What's wrong with Non-Vintage Constructed Magic?

[Ric_Flair]

In 2000 the last Standard Pro Tour was held.  There has never been a Vintage Pro Tour.  That leaves one 1.5 event, lots of Extended and lots of Block.  The problem is that these two formats have really been awful in the past two years.  Extended is still burden with the horrendous mistake that is Uzra's Block and yet it is without the sanity saving Force of Will.  The result, I am afraid, is that with the addition of Tog and Mirrodin fast mana the format will either be too fast (PT:NO) or kinda boring, like it was the last half of the season.  The days of PT: Houston are gone for good, at least until rotation.  

This leaves Block Constructed.  Block Constructed is an AWFUL format.  It has been since Odyssey.  Invasion was the last set that produced a large number of different decks.  Odyssey was quickly turned into a two deck affair.  PT: Venice held some promise, but by the time we got to play the format was again a two or three trick pony at best.  And apparently Mirrodin Block is no good either.  Here is what the Pros have to say:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/ptkob04/fthoughts

Here is the point of the post.  Wizards is either purposely or accidentally ruining Constructed Magic.  Each of the Pro Tour formats has a purpose.  Extended is to give cards "lasting" value.  Block is to sell new cards.  And the Limited formats, well, those are what keeps the company in the black.  I think that the fact that they have stopped supporting Standard and NEVER supported Vintage is a shame.  If the formats are as crappy as Extended from PT:NO or Odyssey Block, what the hell do they have to lose?  This is hyperbole, in a sense, but at some point if the formats suck so bad that even people who get paid to play don't want to play, maybe it is time to change the formula, even if that means doing something as crazy as having ::GASP:: a Vintage Pro Tour.  I know all the argument for it and against it, but the real point is that it is time for a change on the Pro Tour.  Shake up the Constructed formats.    

I, for one, am a fan of Constructed Magic.  But with the recent string of garbage formats, I am wondering if Wizards is tanking Constructed on purpose in an effort to get us all to switch over to Limited.  I like Limited.  I am a fan of drafting.  It is usually one of my two favorite formats, but Sealed deck is terrible.  The card pool is too small to really construct a deck.  The end result is a deck where you play all or nearly all of the cards in two colors and a splash of a third.  That is not deck construction.

I hate when Wizards plays big brother and tell us what to do.  The best part of the game is the freedom it allows (which is why I have stopped calling for the errata of Mask and the like).  They tell us not to look at spoilers.  They can kiss my ass.  This is FUCKING AMERICA.  I can read what I want, be it salacious pornography, milita movement books, the Bible, the Koran, or SPOILER LISTS.  So if the recent string of bad Constructed formats is an attempt to get us to switch over, I for one would like to knee someone is the nutsack.  WE BUY THIS GAME, LET US PLAY HOW WE LIKE.  

Even if this is not some "black helicopter" conspiracy to switch us over to Limited players, how about some forethought in Block construction?  No more stupid, heavy handed, "we'll build decks for you little retards" mechanics like Affinity or Madness or experiments like the "black heavy" set.  These ruin the format.  And for the love of God BAN CARDS IN EXTENDED to stop combo or reprint Force of Will.  I know they cannot do the latter, but this streak of suck ass formats shows a clear lack in thinking.  

I apologize for the less than civil tone of this post.  I normally try to keep them nice, but this issue goes to the heart of the game I like, so I feel vindicated in being MAD.  

What do you think?  Is a conspiracy afoot?  Have the Constructed formats been that bad?  If the formats all suck, why not try something new, right?  Any suggestions (hint, hint Vintage PT)?  

I know the last thing has been claimed to be impossible.  But I would like to hope...

[jpmeyer]

The problem with block PTs is that whatever the block "theme" is is almost always better than like anything else with the possible exception of the theme's anti-deck.  Tempest and Saga didn't really have block themes and mechanics that were being pushed, but look at all the blocks after that:

MM: Rebels (theme), Waters (anti-theme)
Invasion: Domain (theme)
Odyssey: Madness (theme), mono-black (theme)
Onslaught: Goblins (theme,) U/W (anti-theme for big spells)

and now Mirrodin with Affinity and anti-Affinity.  I really do wish that they'd replace the block Pro Tour with a Standard Pro Tour.  I get the feeling that Extended will clean itself up next year once Saga leaves, so I'm not so worried about that, although it is kinda boring that the metagame is STILL just Tog/Madness/Rock/some red deck.

