[Article] Forsythe on B&R

[dromar]

Another valid argument for the banning of desciple in standard:
Some vintage decks even use it.

http://www.themanadrain.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20337

I have no idea if the deck is any good, but that's beside the point. I think Wizards was mistaken in not ripping that card in half on December 1st, at least as far as standard is concerned.

[mogote]

Can you imagine how elite the Vintage format would be if nothing were banned/restricted? I think part of the problem is that people are shying away from starting Vintage because to be competitive at the mid-/higher-levels you have to invest quite heavily in it. Restricting cards that are good as 4-ofs and not so spectacular as 1-ofs would not only slow the format down dramatically, it would allow and encourage more people to play the format.

Why would you want to start restricting cards not because of power-concerns but because they are expensive? [sarcasm]While you're at it you could start banning cards for money reasons as well to make the format more accessible [/sarcasm]. For those who want to play their old cards but don't have the most expenisve ones WotC already restructured "T1.5". The new Legacy is designed to be the accessible format for those players (opposed to Vintage).
Also, I don't follow your reasoning here that a restriction of cards like Bazaar of Baghdad would get more people to play Vintage. The main problem for starters really is getting the P9.
And I'm not  saying all this because I own Drains and Bazaars myself (which I got before my first power cards to use them in old "T1.5" as well) but it would really worry me if the DCI started restrictions for other reasons than sheer power.

[dandan]

Voltaic Key basically just untaps Mana Vault and Grim Monolith.  Decks that can use a pile of colorless mana well already have plenty of much more consistent ways to get it.  If there is some secret reason for it staying on there, we deserve to know it.

Whilst I agree that the Key could come off the list, it is almost certainly there because of the interaction with Metalworker rather than Vault or Monolith. With MWS decks currently close to the upper limits of acceptability they probably decided that the time isn't right to unrestrict Voltaic Key.

[martyr]

Why shouldn't we restrict Mana Drain or Bazaar? Perhaps my vision of the format is different than yours, but I would prefer a format where the more obviously amazing cards are restricted instead of banned. Sure, getting the Power 9 might be the biggest hurdle to entering competitive T1, but we don't have to compound the disparity between the people who can play the Power 9 and 4x Mana Drains and the people who can't afford either but are otherwise just as competent players.

Wizards only needs to regulate T1 to keep a demographic with healthy, long-term interest in their game, playing. It's probably their lowest profit-margin, as they don't make any money directly from the sale of out of print cards.

So it's up to us to regulate it, and make it fair for people. The format can be patently unfair, with unfair cards, but that shouldn't mean that those cards should be available to some and not to others: that's the wrong kind of unfairness, and not the sort I want in the format.

But meh, it's not a big deal. I'll play it, either way.

[combo_dude]

That's not unfairness - that's business. It's exactly the same in Standard with Ravagers, for example; I can't see anyone calling for it to be banned for financial reasons.  Apart from anything, why on earth would WotC want to ban something in order to dent the profits of someone like SCG who are one of the best marketing tools (I don't mean this in a disparaging way; cutting down on the business of SCG by causing a crash on their most expensive cards would NOT be good for the game because SCG is then less likely to be able to operate) that they've got?

Oh, and it's a Trading Card Game. This means that, like it or not, people have to trade and/or shell out some cash to get cards. This is an argument coming from the "deal with it" stance, by the way.

In addition, this card availability is made much smaller by proxy tournaments; sure, they aren't sanctioned, but since (for example) the Power 9 tournaments are more expensively prized than GenCon (which IS sanctioned), this lack of sanctioning doesn't seem to be a problem, really.

[absolute]

Why shouldn't we restrict Mana Drain or Bazaar? Perhaps my vision of the format is different than yours, but I would prefer a format where the more obviously amazing cards are restricted instead of banned. Sure, getting the Power 9 might be the biggest hurdle to entering competitive T1, but we don't have to compound the disparity between the people who can play the Power 9 and 4x Mana Drains and the people who can't afford either but are otherwise just as competent players.

