically assist budget decks (artifact hosers, nonbroken card drawers, and global artifact hate) hasn't been very effective in the past.

The reason for this post is the recent revelation that such a restriction by no means goes against precedence. The number of restricted cards playable per deck has been regulated in the past!

Maze of Dreams

Quote I'm not sure if you are aware that there is a precedent for this. Many players may not know that WotC has restricted the number of Restricted cards allowed in a deck before.

As a matter of fact there were slight tweaks to the play/draw rule. I ran across the actual info while doing research for my B/R list history (yes its ongoing but damn theres alot of holes in the info.)

These rules were imposed for AndCon '95, there were several changes to the B/R list in both T1 and T1.5 for this event and applied to both T1 and T1.5;

-----------------------------------------------------------
Experimental
Type 1 Super-Restricted
Tournament Format

A new class of cards is added, called Super-Restricted. Only one of each of these cards can be in a deck, and no more than four (4) Super-Restricted cards in total can be in a deck. In addition, at the beginning of a duel, each player must announce if they are using any of the Super-Restricted cards. If one player is, and the other player is not, the player without Super-Restricted cards automatically goes first.
Super-Restricted cards:

Ancestral Recall
Black Lotus
Channel
Chaos Orb
Falling Star
Time Walk
Timetwister
Mox Emerald
Mox Jet
Mox Ruby
Mox Sapphire
Mox Pearl

The Restricted list has the above cards removed, and the old-style Dual Lands added.

Charles Keith-Stanley              werewolf@wizards.com
Cyberspace Liaison                  liaison@wizards.com
Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Experimental
Type 1.5 Tournament Rules
for AndCon '95
Wed, 13 Sep 1995 16:28:37 -0700 (PDT)

Type 1.5 rules are the same as Type 1 except as modified below:


The following cards are moved from the restricted to the banned list:
Ali from Cairo (AN)
Ancestral Recall
Black Lotus
Channel
Chaos Orb
Demonic Tutor
Falling Star (LE)
Library of Alexandria (AN)
Maze of Ith (DK)
Mind Twist
Mox Emerald
Mox Jet
Mox Pearl
Mox Ruby
Mox Sapphire
Sol Ring
Timetwister
Time Walk
Wheel of Fortune

The following Ice Age cards are added to the restricted list:
Zuran Orb

The following Ice Age cards had been added to the restricted list, but were removed on Wednesday, 13 September 1995. These are no longer restricted:
Enduring Renewal
Jester's Cap
Jester's Mask
Zur's Weirding

``Summon Legend'' or ``Summon X Legend'' cards are no longer restricted to one per deck, however the rule of no more than four of any card in a deck still applies. Please note that only one of a particular ``Legend'' card may be in play at any time.


Nota Bene

These rules apply only to the tournament to be run at AndCon '95: no determination has yet been made about which (if any) Ice Age cards will be added to the regular Type I and Type II tournament rules.


Charles Keith-Stanley              werewolf@wizards.com
Cyberspace Liaison                  liaison@wizards.com
Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Just some history and perhaps some food for discussion.

Shawn

[foolinc]

Restricting the number of restricted cards would just make WelderMUD and Dragon Combo better since they don't need the restricted cards to get the job done.

[Crater Hellion]

honestly, it's been discussed a lot in the past, and the format becomes either
a. negligibly different or
b. way too similar to 1.5

it obviously depends completely on the # you decide upon, but it's most likely going to fall into one of these categories.

[Dante]

those rules were specifically for one tournament back in '95, not to the environment as a whole.

[centroles]

Don't look this over such a short term. Sure WelderMUD and Dragon might be powerful. But they're already the dominant decks in the environment anyways. If they prove abusive, they'll get clipped just like Long. And then, nonabusive budget variants of WelderMUD that utilize Ancient Tomb, and nonabusive Bazaarless variants of Dragon, utilizing Hermit Druid, would probably spring up.

[Crater Hellion]

It may seem cumbersome, but a much more effective plan would be a sort of "points system". say a dozen points per deck,
black lotus- 3 points
moxen - 2 point
mishra's workshop/bazaar- 2 points each
noble panther- 13 points

maybe the numbers are way off, but this seems more accurate than limiting the # of restricted cards

[Smash]

Or you can just leave a perfectly fine format alone, and either play a competitive deck or move to a crappy 3rd world island and play apprentice with  

[Mage of Dreams]

Quote What is the right number of restricted cards per deck, three?, four?, five?

Before you could even consider the number of cards, other questions need to be addressed;

1- Would such Super Restriction apply directly to the Restricted List or would there be a Super Restricted (SR) List as they did at AndCon?