It really seems like they've just got to stop with the block mechanics.  Unless the mechanic is really, really broad like Invasion's multi-color theme, you just get into the situation where you just have a war between the mechanics (like how Standard has been,) or you just have one mechanic just blowing away everything else.

[Dr. Sylvan]

I am confident that they're not intentionally crashing Constructed. I'm sure that their marketing shows that many people want to play Constructed but not Limited---any change that loses them customers is a bad one, therefore they will still print cards to keep Constructed going as successfully as possible.

Personally, I think that they're putting up those Pro opinions of MirBC as a precursor to some kind of change, either (a) moving the Block PT to include the third set for (hopefully) increased diversity or (b) reinstituting the Standard Pro Tour. Either would be an improvement, but my view of Block isn't just based on the mechanic/theme being the best. It's that the card pool is so small that there's not enough good stuff to make a diverse metagame. They simply can't print enough power cards in that number of sets. I feel the same way about Type Two...this is the phenomenon that pushed me into Vintage in the first place. There will always be a small group of "strictly awesome" cards which define the three or four playable decks. Extended is mildly interesting to me because it has at least three times the cardpool of Standard. 1.X's minimum diversity is around the maximum diversity of Type Two, post-banning.

However, the only cardpool that I've seen to be big enough for a diverse Constructed metagame is Vintage. Even just considering the really good decks, we have Hulk, GAT, Keeper, Madness, Slavery, and probably twenty other solid decks that a skillful player can win with. We're swingy as all hell, but we at least have a diverse metagame. The proxy/reprint issue will prevent us from getting a PT, but I think Wizards' recently increased support is a sign that they know we're a reasonably healthy side of the Constructed game.

As for a solution to the problem of Constructed PTs, I suggest that they at minimum move the Block one to include the third set, and probably would be better off just making it Standard, which would emphasize all of the cards currently in print. Extended should be pretty healthy for the foreseeable future. And of course it'd be great if they went with my notions on reprints to institute a Vintage PT, but we know that won't happen. :(

[Vegeta2711]

If the formats are as crappy as Extended from PT:NO or Odyssey Block

Odyssey block was crap, this is true. But I personally LIKED 1.x before the bannings. I enjoyed the sheer brokenness of everything and I thought it was actually pretty fun. The PTQ's were some of the most intresting I've seen since they rotated 1.x. (My favorite format of all time was the original 1.x, bar none) I'm not sure who you talked too, but as far as I know, many people enjoyed the brief broken period and the rest enjoyed subsquent bannings.

Post-Darksteel T2 actually seems kind of intresting, because control isn't on top anymore.

Even just considering the really good decks, we have Hulk, GAT, Keeper, Madness, Slavery, and probably twenty other solid decks that a skillful player can win with. We're swingy as all hell, but we at least have a diverse metagame

Huh? I can say more or less the same thing about T2. I've seen very good players smash face with Tier 2 or 3 decks. Ones that are 'solid', but not powerful enough to be considered top tier. That assesment has the same problems, I can think of maybe 4 decks right now that are the best you can play in T1. Past that it's exactly like T2 or 1.x or pick your format.

Nearly all formats have 10-20 decks you pick from that have some concievable chance of winning and a few will, because they're piloted well and with a little luck. Past that you'll see the top decks. T1 is the same in this aspect, we only don't notice it as much, because of more personal attachment to decks and that we don't have the sheer amount of data the other formats do.

Oh and it's unfair to judge Mirrodin Block yet, we still need to see what 5th Dawn brings. ONBC was looking to be an awesome format until Scourge messed it up. Maybe we'll see the opposite and 5th Dawn will save this block format.

I accept T1 outclasses T2 as far as archtypes go. But it's not as bad as it's made out to be. Also this makes sense since T1 has the biggest card pool. If you want to include variants (which you don't) T2 wins by a landslide with like 3-4 versions of every deck.  :lol:

[jpmeyer]

I am of the belief that any format that has that many (10-20) playable decks has something wrong with it.  Either the cream hasn't risen to the top yet or people are just playing decks more "because they can" than because they are good.

Note however that I also am a lot more incorporating with my deck classification.  Stax/Mud/Slaver is more or less one deck to me, Scepter Keeper/AK Keeper/Scrying Keeper is one, and so on.