While this is true, the vast majority of people that play type 1 would generally accept the fact that there is a general amount of unfairness which makes each deck viable in some form or another. Many competent players exist who have little money to play with, and who have spent the time to learn the format in and out (including myself). Comming from the prespective of a player with less than an average amount of money to spend on the game (as it is just a hobby) makes me care less whether someone plays with these cards or not. Many IN-compotent players own the power nine, drains, bazaars, workshops... but will never put them to full use, and would generally care less about the playability of the cards vs. their value. The primary failure in your theory is not realizing that the format with drains/bazaars/ workshops, or themselves in restricted form, will be about as exciting as Legacy with a little pip in its step.

Wizards only needs to regulate T1 to keep a demographic with healthy, long-term interest in their game, playing. It's probably their lowest profit-margin, as they don't make any money directly from the sale of out of print cards.

So it's up to us to regulate it, and make it fair for people. The format can be patently unfair, with unfair cards, but that shouldn't mean that those cards should be available to some and not to others: that's the wrong kind of unfairness, and not the sort I want in the format.

But meh, it's not a big deal. I'll play it, either way.[/

This is another reason why wizards generally has 2 options with the comming realization that players will never be able to attain every card in magic for tournament play. They would first be able to reprint the power nine, possibly in a "proxy" fashion which would be allowed play in tournaments, but would be worth considerably less than the power nine (and wouldn't really put a dent in their price tags). The second option would be to allow proxy sanctioned events so the format could be "fair" to some extent, and allow a far more vast amount of competative play. Either way they would gain a marginally better profit from the format, and allow players the ability to enter magics finest format with a little better ease. A healthy environment is never really achieved, and unfortunately there will always be cards which are inherintly better than others. As was already pointed out, if you ban the big cards in the format now, there will only be bickering back and forth about how force of will, ancient tomb, and buried alive are too powerful for the format, and this cycle repeats itself until the format is pointlessly redundant.

[Moxlotus]

Why shouldn't we restrict Mana Drain or Bazaar?

Because then Type 1 is Legacy with moxen.  Wait-that's how it used to be.  And it sucked.  If you don't like the fact that each deck is broken (because that is what Type 1 is-broken) then Wizards created Legacy.

[andrewpate]

If you think about it, Mishra's Workshop, Dark Ritual, and Mana Drain really all do the same thing:  each provides its given archetype with a ton of mana in the first few turns.  Stax drops turn 1 Trinisphere.  Combo drops turn 1 Necropotence.  4cc drops turn 2 Exalted Angel.  All of these plays are really the same, and they are the bread-and-butter of the environment.

Not to mention the fact that the more broken accelerants we restrict, the more random the format becomes.  Imagine artifact decks with 1 Tolarian Academy, 1 Mishra's Workshop, 1 each of the P9 mana, 1 Ancient Tomb, 1 Dark Ritual, 1 Mana Crypt, 1 Mana Vault, 1 Lotus Petal, and then lands.  Every once in a while, you are still going to get a "Workshop, Mox, Trinisphere" hand, with the only difference being that when you do, your opponent will almost certainly not have enough broken accelerants of their own to dig out from underneath it with.  The primary concern with deckbuilding will be "Well, Su-Chi isn't that fantastic on turn 4, but he's great on turn 1.  How many should I run?" and not "What is the optimal 4/4 for 4, Su-Chi or Synod Centurion?"  For me, the second scenario sounds more like the type of deckbuilding I like.  Each deck has its broken accelerators, so it isn't a broken format.  That's like saying that basic lands need to be restricted because they allow broken starts like casting spells.

The only reasons to axe Workshop, Rit, and Drain is that they make games "go too fast" or "become noninteractive."  I would respond by saying that a)if the environment is too fast, why do such a large percentage of tournament matches go to time?  And b)if the format is noninteractive, why do we play more Force of Wills than any other card including land?