2- If there were a seperate SR List what qualifies a card for it?

Quote Restricting the number of restricted cards would just make WelderMUD and Dragon Combo better since they don't need the restricted cards to get the job done.

Quote honestly, it's been discussed a lot in the past, and the format becomes either
a. negligibly different or
b. way too similar to 1.5

These kinds of implications definately deserve consideration, however if you have watched closely as changes to MTG have happened, the things that are generally thought will happen seldom do. While decks like these look like they will take over if the format remained stagnate, the reality of what would happen when other decks that were unviable before start to work into the metagame is a harder thing to see. Without actually testing such a change I find it hard to belive anyone can predict with 100% accuracy what would happen.

Quote those rules were specifically for one tournament back in '95, not to the environment as a whole.

Yea, I wish I could find some tourny reports or WotC reaction to how it went.

Quote It may seem cumbersome, but a much more effective plan would be a sort of "points system". say a dozen points per deck,
black lotus- 3 points
moxen - 2 point
mishra's workshop/bazaar- 2 points each
noble panther- 13 points

maybe the numbers are way off, but this seems more accurate than limiting the # of restricted cards

This could be another option ( BTW    is worth 20 points min.). The problem would be having deck checks. Adding the need for judges to do math maybe more then should be expected. At least with a card list to check against deck checks would not require much more time. Still this idea has merits and is a subject that should be discussed.

Quote Or you can just leave a perfectly fine format alone, and either play a competitive deck or move to a crappy 3rd world island and play apprentice with    

LOL thats one way to look at it. While the format is in good shape for us who are fully powered, its not so great for those who aren't. While we can sit here and say those who don't have power aren't dedicated enough or any of the other comments made, there is a truth here. There is a voice in our community with a concern and we keep sluffing it off, pretty much like we often accuse WotC of doing.

I found it interesting in many of the posts concerning Maro's article that several comments were made about how he just rehashed old ideas. If you read the article carefully there maybe a clue as to why he did this. He keeps getting the same suggestions over and over even after thos ideas are explained and rejected. There is an implied request in the article for new and different ideas on how to make the format of more intrest to "the company". I for one have no desire to see my power decrease in value. I would like to see the format expand. I am willing to explore rather then shut down ideas that may keep my concerns stay that way instead of becoming a reality.

[Smash]

Quote
LOL thats one way to look at it. While the format is in good shape for us who are fully powered, its not so great for those who aren't. While we can sit here and say those who don't have power aren't dedicated enough or any of the other comments made, there is a truth here. There is a voice in our community with a concern and we keep sluffing it off, pretty much like we often accuse WotC of doing.

There is plenty of power out there. If you can't play with the big fish, get out of the ocean. There are plenty of people who like type 1 just how it is. The vocal complainers are given too much attention.

[Mage of Dreams]

1) I am fully powered.
2) I pull fish from the ocean, cut their heads off and broil them with butter, garlic and dill.
3) There are plenty of people who like MTG just the way it is and can't wait unill the last T1 player is tapping his own mox all by himself in some dark corner.
4) As far as vocal complainers go, just look around these forums.

If you don't like the thread why clutter it with off topic posts? Or did BB take over and all contrary thought is unlawful?

Freedom is Slavery
War is Peace
Ignorance is Strength

Achtung budget player! Back to T2 for you.
LMAO

[jpmeyer]

Different formats provide different experiences, and this is based on the cardpools available.  Once you start introducing cards with different effects, it makes the environment provide a different experience.  You want creature combat?  You're playing limited.  You want a combo/control/aggro metagame triangle?  You're playing post-banning Extended.  You want a format based on huge amounts of mana?  Play Standard.

Because of this, "Go play Type 2" isn't really an attack.  Most of the requests that people make for Type 1 New Coke the format and turn it into either a watered down 1.5 or Extended.\n\n

[Mage of Dreams]

@JP;
I agree with what your saying for the most part. This is why I specificly used the term "comments" rather then "attacks". The main problem I have with these type of comments is that they seem born more from resistance to developing the format then from any actual experiance.
I can support my thought simply from a common, continual cycle that is repeted not only on these boards but just about every MTG board I've ever visited.

1) A new card, rule, banning, whatever, gets announced.

2) The community/format begin the outcry of "this will be the doom of MTG", "Now Decks X and Y will rule", "The entire format is ruined." etc. ad nauseum.

3) The card, rule, whatever is implemented and very little of any if the outcrys ever materialize.

This is easily checked using any forums' search function for threads between the date of an announcement and about a month after it's implemented.

