The State of Vintage: Has Vintage Bled Out the Casual Players?

[Hi-Val]

The casual players bring their Enchantress decks that did well at GenCon two years ago and then run into a monstrosity like Stax or CS or Gifts, and they crumble. They stick it out for another round, and they crumble again. How were they supposed to deal with Tinker? They didn't even know what the card did! They play a few more rounds, and even the 0-X people are beating them. They pack up their cards and see that Vintage is not what it used to be and decide to play in something else instead, like Legacy.

There will always be the people who put together Pox with a proxied Black Lotus and bring it to a tournament and lose. Those people learn though and never come back to the tournament. If they do, it's with a much bigger investment and a different deck. The point is that they aren't playing what they used to be playing, and so they aren't casual players anymore.

Vintage keeps growing and growing; the last SCG was the biggest ever. Power prices rise. People flock to the format, because everyone deep down wants to play Vintage. Casual players are being driven out, but that does not mean that *players* are being driven out. The player base has changed.

And finally, LOL @ proxies "stifling innovation".

[dandan]

I'm a casual player. I used to be a hardened tournament player back when everyone was bad but now I don't have the time to playtest. I'm not being driven out but I now have the (very attractive) lure of Legacy as well as understanding that tournament Vintage is never going to be about fun players playing fun decks ever again. I'm happy that the format has developed and amazed that it remains 'balanced' (in that all sorts of broken things can happen) even though it has moved away from me.

I will continue to play casual Vintage decks until the day I die (although most of my casual decks will be Legacy legal as a default) but I doubt that I will play in any large Vintage tournaments.

Now none of you will ever have to face Nova Pentacle in a tournament ever again......

[moatzu]

I think, that the situation of Vintage are changing, the player tipe1 age average is growing, the most "pro players" are more close to thirty to twenty. When i started to play i was 18 and didn´t have enough money to buy all cards thas i wished. Now, i am 28 and i´m working and buy the power (except lotus) i started to play vintage "seriously" again two years ago. Since i have power i start to play more serious and go to tournament not only to enjoy, i want to win. I think that there are a evolution and most people with my age, that continue playing follow the same evolution they are buying power and playing tier 1 decks, they and me continue playing for fun among us, but when we go to a tournament we go to win the prizes, and each tournament is a excuse to travel (like paris). Me and my friends went to paris to play for fun (no one of us thougth to win nothing), and to know a new country and city.
The thing that i try to say is people are changing like the format, both are growing, people becomes older, have more money, spend it in expensive cards and this do that this people want a reward for spend their money and format grow in the same direction, if you don´t own power you wouldn´t be able to win something important, we don´t play casual decks, we play tier 1 decks, this is funny we do broken things that is more spectacular that play a mountain and play a kird ape.

[Law]

The casual players that just play for fun will lose. Those that just play to win will have health problems. But those that do both will keep playing and changing the format.

The player base is filling up with those that either play in a tourney to play in a tourney, play to win and have fun, and those that are just getting into the format with some known info.

Look at my area the type one FN tourneys have gone from 26 people to 8-14 people. But it is also summer so that might have something to add to the drop.

[Elric]

People need to take a step back. There is no reason to play power tournaments for the prize--it's all about fun. Wait!? What the heck!? Theres no reason to want that prize--shade are you crazy!! No, I'm not. What I mean by saying this is that Type 1 power tournaments are not tournaments players should go to solely looking to walk away with power and nothing else.

Let's use an example. If there is a 50 player tournament that plays 5 rounds and cuts to top 8, with prizes like the y last power tournament I attended ( 1st: time walk, 2nd: 65 store credit, 3rd-4th: 35 store credit, 5th-8th: 20 store credit, there is no mathematical reason to support playing competitively, solely for the prize, unless you plan on finishing in 1st place. In the 6+ hours it takes you to play the tournament, you could have been simply working at California's minimum wage of 6.75 and made $40.5, which, at the end of the day, is what 48 players should have done--unless they are playing for sometheing more than money, like fun and a great atmosphere.

I agree completely.

[eddavatar]

I'm speaking here with a perspective of a hermit.