[dromar]

wizards generally has 2 options with the comming realization that players will never be able to attain every card in magic for tournament play. They would first be able to reprint the power nine, possibly in a "proxy" fashion which would be allowed play in tournaments, but would be worth considerably less than the power nine (and wouldn't really put a dent in their price tags). The second option would be to allow proxy sanctioned events so the format could be "fair" to some extent, and allow a far more vast amount of competative play.

I honestly don't think the first option would work. There's no way that an increase in supply of power cards could possibly not affect the price of the original power. (If that sentence was confusing, it means: more cards means less value per card, and there's no way around it) I think this topic has been gone over many times.

The second option is of note however. I'm not sure what Wizards' stance on sanctioned proxy tourneys is, but right now I think they wouldn't allow that. In the future maybe, but I'm skeptical. If they did allow proxies for their sanctioned tournaments, I think it would be a good idea (for all Vintage players, anyways). It really doesn't make much difference though, since the majority of major vintage tourneys are unsanctioned anyways, and especially more so now, with 9 SCG Power tourneys per year.

[martyr]

In the past, reprinting old cards made the originals more valuable. People like black border cards, and they like being pimped out. You people with power will always find buyers, and probably at roughly the price power is at now.

However, Wizards could profit from reprinting the old power-cards. I believe an article was very well-written about it a long time ago, perhaps on SCG, where someone (Bleiweiss?) said that if Wizards reprinted Moxes, it would signal the end of Magic...you know, once Magic eventually goes down in value, and people leave the game, and it goes the way of Spellfire, Wizard's death-rattle will be a set of all the fave cards, Power included.

While I didn't agree with his reasoning, he might have a point: Wizards might just never do it.

However, the opinion that Wizards printing "proxy" versions of power isn't viable, but them sanctioning proxy tournaments is...that makes no sense. If you make available Power that doesn't look like the old power, people will buy it, but it won't be close to as valuable as the old stuff, and it won't decrease the value of the old stuff, at least not much.

What about a T4 set? The best, coolest, most broken cards ever, split equally along the color pie and with lands and artifacts, offered as boosters? People would draft that to no end, and none of them would break the prices that T2 singles do (at the VERY WORST, Power from this set would be worth 20.00).

You'll still find collectors that want an original piece of power, or you can easily dump it onto a store who'll do the finding for you. I think this would solve most of the "common man's" problems, with regards to this format and it's supply/demand dynamic, as well as generate more interest in the more complex, intensive game-play T1 involves.

[Moxlotus]

In the past, reprinting old cards made the originals more valuable.

I disagree with you.  Chronicles.

[andrewpate]

Maybe he's thinking of the foil Balance, which didn't really affect the old Balance's value and actually ended up being worth more than the Beta one.  This is also true of the foiled Brainstorm and Accumulated Knowledge.  I don't know of those actually raising the prices of the old ones, though.

Why does any talk of B/R lists always digress to talk of proxies and power reprints?  It's not going to happen, folks!  They are not going to ban everything that costs $100+ so you can afford to play, and they're not going to make those cards cheap or free so you can afford to play.  If you can't afford to play, play Legacy, or play any of the hundreds of nonsanctioned tournaments available that do allow proxies.  I have personally never played in a sanctioned Vintage tournament, as most of the best players rarely do, except for GenCon.  Just look at the SCGP9 circuit--totally unsanctioned, and totally permissive of proxies.

[jpmeyer]

In the past, reprinting old cards made the originals more valuable.

I disagree with you.  Chronicles.

Right.  NOWADAYS, it doesn't change prices though, but they're also not reprinting super old cards or chase rares.

Why does any talk of B/R lists always digress to talk of proxies and power reprints?

This (the fact that these threads just careen wildly off-topic before they crash into the divider and asplode) is also one of the reasons why us mods really starting to dislike B/R threads.

[martyr]

Because if people are reduced to playing in proxy tournaments and not non-proxy tournaments, they're going to want proxies.