Why does this happen? Because on paper this is what should happen. Yet very little does, why? Because MTG isn't played on paper. Deck builders take advantage of the changes to construct new builds, current builds are tweaked to handle the oncoming new decks, old builds either adapt or fade.
There is no way to calculate all of this on paper. Unless you've fully played in a changed enviroment everything is little more then guesses (which again, seem to often be wrong).

Maybe by letting such a topic run free of nonconstructive comments, a good change for T1 can be found, or maybe the discussion will run its course and it will be seen that the idea is flawed. Either way there is a good chance that the people discussing such things will grow in their understanding of the format, which in turn provides stronger players.  Not a bad thing in my opinion.
With just a little guidance, rather then random comments of no use, topics like this can lead to productive members. I don't think anyone wants T1 lite (well some do but thats another story). What can happen? WotC gets a thought out suggestion that they can test and accept or reject. People get a chance get into what makes T1 tick. The members get to watch, evaluate, and guide users in good ways. I don't know I see little downside here.

[centroles]

Very insightful anaylisis Mage. I noticed this pattern on many an occasion and admittedly had contributed to it, regarding Platinum Angel when it was a 6/6 flyer for 6, in the past as well.

Now, with full knowledge of the inherent irony, I will point to the one overwhelming doomsday pattern that is rapidly becoming a reality. The pattern has been ongoing for so long that it's eventuality is undeniable. As the card pool gets larger and larger, so does the number of broken cards and the overall speed of the format. Restrictions merely serve as speed bumps. Even with long gone, the critical turn for the most dominant decks WelderMUD and Dragon is a mere two where as just an year ago, such speed would be considered unimaginable. With a little more exploration and a few more sets like Mirrodian, very soon, vintage will indeed collapse under the weight of it's own brokenness.

The aforementioned idea, though it may seem slightly extreme to a few of you now, will likely be the only possible recourse a little under an year or so from now. It'll reduce the inherent speed and brokenness of the format, and the reliance upon and dominance of the power cards without hurting their value. In doing so, it'll make vintage more accesible to more players, balance the playing field a bit, allow more budget decks to be viable, and in short support a healthier more diverse format. Afterall, a slower format inherently is one where a great many more strategies are viable. Experimentation, creativity, metagaming, and skill would all matter again. Equal footing, low threshold of entry, and skill based games are good for Magic and for the format.  The fact that economic status has such an incredible and systematic influence on success in this format besmirches all our claims to be intellectual and skill-testing.

Vintage has a notorious reputation for being over priced to get into. Many vintage players have expressed discontent that there are simply not enough cards to go around, that it's unrealistic to expect the game to be skill based when less than 1% of the players have access to the tools that play such a critical role in winning. Even MaRo stated that this was the reason vintage doesn't recieve more support... "Truly playing a format does not mean I have only one or two choices. If finances prevent me from playing the majority of the competitive decks available then the format does in fact have a “high barrier to entry.”"

But reducing the reliance on and need for these over priced cards will change this. Since proxy tournaments have started, interest in vintage has shot up.  So it's apparent that if the barrier to entry was lowered, this would cause a great number of new players to come to the format.

If a restriction upon the number of allowable restricted cards per deck is what it takes for more players along with Wizards to throw more support behind vintage, then I'm game.

[centroles]

Jazzy Cat

Quote The power nine for the most part were restricted because they broke fundamental rules of the game.

If I put out two land on one turn, without fast bond or exploration on the table you would say I was cheating, well moxes let you do just that. As to the lotus...lets not go there.

As far a ancestral goes. You are allowed to draw one card per turn. Elementary card advantage tells us that the more cards we draw, the smoother our mana base, the more answers and the more threats we have. This card effectively gives you two extra turns of cards for free.

Time walk, normally we alternate turns. Timewalk basically says skip your turn.

Timetwister is powerful like other draw sevens, but I think it is expensive because it is blue and went in so many combo decks over the years.

OK, now we know that cheating helps you win if you don't get caught right. Now these cards are like legal cheating. There are very few decks that wouldn't see a performance boost by being able to legally cheat.

[Loci]

Logic dictates that the more cards you will have the less likely it will be that restrictions are enough to keep the format healthy.

But history (of Magic) has thought us that nothing will be done until it has been proven that there is something wrong.

Although I agree and see the 'Super restricted' list as the only viable solution I see no point in debating it any further for the above reason.

Long.dec took one of the last two unristricted three mana accellerators down with it.

I think the following things will happen in the future and I doubt very much that I will be proven wrong;

1) Someone will break the already broken Mishra's Workshop and it will get restricted. (again)

2) Someone will break the metagame with a combo deck relying on all the restricted mana accelerators available in the format.