I was playing competitively a year ago. But one reason I think why many "casual" or even hardcore players are disappearing from vintage is because many of us who play vintage are in the 21+ bracket, which means we're in a transition from school to something like work and grad school (I'm personally applying to pharmacy school) (And RIP Team Food is Broken, thanks to work and life). With less time to play test, I simply can't afford to play competitively, since I dont want to lose. For casual players, it's just even harder for them to play when they've more and more responsibility on their shoulders.

Also, keeping powers while having to pay bills is rough. I'm the only one in my team who's still holding powers, as my teammates sold their betas. The allure of selling a collection in return for not having to worry financially for a few months is rather huge.

I do think, however, vacation seasons would bring players back to the table. I've taken a hiatus from magic for the last few months thanks to heavy school work, but I'm going to start playing semi-regularly at least locally. A few competitive players down here asks me to help them play test, I might do just that.

[BigMac]

I can relate to Eddavatar. I started playing back in 1993. I was at collega at the time and we had a huge group to play with, which nowadays would be considered a team as we tested a lot against eachother. Then i lost interest for a few years and needed the money. My luck was that at the time i had 2 sets of power so i only had to sell 1. I always kept on trading for the new series not to get behind but i didnt play competative magic for at least 3 or 4 years. I started again when some friends pretty much dragged me to a tournament and slowly i started playing somewhat more competatively again.

I am now considered to be among the better players in my country but still see myself to be a casual player as i do not have the time to play much due to work and my social life. What i see however is that more and more of my old magic friends, that stopped playing competatively right about the time i did, start playing again. Some take up the regular types, but most take up vintage. They recognise not to have to high expectations at first and just have fun and get reacquianted with the format. If you are new to a format you need to learn that format before you are good at it. It took me a while to get to the standard i am playing at now. It takes up time to read about new decks and keep up to date with new tech. Leaving vintage for a period of time will mean losing track of the recent tech and that means when you return you will have to face new tech and probably lose as you have no idea what to do about it.

My point being, i think more players have started playing vintage making it more competative. Casual players still will have chances as long as they make some time to keep up with the new tech. I keep saying that netdecking will not win tournaments. It will give you a good deck but you still will have to know how to play it, with vintage probably more than else (other discussion altogether). So casual players are not gone forever, they will be back when they choose to be back. And more people will be back than everybody expects now. Vintage is growing and will keep on growing, numberwise and competatively.

[rvs]

I keep saying that netdecking will not win tournaments.

However, netdecking and some proper metagaming will. For the most part, that's where my wins come from anyway.

[Smmenen]

Which statement do you think is more true:

1) The restriction of trinisphere helped type one

2) the restriction of trinisphere had little effect on type one

I think that Type One, when played, is probably the most addictive format becuase it has all the fun cards.  However, kindling that spark of interest in other players is the real trick. 

I'd like to see Vintage continue to grow - but I'm not sure what needs to be done aside from the obvious:
1) increase the proxy count
2) more prize support for touranaments

SCG has done its part but outside from the SCG circuit, is type one flourishing or stagnant? 

One thing that I think has finally been driven home to me is how difficult Vintage is from a skill perspective.  There are so many decisions and the games become so complex that skill is a really big factor.  Does that drive competitors away? 

Here is my problem with the "casual" crowd.

When I go to a tournament with a huge casual contingent, it isn't very fun.   It isn't fun for several reasons.  First of all, if I put alot of work into the tournament through testing and preparation and I play against someone who just took out their deck for the weekend (maybe the only tournament they play in all year) and I LOSE, I feel really crappy.  Matters are made worse becuase they are usually quite smug about it.  This happened to me in Cleveland.  I took my Intuition Gifts list to a 16 person tournament in Cleveland in April (?) and there were like 3 competitive players.  I went 0-3 drop.  It was my worst performance ever.

My round one opponent was a teammate.  But my round two opponent was a local who plays mono blue control with Phids, Morhpling and Rootwater Theif!  I made some play mistakes to be sure, but this guy pwned me and was gloating the whole time. 