Chronicles was a poor example, because the only card in Chronicles that's any good was City of Brass. It might not have raised the prices, but it didn't hurt them, that's for sure.

JP's got a point though, this has gotten off-topic. I guess I just think it's silly to have an obvious rise in participation (a very positive thing, it would seem) with the increase in proxy-tourneys, and Wizards NOT take advantage of that with a set or old, powerful cards.

BTW, the Foil Balance is NOT worth more than a Beta one, sorry. And the Foil FNM AK is not worth as much as a foil normal Accumulated Knowledge. Comparing promotional foil cards to cards long out of print is kind of silly, because there are all sort of mitigating factors that we're not taking into account.

[Necrologia]

Chronicles was a poor example, because the only card in Chronicles that's any good was City of Brass. It might not have raised the prices, but it didn't hurt them, that's for sure.

That's simply untrue. When Chronicles came out collectors were outraged as their Elder Dragon Legends dropped from $30+ to almost nothing.

Note that it's not necessarily true anymore, however. Somewhere around the time Serra Angel/Sengir/Ernie got reprinted, Wizards noticed that reprints were actually increasing the value of old cards. Making the classics Standard legal again was a boon for cards that had been sitting in shoe boxes for years. None of them made a splash on the tourney scene, but at least it gave them a breif boost in popularity.

[Komatteru]

That's simply untrue. When Chronicles came out collectors were outraged as their Elder Dragon Legends dropped from $30+ to almost nothing.

Yes, Chronicles was a terrible PR move at the time and it was all the outcry over that set that caused Wizards to generate the first reserved list, which had practically everything on it that hadn't already been reprinted.

For reference, here's an article from Randy Beuhler describing the reprint policy and such before it was changed.  It's the best thing I could find from Wizards describing what happened when Chronicles was released.  A more interesting description of the history is in the first Magic Encyclopedia, if you have access to that.

Note that it's not necessarily true anymore, however. Somewhere around the time Serra Angel/Sengir/Ernie got reprinted, Wizards noticed that reprints were actually increasing the value of old cards. Making the classics Standard legal again was a boon for cards that had been sitting in shoe boxes for years. None of them made a splash on the tourney scene, but at least it gave them a breif boost in popularity.

However, those cards were uncommon in the basic sets and were widely available for $2 or less before they were reprinted.  Clone was also an uncommon in Revised but was reprinted in Onslaught (as a rare of course).  Underworld Dreams was reprinted, and the thing that got hit the most was the Italian version.  It wasn't a big loss, but it was a loss of $5-8, which is decently high considering the card used to go for around $20-25 initially.  A lot of the card's value decrease is going to depend on how played the card is.  I don't think Forcefield would see too much play if it were reprinted, but I don;t think the value of the old card would go down too much, because the people who are buying Forcefield are getting it for a set or something.  However, I guess that dual lands would drop by about half if they were reprinted.  Force of Will could be cut to as low as $5 if it were reprinted (~$8-10 if it were reprinted as a rare), which is a pretty significant loss.  Sure, the demand would be higher, but given the large print runs of new sets, the supply would be more than enough to keep everyone satisfied.  When there's already a lot out there that no one wants, the price goes up when there's a new demand.  When there's already a demand and short supply and new supply is introduced, the price goes down.

And with that, we're WAAAYY off topic (which I admit I didn't help, sorry mods   ).  If this is to be discussed further, someone should create a new thread over in the community form.  This has been beat to death already, but whatever.

[majestyk1136]

The only reasons to axe Workshop, Rit, and Drain is that they make games "go too fast" or "become noninteractive."  I would respond by saying that a)if the environment is too fast, why do such a large percentage of tournament matches go to time?  And b)if the format is noninteractive, why do we play more Force of Wills than any other card including land?