3) Some sort of Super Ristricted List will be introduced.

I do not know long it will take. It will depend on new cards mostly. There could also be another step between 1 and 2 (Perhaps even before 1) with a new Mox or what ever, that will show up and get restricted as well.

Further more it is presumptious to make up a Super Retricted List already and claim that it is what will save us in the future. At first I did not see this, but now I must agree with Smmenen and the others. We are going to need the proof first. Too much looks bad on paper but seems fine in real decks and visa versa.

[Ephraim]

Quote (Smash @ Dec. 16 2003,00:02)

Quote
LOL thats one way to look at it. While the format is in good shape for us who are fully powered, its not so great for those who aren't. While we can sit here and say those who don't have power aren't dedicated enough or any of the other comments made, there is a truth here. There is a voice in our community with a concern and we keep sluffing it off, pretty much like we often accuse WotC of doing.

There is plenty of power out there. If you can't play with the big fish, get out of the ocean. There are plenty of people who like type 1 just how it is. The vocal complainers are given too much attention.

You can't have it both ways. Now, Smash, it would seem, is a Type I player that wants to prevent the format from becoming popular among more people. Holding an attitude like this, even if one outwardly wishes to promote and expand the Type I format, is going to ensure that Type I continues to lose in popularity. I don't know what a good sollution might be, but I can say with some certainty that telling people they're not fit to play in your league is not going to cause them to think highly of the format.

I'm not implying that most people have this attitude, but I think it's something to watch out for. I am not powered, but I can definitely see how, if I were, I would be plenty upset if there was widespread discussion about how to make it easier to obtain the cards I spent so many resources to acquire. I think one of the ideas must be considered is the promotion of 1.5 as a means of drawing WotC's attention to Vintage formats, in general. If I thought I didn't need Moxen or Loti to be competetive, I would probably be more inclined to at least try.

[Toad]

Quote (centroles @ Dec. 15 2003,23:50)Don't look this over such a short term. Sure WelderMUD and Dragon might be powerful. But they're already the dominant decks in the environment anyways.

Every time I read one of your post about your so-called dominant decks, I can't stop laughing. What is the last biggest tournament wMUD has won ? Last time I checked wMUD was losing to Dragon, Keeper and Long.dec...

Furthermore, there are already a lot of formats where the number of restricted cards is limited. These are called T1.5, T1.X, T2 and T3.

[centroles]

I completely agree with your predictions Loci. History has been leading up to precisely this for some time now.

I am merely pointing out that we should open ourselves up to the possibility that the number of restricted cards playable per deck be restricted as well in order to ensure the survival and prosperity of vintage. Because it is an inevitability that I believe is just around the corner.

And I am convinced that this is a very good thing. The format will be a bit slower, less reliant on power cards, a bit less random and more skill based, have a lower barrier of entry, have many more viable archeatypes and in general will be a lot more accesible to new players. This is exactly the push it needs to get more support from Wizards.

Currently, the player who can't afford any power cards is at a strict disadvantage compared to one who can opt to play all five moxen, black lotus, ancestral recall, time walk and essentially fill a fourth of their deck with the most unbalanced, overpowered cards in the game. Cards which as Jazzy Kat puts it, are analogous to legalized cheating. Once the number of such cards playable per deck is limited, there will indeed certain advantages for the player who though they can't opt to play black lotus, ancestral recall, time walk etc. will be able to make up for some of these slots with cards like balance, necropotence, strip mine, tutors etc.

Toad, it seems as though you missed the point both concerning my post, and this thread in general. And it seems as though you misunderstood what I meant by the statement restricting the number of restricted cards playable in a deck as well.

[Toad]

No I don't. Why would you want to restrict the number of restricted cards in a deck ? To make budget viable again ? Well, Type One has never been made to be a budget format. If you want to play with a restricted number of broken cards, go play T1.5. If you want to play budget because you can't afford to buy a Workshop, go play T2. There is no shame in that. There is really no point in restricting the number of brokeness in a deck.

You want to encourage Wizards to design artifact hosers ? What about Chalice of the Void and Null Rod ? You want cheap non broken drawers ? What about Accumulated Knowledge ? You want to play with global artifact hosers ? Well, there is a nice T2 deck playing 4 maindeck Akroma's Vengeance. All you want already exists.

Type One is fine. The post January metagame is really sane, with good blue based Control decks (Keeper, Tog, Landstill), Combo decks (TPS, Dragon), Artifact Prison decks (Welder MUD, Stax), Aggro decks (TNT), Aggro Control decks (GAT, Fish), annoying decks (Slavery, Stacker), etc... This is a very wide field with plenty different viable strategies. Why do you want to destroy that ? To make Stompy good again like back in 2000' ? Spikes and Timmies don't mix well together.