Think about it this way: If I beat a casual player, it means almost nothing.  But if i lose, then it feels really bad for me - esp. if I put alot of work into it.  Thankfully that doesn't happen very much (I'm not used to losing in Vintage anymore), but it just seems to me that the casual crowd makes things "less fun" for the competitive players.  And I think its a viscious cycle. 

I honestly want to play in tournaments with lots of good players, lots of great competition, and a tough day.   If you win, it feels great.  If you lose, it isn't good - but at least you had fun playing the games.  In a casual field, it isn't even fun playing the game.

Sadly by my own admission, I have been addicted to type one for probably four years now.  I was always astounded when people would tell me that they didn't want to play Vintage or had other more fun things to do.  JP, for example, doesn't like playing.   That blew my mind.  For the first time that I can remember I actually had those thoughts recently.  I just don't want to play Type One if the field isn't strong.  If you lose, it was a waste of time.  If you win, it still feels like a waste of time. 

[Whatever Works]

I have to echo the statements about playing in a weak field. Though winning round 1 or 2 against a scrub is nice (curtainly better then losing), I HATE playing against bad decks (IE goblins/elfs/Meandeck Gifts (thats a joke smennen)). I feel like I am wasting my time and I have better things to do then play bad decks, and often my desire to rush through the match because of a feeling of superiority (even if perhaps false) has caused me to make some pretty horrible play errors over the years. In these situations I dislike casual players... but I know that if they didnt exist the attendance would be smaller, and so would the prize support that is neccessary to keep some people interested. Which is a double edged sword.

The best thing that could happen to type 1 is to be put in the same situation legacy has been put into recently, but then allow 10 proxys. Even if for just 1 event. This would spark huge interest and would bring in a large new audience, and I agree with steve when he says that type 1 is addicting, and I believe 1 large event could get many many people hooked.

However, the day that wizards supports proxies or type 1 in any type of major event is the day hell freezes over. The next best hope would be the equivilent of the paris tourney in the USA That sparked a ton of europeon interest in the format even if only for a few months.

Kyle L

[Revvik]

The next best hope would be the equivilent of the paris tourney in the USA That sparked a ton of europeon interest in the format even if only for a few months.

Hell, even I wanted to go.  I don't think the plane ticket would have even been the prohibitive factor (I still have both kidneys).

I'd definitely like to echo how Smmenen feels about pulling Vintage antics on casual players - I feel so bad when I'm Intuitioning before a Yawgmoth's Will turn while staring down a Llanowar Elf and Rogue Elephant.  There is definitely a feeling from both players that this entire game was a waste of time, and I don't particularly like it.
Unless I saw the guy being a total dick, in which case I'll gladly return the favor (<-- not afraid to be an asshole, even when it doesn't count).

And yeah, if they beat you, it is kind of demoralizing.  You think back to all the close games against the Vintage field that you've scraped your way out of, the victories you've had before and the impossible situations you've conquered and think "Damn, how did I bury myself like that?"  It's not so much that you were beaten, it's that you let yourself get beaten, and by something you've instinctively underestimated (most likely with good reason).

1) The restriction of trinisphere helped type one
2) the restriction of trinisphere had little effect on type one

Honestly?  I couldn't care less, I'll play the format whatever their changes (at least, until they restrict Force of Will, unrestrict all the Moxen and Mind's Desire, and give us the finger all the way from Seattle).  I know one thing just from looking at newer players: it makes it harder for someone to enter into, pay for, and enjoy a format with plays like that running around, and the looks on the face of some of these people trying their damnedest to put up with that is argument enough for its restriction.

Debatable, I'm sure.  I never claimed to be a master at all of this theory, you know.

Back to the subject on hand (the title of this thread?), here's my take on it:
When I picked Magic back up, Legions had been out for about a month.  The reason?  OMG Slivers were back!! (tells you something about my skill at the time.)  I progressed slowly, eventually taking Type II slightly seriously.  By the time of Mirrodin's release, I had my first quality tournament deck: R/G Beatz.
A Vintage tournament (sanctioned) was held at my store, so I decided to just enter my Beatz deck and play (dead last was fun, by the way).  After that performance, I decided to take this format seriously, like I did with Standard, and build a deck for the next tournament, a mono-blue Fish deck.  I had evolved from a casual spectator into a more professional player, even taking second at that tournament.
I see this happening all the time!  Casual players will start with some creation of theirs, and work their way up to more competitive heights.  We're not bleeding them out, we're absorbing them in (of course, a lot of casual players are set in their ways and refuse to play like that.  So be it, I suppose).