The reason why some vintage matches go to time is because of the fact that when control decks match up against each other you have two decks that have essentially gone all in for control and the eventual winner (who likely won quite early) will simply take awhile to win due to the low threat density present in vintage control decks.  Ever see a Doomsday vs belcher match?  They take about 5 minutes, so you have plenty of time to get lunch after you're through smashing face.  The problem comes from the fact that each of the archetypes has sold out entirely for their particular style of play at the neglect of any other strategy.  Hybrid stategies don't work because you end up not being focused enough in your particular strength to overcome your more focused adversaries.  The more I hear from JP and Pip about accelerants the more I'm forced to agree with their logic.  A couple of critical restrictions would have restored order again and opened up the metagame to slightly more diversified builds that will reward playskill, testing and design rather than doing well when you randomly guess the metagame you're walking into correctly and pick the right deck to win the majority of the Rock/Paper/Scissors matchups you're going to see that day.

And about FoW, the unfortunate problem for control decks today is the fact that anything less than turn 1 FoW probably means you lose if you're not playing against another control deck.  As a result, FoW's use is on the upswing out of necessity, and even decks that on the surface might not benefit from its use are cramming it in simply to survive to turn 2 and getting UU up.  This means that the threat density for non-control decks is too high.  There are too many spells now that MUST BE COUNTERED or you lose.  Time to restrict stuff.

[andrewpate]

There are too many spells now that MUST BE COUNTERED or you lose.  Time to restrict stuff.

I certainly see your logic leading up to this statement.  It is absolutely correct that first-turn Force of Will is a bit too essential right now, but as you say, the problem is too many must-counters, not too much mana.  Even the control decks have piles of mana; it's balanced, if powerful.  The best way to keep speed in check has always been to decrease the number of possible first-turn plays that either cinch up the game or win it immediately.  Some might suggest that Mishra's Workshop is what causes this, and it is certainly true that one way to go about this goal is to restrict acceleration, as the broken artifact mana, Tolarian Academy, and others will attest.  But all of the best broken mana is currently restricted; that is, no restricted accelerant is worse than any unrestricted accelerant.  As a result, you have to ask if the amount of fast mana available is too much in an objective sense, thus redefining what level of speed is acceptable.  Clearly we have decided that a consistent 6 mana on turn 1 is too much (unrestricted Lotus/Mox/etc.).  Now we are asking if a consistent 3 mana on turn 1 is too much.  I do not think that it is.

In other words, I agree with many of your points, but I use them to come to the conclusion that Trinisphere, Death Wish, Oath of Druids, and other powerful cards are what we should be monitoring, not Workshop or Dark Ritual.

[Dante]

Ever see a Doomsday vs belcher match?  

This matchup will not take less than 20 minutes unless 1. The players don't shuffle properly and 2. The Belcher player wins turn 1 in 2 games.  Funnily enough, most combo on combo matches that I've played or seen usually went close to or over time.

This is Dragon vs. Belcher, Dragon, vs TPS, Dragon vs Deathlong, Deathlong vs Doomsday, Deathlong vs Belcher, Doomsday vs Belcher.

[dicemanx]

Funnily enough, most combo on combo matches that I've played or seen usually went close to or over time.

This is Dragon vs. Belcher, Dragon, vs TPS, Dragon vs Deathlong, Deathlong vs Doomsday, Deathlong vs Belcher, Doomsday vs Belcher.

I'll second that. I've played 3 matches with Dragon versus Tendrils-combo (TPS and DeathLong) in the past year at fairly high level events, and all three almost went to time.

I don't think you can restrict the longest matches to slugfests between two pure control decks.

[Razvan]

There are too many spells now that MUST BE COUNTERED or you lose.  Time to restrict stuff.

This statement scares me, primarily because of confused people that will take it to heart.

There are too many spells that must be countered? No, there aren't. Even in draft, if your opponent casts a 3/3 flyer, and you have no flyers of your own and cannot deal with it, and cannot win in 6-7 turns (which is true, because the board will develop), that 3/3 flyer just became a MUST-BE-COUNTERED.

A 3/3 flyer is hardly something worth restricting based on power alone (unless it costs zero).