[Mage of Dreams]

Quote Although I agree and see the 'Super restricted' list as the only viable solution I see no point in debating it any further for the above reason.

Quote Further more it is presumptious to make up a Super Retricted List already and claim that it is what will save us in the future.

Not to put to fine a point on it but, with logic like that the church would still have the masses beliving the earth is the center of the universe, Einstien would never have been allowed to advance physics, Quantum Theories would never be expanded or developed, there would be no MTG, etc. No I am not comparing the minds here to those but the point remains that without discussion of things that seem irrelevant and/or presumptious we'd still be living in caves naked, hoping something didn't eat us.
This thread started because of a response I made in another thread. I had found the info about the SR List for AndCon while doing research on the B/R List history. If theres a desire to discuss such an idea where's the harm? Here is another example a little closer to the community: Smmenen and others often talk about  the "best" deck, or how they only play the best deck and why would anyone play a "sub-optimal" deck. The bottom line is there is no "best" deck, but with that attitude they help refine the metagame and deck building, thereby bringing it to new heights. In truth such discussion is both irrelevant and presumptious, but a better understanding of the format is achieved. Thats got to be a good thing.

-----------------------------------------------------------
END OF THREAD HIJACKING
-----------------------------------------------------------
@centroles;
I think you have an interesting topic, heres my suggistions;

1) Start with the list used at AndCon and work from there.
Heres the Restricted list going into AndCon;
Ancestral Recall
Balance
Berserk
Black Lotus
Braingeyser
Candelabra of Tawnos
Copy Artifact
Demonic Tutor
Fastbond
Fork
Feldon's Cane
Ivory Tower
Library of Alexandria
Maze of Ith
Mirror Universe
Mishra's Workshop
Mox Pearl
Mox Emerald
Mox Ruby
Mox Sapphire
Mox Jet
Recall
Regrowth
Sol Ring
Timetwister
Time Walk
Underworld Dreams
Wheel of Fortune
Zuran Orb

Take a look and see if you can figure out what they were trying to accomplish. It may have been a failure, and the basic premise of why which cards could be Super Restricted needs to be reevaluated.
The current B/R list breaks down close to this using VERY broad topics which you may wish to refine further;
a total of 54 cards broken into the 4 categories of search/draw (27 cards), disruption (3 cards), mana acceleration (19 cards), and broken (5 cards).
Like I said these are very broad categories that can be refined.

2) I would tend toward having a B/R/SR list at first glance, but this would add more time to deck checks and may not work.

3) If it starts to feel like T1 Lite your on the wrong track, open up the numbers or SR less cards. It would be better to leave the format alone then to create T1.5.5.

4) If you can get some people on MWS or Apprentice, build up decks both current and new using the SR List, if you find that your "pet" decks are suddenly Teir 1 there's a problem. Take a step back and look at the list objectively.

While I don't think the format is in need of changing, this should be a good look into the inner workings of T1. Keep on track and don't let the naysayers daunt you. Good luck! I'll be on the road till the 24th but if you can keep the thread going I'll be glad to spout off my useless opinion on what you've got.

Shawn

[xrizzo]

Quote (Toad @ Dec. 16 2003,11:59)Type One is fine. The post January metagame is really sane, with good blue based Control decks (Keeper, Tog, Landstill), Combo decks (TPS, Dragon), Artifact Prison decks (Welder MUD, Stax), Aggro decks (TNT), Aggro Control decks (GAT, Fish), annoying decks (Slavery, Stacker), etc... This is a very wide field with plenty different viable strategies. Why do you want to destroy that ? To make Stompy good again like back in 2000' ? Spikes and Timmies don't mix well together.

I couldn't agree more.  I am very excited about the Jan 1 meta, and think that we will see great parity in Vintage.  Rarely have we had so many decks which where capable of winning any given tourney.  

If there is a critical mass of restricted cards reached in the future, we can again discuss limiting the number of restricted cards, but for now, we have a healthy environment.

It is interesting to note how quickly our format has become prone to T2 card fluctuations.  In years past, the meta would change VERY slowly.  In 1999, Nether Void was a good deck.  In 2000, Nether Void was a good deck.  If you pick up the same deck in 2001, it was again playable...  now though, it seems that decks can vary by season.  (much quicker than old vintage was)  I don't know if in a year RG beats will be playable, but it is right now.  I don't know if artifact hate will discourage brown decks...  I don't know if Scepter will end up being the second coming of FoF for blue...  but it is exciting to not know for once.  Deck building, and creative though have really come alive with more internet readers around the world.  I also attribute a lot of this development to apprentice/MWS, but that is for another thread.