It's kind of the same transition a new player goes through from "starting the game" into "playing Standard."

How does this happen?  They taste the game.  They prepare more, to play better (as is natural).  Eventually, success will start sucking them in.  Not just the prizes, Smmenen  - Success is different.  Competing and succeeding, and having fun at it.
The proxies are an interesting variable in all this.  It makes the cards more accessible, making the fun more accessible, and making it easier to become successful.

I realize I might sound like the only way to have fun is to win, but honestly that isn't my intent.  Success in this case doesn't always mean winning first place, it can also mean "playing competitively, being a challenge" as opposed to "playing like a scrub."

[Eandori]

If we have lost the casual players forever i am unsure as i try to keep my friends somewhat involved anyways. I suspect other people doing the same and in the end the game is just to much fun to stop playing altogether. I think also the casual players will start adapting a bit more, or just don't care about results. I say this with in mind that we as a community will have to keep a niche to stay open minded and courteous towards people thinking out of the box and playing out of the box. Vintage is about winning, but it is also about friendships and courteous behaviour.

If we stop being condescending the casual players will return. I am sure of it as the game of magic is fun in its core, and vintage players are good people in their core, lets just watch out for those condescending pricks poisining the format

Can I get an AMEN!

[Smmenen]

Well, it's true that success makes you want to play this format - but I am not convinced that success with a deck like, say Fish, is really the best gateway to Vintage.  It isn't a bad gateway, but it doesn't give you a real taste of what can be done in the format.  You're getting people into tournaments, but if that is what they think of Vintage, is it going to keep them there?  I had high hopes for Dday combo becuase it was budget and fun as hell to play.  Unforunately, that fell flat.

I am also wondering if skill isn't a huge barrier that didn't used to exist.  Is it possible that the decks are getting just so complicated to play that this format is nearly impenetrable? 

I think one of the causes for alarm that no one has said yet is basically the dying of the old guard.  To be sure, I've watched players drop off the scene for years now.  The biggest was Azhrei.  There were others.

But think about this:
Jp Meyer doesn't play anymore.  Zherbus is gone.  David Allen has sold his cards.  Shane doesn't really play much anymore.  Josh Reynalds is more interested in judging.  That's the OLD guard - the old paragons.  Basically, I'm the only pre-carl winter paragon still playing and actively innovating.  Other upstarts are on the wane: Marc Perez put 10 testing games into Richmond.  Kowal, the newest upstart seems disenchanted with the game.  Others have dissapeared: Eastman, Kerz, etc.

And I have no idea why aside from personal issues. Let's face it, if the game were really that fun for them, they would still be playing.  I don't know what it is exactly either.  We are losing players - but are we gaining that calibre back?  It takes years to learn the format and the barrier to entry is Enormous.  I can't even fathom trying to get into Vintage right now.  My collection is in constant growth - and I own everything there is to own - but I have to keep buying just to keep up so I can play any deck in the format (Old Man, In The Eye, and Chains are notable recent purchases). 

The SCG tournaments just seem to keep growing.  Richmond was 110 (the biggest since the first).  SCG Chicago was 154 - 20 more than the previous.  And Rochester was the largest event yet.  Waterbury hit 200 in January but fell to 140 in April.  Those are huge attendence records. 

I think that the standard number of proxies needs to grow even more.  The prices are such huge barriers to the format that we simply can't get new players in unless it is commonly accepted and respected.  The price of Black Lotus is just absurd right now.  The flip side of the attendence records is that the price of Vintage staples keeps going up at the same time that we are trying to grow the format.  If we want the SCG touranments to continue next year, Pete has to continue to do well on them.  Breaking even is not likely to make him want to continue the effort.  And let's face it, and this is hard fact to face right now, without SCG circuit, what is Vintage right now? 