[Vegeta2711]

I am of the belief that any format that has that many (10-20) playable decks has something wrong with it. Either the cream hasn't risen to the top yet or people are just playing decks more "because they can" than because they are good.

Ladies and gentleman, T1 in a nutshell.

Can we stop the harassment of T2 please? Thanks.  

[kirdape3]

I personally don't like Standard RIGHT NOW because I don't think any of the decks are that amazing.  It's not the format - I personally like the fact that you have to have skill besides tapping mana to play Magic in a competitive sense (whereas most Vintage decks it's literally 'my cards are better than yours, die.)

[Matt]

As I recall, the last time Standard had more than four viable deck choices...was when Saga was legal. I'm just sayin', is all.

Mir-On: Goblins, Affinity, maybe white control (in peril with Skullclamp's release)
Od-On: I freely admit that I know nothing about this format.
In-Od: Tog/Opposition/Trenches. I recall Worlds that year being so boring.
Ma-In: Fires, Counter-rebels.
Saga-Masques: Rebels, Bargain, Replenish, Napster, Stompy, Tinker, Accelerated Blue, Ponza, Angry Hermit 1/Trinity Green... plus less-well known decks like Sped Red and Negator-Suicide. I hasten to add that not only was no one DECK dominant, but no one color was either. There's combo, there's aggro, there's control.

[jpmeyer]

MM-IN also had Opposition, U/W control and U/B/R control.
IN-OD also had Madness and multiple very different Tog builds
OD-ON was Madness, Wake, GR, and Slide

Four decks is really about what a format should have if it's been suitably explored and has a large enough card pool.  Extended is a great example in that there were a lot of instances where there were like 15 decks for a while, but given enough time it was clear that the best decks had been consolidated.  PT Chicago is an even better example than PTNO, since you had 8 different decks in the T8, but a month or two later it was clear that Trix was far and away the best deck.

[Dr. Sylvan]

Standard's alright because it's very hard for there to be a broken combo in it, and it's got the potential to be relatively interesting with no fewer than two mechanics battling it out, and their accompanying antidecks. I just can't give it its due lovin' thanks to my incessant desire to use a lot of my favorite cards all at once. I would be totally cool with the Standard PT, which I can spend a weekend reading about on wizards.com and safely ignore until Worlds.

I'm not convinced that Vintage's pool of decks is unrealistic. I'll agree that in any well-explored format there are probably three to five truly tier one decks, but I think card pool determines the potential for how many tier two decks (and in-between decks) there are. I don't think Standard or Extended can claim to have as broad a second tier as Vintage, even if there are some other decks which technically exist there.

I accept T1 outclasses T2 as far as archtypes go. But it's not as bad as it's made out to be. Also this makes sense since T1 has the biggest card pool. If you want to include variants (which you don't) T2 wins by a landslide with like 3-4 versions of every deck.

Don't we do the same thing, except moreso? Vintage is like a bag of Skittles or something, you just mix and match colors until you've got your particular preferred level of fruitiness. Standard decks stick to like, two or three colors, blech. Clearly Standard players aren't comfortable enough in their sexuality. :)

[Smmenen]

I think its pretty obvious that Constructed, as a whole, is going down the tubes.  

And why shoudln't it?  Limited is the biggest cash cow, it requires nothing but a few packs, it helps support Magic Online, it is used in all sorts of events AND it means total parity between players based solely on skill.

The ONLY reason that constructed is still around, is becuase Wizards wants older cards to retain value.  Without constructed, the value of the cards drops to marginal levels.  

In fact, I would say that Vintage is an anomoly - it's popularity has continued to grow while the other formats slowly whither.  Extended?  Last year at Origins the Extended tournament had 4 players compared to 56 for one of the Vintage tournaments.  

Most of the best players in the lower formats don't like to actually *own* cards.  I think the biggest exception is probably Regionals and Block - and only then becuase Regionals is such an event and BLock doesn't require as many rares.

Stephen Menendian

[jpmeyer]

I don't know how you can say that Constructed is "whithering."  PTQ and GP attendance just keeps soaring.

[Vegeta2711]

Standard decks stick to like, two or three colors, blech.

We don't have good 5 color lands.  

[Nameless]

I don't know how you can say that Constructed is "whithering."  PTQ and GP attendance just keeps soaring.

I think we saw a big hit in the popularity of Vintage over the last few years when it left the invitational.  To add insult to that injury, Maro went back on his word to return Vintage to the invitational by letting RandyB move it to MODO for good.