Between the release of Mirrodin and the B/R announcements, think about how many changes we have seen.

[centroles]

Wizards has always expressed a desire to keep things as simple as possible. This is why they refuse to seperate the lists between type one and 1.5, this is why they refuse to make a semirestricted list in type one. And this is precisely why they won't give this possibility serious consideration unless we keep it as simple as possible.

This is why I believe it's best not to create a seperate super restricted list. Why not simply leave the current rules alone, including the current draw/go rules?

The only addition is a simple rule, no deck including the sideboard may contain more than a total of X restricted cards.

If in this new format, certain cards previously considered unbalanced no longer prove themselves to be so, cards like Fork and Recall whose power derived from the other restricted cards, maybe someday even something like Fact or Fiction, then they will slowly be removed from the restricted list entirely. But at no point do I see the need to create a seperate super restricted list.

Vintage will still be much the same. It's main appeal, the ability to play with just about every card every printed, will still hold true. No card save for the ante cards will be unusable. The only change is that it will be more inclusive. It's slightly slower speed will support many more viable archeatypes. It will be better able to support more players as cheap restricted gems like stripmine compete with powerhouses like black lotus and the moxen in budget variants. Meanwhile, both budget and powered players have access to powerhouse cards like necropotence, yawgie's will etc. Victory would be a lot more satisfying as more people can attribute their success to skill rather than their financial ability to acquire all the cards. Budget decks will have a place in the meta once again. Deck variation and experimentation would be at an all time high.

In such a scenario, I see more support from Wizards and from the community as a whole as an inevitability. And this support behind type one in turn would be recripricoated.

As Dr. Sylvan put it...

"Type 1 players' dedication can and does bring in new customers. It's rare to meet even an unPowered Vintage player who doesn't have years of play behind them, and frequently over the course of those years they teach new people to play (I'm personally responsible for bringing in a few myself, and causing people to continue playing when they otherwise would've quit).

... There would be an increase in the people who play multiple formats; even now, people 'dabble' either into Type 1 or out of it into other formats (witness CrazyCarl's States participation; this is not uncommon--I even *gasp* draft about twice a month). With a more reasonable cost, there would be more mixing. And since when has having more accessible ways to enjoy the game caused someone to quit? Indeed, having players involved in a diversity of formats provides a safety net against one format's degeneracy--players still have somewhere to go even if something goes wrong and makes Type 2 boring for a season, or 1.X, or whatever else. (Obviously Urza block is not a supporting example here, but Psychatog surely is for its temporary ruination of Standard, and Tinker now in Extended.)

No matter what, Type 1 is a phenomenon of increased longevity among WotC's customers--people who get addicted to it tend to stay around longer than others. Even if they don't play other formats as much as the devotees of the cash cows, they're still supporting their local stores and proliferating Magic in general. I don't think that by making the cards for our format more generally available that there would be any negative effect on the number of players in the supported PT- and Worlds-level formats. These are not only the formats with the most prizes, but they would still be considerably more accessible. I don't think Type 1 could ever threaten the broad appeal of smaller-card-pool formats.

Type 1's endurance is a sign of the game's endurance, and its recent ascending popularity shows that many players are reaching a stage where they want to explore Constructed Magic in the broadest terms, with the oldest cards. A maturing player base is to be expected in a game as it gets older, and catering to this evolving demographic would be a sage business move."

[Falc]

Quote Now, with full knowledge of the inherent irony, I will point to the one overwhelming doomsday pattern that is rapidly becoming a reality. The pattern has been ongoing for so long that it's eventuality is undeniable. As the card pool gets larger and larger, so does the number of broken cards and the overall speed of the format. Restrictions merely serve as speed bumps. Even with long gone, the critical turn for the most dominant decks WelderMUD and Dragon is a mere two where as just an year ago, such speed would be considered unimaginable. With a little more exploration and a few more sets like Mirrodian, very soon, vintage will indeed collapse under the weight of it's own brokenness.

This simply isn't true.  The speed of the format goes up and down all the time.  Back in the true "old days", turn one wins were not uncommon (Channel/Fireball).  Then the B/R list came about and that nonsense stopped for a long time.  Then, Urza's Saga happened and the turn one kill returned (Academy).  The B/R list was adjusted and fixed the problem again.  Long was just the newest incarnation that abused a new mechanic (storm) to come up with turn one kill.  The B/R list will fix this one too.  