[Mixing Mike]

Personally, I'm getting tired of going to big events.  Maybe it's because of my preformances, but $25-$30 to go X-2 drop isn't all that appealing to me, even if it's for a guranteed Mox if you make Top 8.  Maybe it's the noise.  In any case, I'm kinda sick of it.  I prefer the small 20-35 man events for a mox.

But think about this:
JP Meyer doesn't play anymore.  Zherbus is gone.  David Allen has sold his cards.  Shane doesn't really play much anymore.  Josh Reynalds is more interested in judging.  That's the OLD guard - the old paragons.  Basically, I'm the only pre-carl winter paragon still playing and actively innovating.  Other upstarts are on the wane: Marc Perez put 10 testing games into Richmond.  Kowal, the newest upstart seems disenchanted with the game.  Others have dissapeared: Eastman, Kerz, etc.

Actually, I was talking to Outlaw the other day about this and like, most of the bigger names are dropping out.  Things change, and new players emerge as the players to beat.  Last weekend, I saw some of the people I grew up playing Magic with in the Top 4.  Like, I was a scrub with him two years ago, going 0-2 drop in everything and going home after some trading.  Now we're making money playing, innovating decks, starting teams, and having people say "Oh noez, I got paired with XXXX, guess I lose".  Hell, I've made about a total of 7 or 8 single elemin round showings in my 4 years playing Magic, and I've got people who are very interested with my opinions; and not just interested, but sometimes use it as basis for building their deck.

[Komatteru]

I think one of the causes for alarm that no one has said yet is basically the dying of the old guard.  To be sure, I've watched players drop off the scene for years now.  The biggest was Azhrei.  There were others.

But think about this:
Jp Meyer doesn't play anymore.  Zherbus is gone.  David Allen has sold his cards.  Shane doesn't really play much anymore.  Josh Reynalds is more interested in judging.  That's the OLD guard - the old paragons.  Basically, I'm the only pre-carl winter paragon still playing and actively innovating.  Other upstarts are on the wane: Marc Perez put 10 testing games into Richmond.  Kowal, the newest upstart seems disenchanted with the game.  Others have dissapeared: Eastman, Kerz, etc.

I've actually put a lot of thought into that and discussed the matter with a friend of mine a few times.  While I'm pretty much a newcomer to all this (I first discovered TMD one year ago after Origins, and was completely terrible, as I had just come back from a nearly two year break), I've come a long way in a pretty short period of time.  I can't speak about the old generation too much, since I didn't see it all firsthand, but here are my observations.  Last year, when I first got into all of this, I noticed that there was an established generation of players--mostly the Vintage Adepts on the site here--who had been playing Vintage for quite some time and were responsible for the creation of the community as we have it today.  This crowd contained, and was certainly not limited to, the names you mentioned.  I recall huge debates about Meandeck vs. Shortbus, and all sorts of hoopla regarding that.  Now, it is generally regarded that TSB is "dead," and only has two active members (one of whom is disenchanted with the game, as you say, and has been selling some of his cards), the rest having been taken captive by the Worlds of Warcraft.  Take a look at who posts on the site now.  There's hardly ever any action in the closed Vintage forum because nearly everyone who can post there is either 1) not paying attention to Magic in general, or 2) found a more useful place of discussion (i.e., team forums or something similar).  The Community and General/Humor forums have a lot more action going on in them, despite being open to the same people as the closed forum.  Last year, I remember a huge number of VAs posting and such.  Now, I think Smmenen, Doug Linn, and Rich Shay (maybe a handful of others) are the only ones who still routinely post.  Even the number of full users who are active isn't especially that high.

While I'm still on the subject of TMD, it's pretty clear that TMD no longer controls the format, as it once did.  The old generation was really able to control what people played and thought was good via this website.  Now, that's no longer happening.  Vintage has grown so large that not everyone with any skill is reading and posting on TMD any more.  People are largely doing their own thing.  If people really took everything here to heart, 5 months ago, Fish would have been completely dead, as it rolled to Workshop Aggro and Mana Drain decks adapted to beat it.  Instead, people kept playing it.  4CC can still be found at tournaments, despite that no "serious" player really considers it too viable at the present moment.  There's no longer five decks that people play.  There's more like twenty.  The older generation has had to adapt to changes in the format, which I gather hasn't especially pleased some of them.  They no longer control the format: it changes much more quickly now and more sharply than it did before.  This has made the game "less fun" for some of them, I'm sure, and they've moved on to better hobbies.