When I saw we saw a hit in the popolarity of the format, I mean to say that while the audience was growing, it stopped growing as much due to this change.  I'd venture a guess and say that our audience would be twice what it is now, had Vintage not been neglected the way it has.

Also, in support of pro's who support T1...  Finkel 4L!  Anybody else know of a pro player with a Vintage rating that high and/or even close to that many Vintage matches?  But, that's kinda off-topic...

[Smmenen]

I don't know how you can say that Constructed is "whithering."  PTQ and GP attendance just keeps soaring.

Perhaps you missed the fact that 90% of GPs and PTQs are Limited, Not constructed.

http://www.professional-events.com/

Steve

[Dr. Sylvan]

Perhaps you missed the fact that 90% of GPs and PTQs are Limited, Not constructed.

Wow, that's depressing considering how much I don't enjoy drafting.

[jpmeyer]

Wait, what?  GPs and PTQs follow the exact same format schedule as PTs.

[Dr. Sylvan]

I'm going to statistically demonstrate that Block Constructed sucks (I suppose I might be surprised and forced to announce its awesomeness, but halfway through the Kobe T64, our suspicions seem confirmed). Anyone know where I could get the T64 for OnBC (Venice '03)? I found the T8 but the Sideboard section of mtg.com doesn't seem to have the full sixty-four, which would be a much more satisfying n. For OdBC (Osaka '02), they already have the card counts up (I think for the whole PT, not T64), but nothing for Venice. If I can't have the whole T64 of Venice, mayhaps someone knows where the OnBC PTQ Top 8s are available?

Thanks in advance.

[jpmeyer]

That's the best I can do

[Ric_Flair]

I think we have all know that since Invasion Block, the Block Constructed formats have sucked big time.  The issue is that Wizards keeps putting their hands on the scales and pump up a few cards to ridiculous power levels.  Ravager is one prime example.  How did this card get through R&D?  This is Urza's Block broken.  Two or three cards like this or a huge number of redundant effects ruin blocks.  Look at the dominant decks:

OBC:

U/G Madness: Broken Cards
Wild Mongrel
Circular Logic
Wonder

MBC: Redundancy
Chainer's Edict
Innocent Blood
Mutilate

OnBC:

Slide/RW Control:  Broken cards AND Redundancy
Slide
Lightning Rift
And a huge number of cards that cycled cheaply essentially making them all the same card

Goblins: Broken Cards
Warchief
Piledriver

MBC:
Ravager: Broken CARD
Ravager

MRC:  Redundancy
Burn
Burn
More Burn
Some small additions of burn

Ugh.  This little thought experiment sucks.  These decks are terrible.  Assuredly TwelvePost, the only fun deck in MBC, will be ruined before we get to play it.  They have been so afraid of the traditional archetypes (when was U/W near creatureless EVER good in Block) so much that the avoid them on purpose.  They force themselves into new areas and the mechanics and synergy take over and make these stupid decks.  Then they have all the color pie shifting.  Once they decide on changing a color's theme they make sure to do it right away and in heavy doses to ensure we all get the picture.  The end result is a lot of cards in that new ability in each set.  I think I may just quit Block Constructed all together.  Or write a letter to Wizards.  Phil, wanna team up?

[Dr. Sylvan]

Phil, wanna team up?

Looks like Block Constructed's gonna get double-pwned. :)

Taken to PM.

[jpmeyer]

I think there just isn't time to test multiple mechanics in one block.  I think if you have too many Invasion-ish blocks, it'll really mess up the larger formats by providing way too much redundency (and not to mention making the blocks look stale.)  Granted, if they can figure out a way to have multiple mechanics and Invasion-style themes and whatnot in every block, that would mad rule but I doubt it's feasible without them mad increasing the size of R&D or something.

[Dr. Sylvan]

I agree; blocks will always have too much internal consistency, unavoidably. The best solution is to simply not have Constructed tournaments with only one Block. I mean, I don't like Standard, but I like it leaps and bounds more than I like Block.

[Jacob Orlove]

The real solution is to have mechanics with less internal synergy.

[Dr. Sylvan]

The real solution is to have mechanics with less internal synergy.

Dingdingding!

You should look forward to Tony's rhetoric on this topic; it's quite spicy. :)

[Smmenen]

http://www.professional-events.com/

More data for you.  Professional Events data goes back two years.

Steve