You just have to have faith in the system.  The only problem I can foresee being inevitable is that there may eventually be so many restricted cards that do basically the same thing, that it won't matter any more that they're restricted.  At that point, the DCI may be forced to bring bannings back to type 1.  Until then, enjoy type 1 for what it is.  If you want to play slower formats, then play T1.5 or Ext.  That's what they're there for.

- Falc

[Dante]

Quote (Toad @ Dec. 16 2003,10:59)To make Stompy good again like back in 2000' ?

Actually, stompy decks have Top 8'd/won recently in some of the European tournaments (splashing either red or white).  Even stompy is good again in the right environment.

[jpmeyer]

Quote (Falc @ Dec. 16 2003,15:40)

Quote Now, with full knowledge of the inherent irony, I will point to the one overwhelming doomsday pattern that is rapidly becoming a reality. The pattern has been ongoing for so long that it's eventuality is undeniable. As the card pool gets larger and larger, so does the number of broken cards and the overall speed of the format. Restrictions merely serve as speed bumps. Even with long gone, the critical turn for the most dominant decks WelderMUD and Dragon is a mere two where as just an year ago, such speed would be considered unimaginable. With a little more exploration and a few more sets like Mirrodian, very soon, vintage will indeed collapse under the weight of it's own brokenness.

This simply isn't true.  The speed of the format goes up and down all the time.  Back in the true "old days", turn one wins were not uncommon (Channel/Fireball).  Then the B/R list came about and that nonsense stopped for a long time.  Then, Urza's Saga happened and the turn one kill returned (Academy).  The B/R list was adjusted and fixed the problem again.  Long was just the newest incarnation that abused a new mechanic (storm) to come up with turn one kill.  The B/R list will fix this one too.  

You just have to have faith in the system.  The only problem I can foresee being inevitable is that there may eventually be so many restricted cards that do basically the same thing, that it won't matter any more that they're restricted.  At that point, the DCI may be forced to bring bannings back to type 1.  Until then, enjoy type 1 for what it is.  If you want to play slower formats, then play T1.5 or Ext.  That's what they're there for.

- Falc

This is a really good point.  Right now, there's no need for bannings or limiting the number of restricted cards and whatnot, but if it does need to happen say, in 5 years, that'll be fine because by then Tempest, Saga, Masques, Invasion, Odyssey, and Onslaught will all have rotated out of Extended so there won't be any "Extended Lite" feeling at all.

If you've been playing for a while (since say, 1999,) you'll remember that back then, 1.5 was literally Extended but with Mana Drain.  Literally.  Type 1 won't have to worry about that if the format format needs to change a few years down the road.\n\n

[centroles]

That is exactly what I am saying Falc. There may have been temporary boosts in the degeneracy of the format, but these were addressed with restrictions.

But this whole time, the format as a whole has been speeding up as more and more unbalanced cards get printed. We are already reaching the point where further restrictions won't significantly slow down the format, there are simply too many cards to restrict.

So eventually, the DCI will have to either...

A. do exactly what this thread proposes and restrict the number of restricted cards allowable per deck.

or

B. start banning cards.

There are several problems I see with the second option. Once we start banning cards, the fundamental draw behind vintage, the fact that we can play with just about every card except for the ante cards will be diminished. Once we start going down the banning road, there is little to seperate vintage from type 1.5. Option A on the other hand allows us to leave the fundamental lure of vintage, the thing that makes it unique, the fact that we can play with virtually all of our cards, perfectly intact.

The even more serious problem I see with option B is that the DCI will hesistate from banning the most abusive culprits, cards like Black Lotus and Ancestral Recall. They'll fear backlash from players and collectors who have suddenly had their $200 investments reduced to worthless cardboard. So they'll be forced to ban cards like Gush, Lion's Eye Diamond, Chrome Mox etc, cards wholly undeserving of a banning. It's just a big mess. This road too is avioded by option A.

In short...

1. The idea described in this thread is unaviodable if vintage is to survive. It is the only viable alternative.

2. The idea described will have many many very positive effects on vintage (those illustrated in my previous posts) and virtually no negative ones.

So lets just open ourselves up to this inevitability. In fact lets embrace it, it WILL be a good thing. And lets start discussing the details. Details such as how many restricted cards can be included per deck.

[centroles]

JPmeyers, I vehemently deny any contention that vintage has any sort of extended lite feel to it. In fact, type 1.5 is also nothing like extended. I don't see any basis for your statement then that restricting the number of restricted cards allowed would further this.

The simple fact of the matter is, the vast majority of the key defining cards behind vintage are not legal in extended. But the longer we wait, the harder it'll be for people to make the transition from extended to vintage.