Essentially, there's a new generation emerging, and instead of joining the old generation, as it should be, it's replacing it.  For whatever reason, the older generation is phasing itself out--perhaps change of life, other obligations, loss of interest in the game, found something else that is just as fun but a lot less expensive, whatever.  Every format has its "players to beat," and Vintage is no exception.  Regular players on the PTQ scene can identify players who routinely make T8s at those events, or are always in contention, yet never seem to qualify.  In the other formats, the "players to beat" are often limited to local areas and certain shops.  Of course, everyone knows all the Pro Tour players, and I'm sure everyone would love to play and defeat Kai Budde or John Finkel in a match somewhere somehow.  However, Vintage is unique in that our "pros" are very visible and accessible.  You get a chance to talk to your T1 role models and such.  Often, they're just a PM or AIM away.  The need to have such players still remains high.  Since the previously established gurus have largely stopped playing, a new generation of gurus has been created to replace them.  It gives everyone something to shoot for, I guess.  People are no longer aiming to beat David Allen, Marc Perez, Mark Biller, and Zherbus because they're gone.  They're striving to beat players like Mixing Mike, Outlaw, Jason Zheng, and myself (I'll try to be humble here)--the rising players, in addition for still shooting at Rich Shay and like all of Meandeck.

And let's face it, and this is hard fact to face right now, without SCG circuit, what is Vintage right now?

Essentially what it was years ago: a bunch of people playing at stores with their old cards.  Small isolated communities of people who want to play with all the old cards they have.  TMD gives everyone a place to talk and centralizes the format, but largely, each small community would only have a handful of "good players"--those keeping up with the latest advances and changes in the format: the TMD readers.  With the SCG circuit, we have a lot more people who aren't necessarily active on TMD (maybe they read it, but don't actively post or get involved) who are very competitive.  I get pretty upset when I hear the phrase "more randoms are winning tournaments."  Not everyone who has any skill posts on online forums, and the "randoms" have gotten strong enough that they can challenge the avant-guard players.  So, maybe we're phasing out JP Meyer, Dave Allen, Josh Reynolds, and the like, and gaining 10 players who are adept.  We lose one "superstar" but gain 10 players fully capable of winning any given day.  The field is growing stronger, not weaker.  It's just getting too difficult for a handful of players to win every tournament.

[Kerz]

Even as a young person, I believe I am qualified to speak on this format. I have been through the entire cycle:

When I was 12 years old, and Masques block was in full swing, the game of Magic was introduced to me. I went through the stages of playing in a group of friends with house rules and whatnot, and soon discovered my local cardshop and their weekly 20-30 man type one tournaments. By the time Planeshift was on the shelves, I was ready to make the jump: from this game being a silly way to waste time to a fun, competitive, game of wits and calculations. Once I began playing in tournaments, I was utterly destroyed during the rounds. After a month passed, my 13 year old brain flashed me "you aren't getting unlucky every week, you simply aren't on the same level as the competition on the most basic plane: the deck". I did what, in my opinion, is the best thing for a player not knowing of a format to do: copy someone else's shit like it was my job. For the next few weeks, I sat out of the tournament and noticed which decks were winning, and which weren't. I quickly made the decision to save up my pennies and invest in a more serious deck, so I could actually win something. Is this the exact moment when I went from a casual player to a tournament player? Absolutely not. Some would say, playing a netdeck would disqualify me from casual status, but I disagree. It is all in the way you approach the game. I was approaching it to win my local 20 man tournaments, in which the same people showed every week, and there was no on line collaboration (not like it didn't exist yet, it's just that the players were too lazy/ignorant to make use of it). After I made my deck and began playing it every week, my playskill developed, as well as my magic knowledge from lurking on TMD (Kerzkid11 = best 13 year old evar!). My goal, always, was to get to the level of playing in the power tournaments I read about. My budget sleigh deck was not going to get me there.