You cannot judge all these spells by themselves, you have to judge them in combination with EVERYTHING else, which you (and others) are not.

You can restrict everything, and be left with 1.5, or you can restrict nothing, and be left with T1. Simple, isn't it?

[VGB]

You can restrict everything, and be left with 1.5, or you can restrict nothing, and be left with T1. Simple, isn't it?

People need to stop equating "restricting" with "banning".

For one thing, 1.5 will never have to worry about critical mass.

[Moxlotus]

And then type 1 will just be Type 1.5 with moxen.  We already had that for years.

[VGB]

And then type 1 will just be Type 1.5 with moxen.  We already had that for years.

My point was that banned is altogether different from restricted, and many people use the two interchangeably, albeit erroneously.

If you infer anything else, that's your problem.

And by stating that if T1 were a highlander format it would merely be 1.5 with moxen, you are mistaken; I think you need to re-read the current restricted list.

[andrewpate]

Exactly.  If we keep restricting everything people get angry about, we're going to eventually move along to a format where there are enough restricted, broken cards to force everyone to play the same deck, essentially a 5-color control monstrosity along the lines of Carl Winter's Revenge list, packed to bursting with restricted bombs.  We'll see the same deck Drain into Crucible with Fastbond out and Tinker for Zuran Orb one game, and then lay a bunch of artifacts and hardcast Darksteel Colossus the next game.  And when it does those things, its opponent will be one turn away from doing them itself.  You talk about Trinisphere stifling innovation?  Think about a format with enough of the powerful cards only available as one-ofs to make a whole deck out of them.  That's where we're headed if we keep with the "restrict whatever the most powerful thing currently available is" policy.

[Razvan]

You can restrict everything, and be left with 1.5, or you can restrict nothing, and be left with T1. Simple, isn't it?

People need to stop equating "restricting" with "banning".

For one thing, 1.5 will never have to worry about critical mass.

A lot of times, restricting IS banning. Yeah, maybe instead of 4 Workshops, you can now use 1 Workshop and 4 City of Traitors (or whatever, fill the 3 slots with Ancient Tombs or City of Traitors, or whatever), but the dynamics of the deck will change vastly.

It was Oscar that at some point stated, for budget builds, you cannot replace the explosiveness of certain T1 staples with less attractive options (Black Lotus with Lotus Petal, for example). If you cannot get the explosiveness, go for consistency.

The same thing can be applied here. You cannot get the explosiveness of Workshop, with Ancient Tomb or CoT, so you might as well go for consistency. Thus breaking the whole point of the deck.

Restricting Workshop is effectively banning it.

[VGB]

Restricting Workshop is effectively banning it.

Yet restricting isn't banning, thus you have the potential to use functional equivalents as well as retain the power of the original.

Of course no other land is identical to Mishra's Workshop, but the fact that many are approximate, such as the aforementioned Ancient Tomb and City of Traitors, as well as Tolarian Academy and Crystal Vein, lets Vintage do what other formats can't - circumvent the bounds of restriction.

Heck, Vintage can even make a Lotus equivalent out of Lion's Eye Diamond.  That's what critical mass is all about.

edit -

By the way, I'm not advocating restriction, just postulating why it isn't that terrible.

edit2 -

I think andrewpate wins the thread.

[Vegeta2711]

Restricting Workshop is effectively banning it.

Redunant mana piece and Ancient Tomb + City of Traitors are very good and are in fact better than shop in some situations by allowing mana for TFK, Tinker, etc. Most of these decks wouldn't change that much. I don't know about you, but I'm sure at least a few of us have tried MWS deck with replacements and it works a lot better than you make it sound. If 3Sphere were restricted, I'd still expect them to run one with normal Spheres.

Basically a lot of the cards that aren't played anymore when restricted, is because they aren't good enough as 1-of's and aren't redunant with the rest of the deck.