I don't know about you, but I want vintage to grow, prosper, diversify and get more support from Wizards.

[Smash]

Quote (Ephraim @ Dec. 16 2003,04:45)You can't have it both ways. Now, Smash, it would seem, is a Type I player that wants to prevent the format from becoming popular among more people. Holding an attitude like this, even if one outwardly wishes to promote and expand the Type I format, is going to ensure that Type I continues to lose in popularity. I don't know what a good sollution might be, but I can say with some certainty that telling people they're not fit to play in your league is not going to cause them to think highly of the format.

I'm not implying that most people have this attitude, but I think it's something to watch out for. I am not powered, but I can definitely see how, if I were, I would be plenty upset if there was widespread discussion about how to make it easier to obtain the cards I spent so many resources to acquire. I think one of the ideas must be considered is the promotion of 1.5 as a means of drawing WotC's attention to Vintage formats, in general. If I thought I didn't need Moxen or Loti to be competetive, I would probably be more inclined to at least try.

Type 1 is very popular around here. We get as many people as type 2, double what we get in 1.5 or 1.x.  If type 1 isn't as popular around you, why don't you work on it at a local level? I spend hours every week running tournaments, organizing tournaments, helping people tune their t1 decks, helping people get access to older power cards, etc. 2 years ago my local metagame had 1 powered person. Now we have at least 3 fully powered people, and at least 10 people with some power. We also have some pretty decent t1 tournies.

At least 1 deck in the top 4 of every tournament is unpowered.... I think the average over the last 6 months, the deck with the most wins to losses would be an unpowered goblin sligh deck, because it is just so explosive against the control around here.

I am NOT trying to keep people away from type 1. Rather, I am doing it on WOTC's terms, not some fantasy B/R list made up by people who don't even play type 1 competitively (read: you).

Rather than bitch about how the B/R list is hurting you poor budget players, do something about it! Start holding unsanctioned proxy mox tournies! Or sanctioned 1.5 mox tournies... If you have 1 power tourney a month and don't advertise it a lot, your little local pool will start to get more and more powered. It isn't hard.

[jpmeyer]

Quote JPmeyers, I vehemently deny any contention that vintage has any sort of extended lite feel to it. In fact, type 1.5 is also nothing like extended. I don't see any basis for your statement then that restricting the number of restricted cards allowed would further this.

The simple fact of the matter is, the vast majority of the key defining cards behind vintage are not legal in extended. But the longer we wait, the harder it'll be for people to make the transition from extended to vintage.

I think both of us are confused.  I didn't say that Type 1 or 1.5 was like Extended.  What I was saying is that since we've already restricted just about card in Type 1 that provides pure acceleration, if we want to slow the format down any more we have to cut out large numbers of decks, and that would make the format less like Type 1 and more like Extended.  If you cut out say, just Dragon or just Workshop decks, you haven't slowed the format down any since you still have decks like Keeper and Tog and Tendrils that are just as fast.  All you're doing is removing a fair deck that is unique to Type 1.

My point was that given enough time so many blocks will have rotated out of Extended, you could conceivably do something like banning cards or limiting the number of restricted cards and the format would still have a "Type 1 feel" to it since it would have so very few cards in common with any of the more current formats.  I think this is important because many times the best deck in Extended has also been the best deck in Type 1 (Academy, Trix, Gro, Tog, etc.) and if you start limiting say, the number of restricted cards then my Type 1 Psychatog deck will begin to look almost identical to my Extended Psychatog deck.

Personally, I think Type 1 is fine right now, and I'm pretty sure that R&D/DCI agrees, which is why I'm not going to expect any radical changes for a long time.\n\n

[centroles]

Toad and Jpmeyer,

I'm not trying to destroy anything. And the course of action suggested in no way targets specific decks or makes any deck inviable. So I don't see where you get this notion. All it does is make even more decks viable and level the playing field a bit.

I'm trying to find ways that type one can prosper, allow for more archeatypes and recieve more support without hurting anyone (as it's been argued that reprints would). My previous posts have already stated how this idea will precisely do just that. And you haven't attacked any of these contentions. So I'll assume that you agree with them. If that is the case, then you clearly see why the course of action being suggested is a good one.

Furthermore, MaRo specifically stated that the high barrier of entry is what keeps vintage from getting more support from Wizards. The course of action suggested will address this issue as well.

I think we all want to see vintage be as healthy and as popular as possible. And I also think we all don't want to see future bannings in type one as will eventually occur if the idea presented isn't followed upon. So I don't see what we're argueing about.