[majestyk1136]

I disagree with this line of argument.  The fact that FoW has practically become a necessity to have available on the first turn for control decks is a pretty restrictive way to start out your deck design.  Mulliganing into bad hands just to have Force is an unfortunate reality that we have to face now.

I agree with you that there are other "problem cards" such as Oath and Sphere, but the problem is that these spells are fed by explosive mana.  I don't have a solution for Oath, but Where did it go?  I haven't seen an oath deck in quite awhile.  The issue comes down to this:  People are going to want to play the best deck.  Right now, one category of "best decks" are sporting 4X Dark Ritual.  Some of the other "Best decks" are sporting 4xTrinisphere/Shop/Whatever.  A third category of "best decks" uses force of will because there is no other option.  You force or you Die.

Let's frame the argument this way:  Lotus Petal is restricted and it generates a Net Gain of 1 mana for one card.  Rit generates +2 for one card.  The fact that Petal can make any color doesn't even matter because it almost always makes U or B.  ESG is unrestricted and nobody cares about it, largely because it makes an irrelevant color, G.  The scariest thing about petal is the fact that it can feed (you guessed it) Dark Ritual.  Oh yeah, and Will.  The fact that Petal is restricted and given Rit's synergy with too many good broken spells like Necro, Doomsday, Will or you name it puts the nail in the coffin for me.

As far as Workshop goes, we're stuck with it I'm afraid.  There's always going to be some bozo that wants to break out a First turn Juggernaut/Su-Chi and restricting his toy will make him cry because his pocketbook will begin to resemble a Door to Nothingness, so we can't do that.  The thing we need to stop is the madness of seeing that irritating play backed up by a consistent Trinisphere/Crucible Lockdown.  At least make prison players think a little bit about how to effectively deny somebody mana instead of mindlessly puking out a Sph3re on turn 1 all the time.

I just get the sense that you guys are advocating shooting at the monsters' arms and not the head of the thing.  The problem with this being that in Vintage if you shoot off an arm an additional one which is probably just as good as the one you just blew away will replace it.  Ritual is the common thread that is holding the oppressive web of combo together, as is Trinisphere for prison.  I don't want to touch the issue of Mana Drain as it seems to be as much of a third rail as shop is with many people.

It's time that we sack up and admit that most t1 games should have meaninful turns after turn 1.  I'm not saying we should gut combo ruthlessly, but we should at least make random turn 1 wins as rare as possible.

EDIT:  Another telling fact that is that Null Rod has become too slow/pretty irrelevant at stopping combo as alot of their accelerants aren't even affected by it.  Same goes for prison.  They just don't care about null rod anymore seemingly because their artifacts don't rely on activated abilities.  Blah.  Turn back the clock on the fundamental turn.

[Razvan]

Restricting Workshop is effectively banning it.

Redunant mana piece and Ancient Tomb + City of Traitors are very good and are in fact better than shop in some situations by allowing mana for TFK, Tinker, etc. Most of these decks wouldn't change that much. I don't know about you, but I'm sure at least a few of us have tried MWS deck with replacements and it works a lot better than you make it sound. If 3Sphere were restricted, I'd still expect them to run one with normal Spheres.

Although I agree that City and Tomb work much better with the other cards (including a welder under trinisphere), that is not the entire picture.

A turn 1 Juggernaut is very possible with Workshop, a lot less so without it (I guess I can run my simulation later on to get exact figures). That 1 mana makes a big difference.

A turn 1 Trinisphere/Crucible is obviously a given with a Workshop, less so with the other 2 lands. Yes, sometimes Workshop->Trinisphere is suicide for the workshop player as well (wasteland), but that's not the point.

Relying on moxen and sol ring (and a few other) is the functionally almost same as having a 2-piece vs a 3-piece combo. Yes, it's very doable, but less frequent.

And we all now workshop relies on a play like that.

Basically a lot of the cards that aren't played anymore when restricted, is because they aren't good enough as 1-of's and aren't redunant with the rest of the deck.

This is well put. I am not sure how it fits, but I agree with you.