So, around Onslaught/Legions (don't hold me to these), and after reading up and continuing to win the small tournaments, I decided to make another leap: bigger tournament magic. By bigger, I don't mean Waterbury, or SCG. I mean Hadley, Cape Cod, and other 30-50 mans in which people I knew from TMD traveled in packs to compete on a semi-competitive level. Still, once I began hitting these tournaments, the atmosphere was always casual, with tons of wacky decks, and a lot of players in the tournament knowing they don't have a shot in the world. There was no rule lawyering, and the "judge" was often a level 0 who was participating in the event. The players were solid- the people I was playing with are some of the TMD elite still posting or spoken about today. These tournaments, at this point in time, were the perfect, perfect type one. The atmosphere was cool enough to keep the casual guys around (this includes prize structure/tourney price), but the competition was fierce enough to lure the top notch players from 100 miles away. My goal was to always keep getting better, to get to the level of play in which I read about happening at Gencon or Origins, or the level of knowledge of the format that the Paragons had. I stived to be the competitive player.

Time passed, events got bigger, power prices hit the roof, players got better. Around Mirrodin/Darksteel era, I was playing in 4 tournaments a month, usually 2 of them being for a Black Lotus. I remember one distinct moment where the fact that type one blew up really hit me: I'm pretty sure it was at AndyStok's double lotus event. Like, 175 people showed, which was around 50 less than he expected! The event sizes were getting out of control. Eight rounds! Thats almost PTQ level! At this event, I played a Keeper concoction which Dave Lawrence and myself had cooked up and playtested the night before. Around one of the early rounds, I ran into a rules lawyer who ended up screwing me over because I had an 14 card sideboard on the table (one was stuck in my box, unnoticed). I thought back to the days where this would be solved by getting me another copy, or just playing on, and sighed. The golden age of type one was 6 feet under. This was the new era. 20% of the field playing the exact same list, and people getting wins by using the rules in the lowest possible way. I had become everything I strived for- a high-level player and name in the TMD community, but all I wanted was type one to go back to the days of old. Even TMD was showing signs of change/strain. But I won't get into that.(See JD's comments above).

So in summation, YES, Vintage HAS bled out all of the casual players. Vintage has bled out more than that, Steve. It has bled out many people who were not casual at all, but still wanted a fun, enjoyable game (This includes but is not limited to nearly the entire Team Hadley and old CT crews sans a few)There are so many things taking the enjoyment out of this format: rules lawyering, lessening deck diversity (I know we have a lot of archetypes, but NO deck was EVER more than 10% of the tournament 2 years ago), and the advent of more and more absolutely degenerate, unfun decks. And if you think unfun is a relative term, make a poll on how many players have fun when killed turn one or locked down turn two. Vintage as we knew it is gone forever. The new age has many participants and supporters, and I commend them for their efforts and writings. However, I am not a member of this group. Was the golden age I described more of a gilded age? You may think so. Please, argue. With that, I bid my official farewell to Type One (NOT "Vintage") forever.

Aaron Kerzner

[Whatever Works]

There are so many things taking the enjoyment out of this format: rules lawyering, lessening deck diversity (I know we have a lot of archetypes, but NO deck was EVER more than 10% of the tournament 2 years ago), and the advent of more and more absolutely degenerate, unfun decks.

I have to disagree with the 10% fact. If anything there were fewer decks 2 years ago, and those decks made up a greater % of the field. Maybe if the field was horrible this could be argued, but if you go back to early waterbury days (60-80 people), about 60% of the field was GAT, and the rest were 2-3 different decks to beat GAT, and 10% was crappy budget rogue (during 5 proxy era).

Type One isnt changing on the local level that has to be made clear. Its changing on the broader more competitive level just how we all wanted, right?

[Godder]

Although I don't say much in the Vintage section of this community these days, I've been a member since day one of TMD, and was a member of BD before that. I remember the days when multi-coloured control was the decktype to beat. I remember Legend Blue (and FU Blue...), TnT and GaT.

Someone above mentioned a paradigm shift, and while others may dismiss the suggestion, the shift was when the collective minds of TMD (among others) realised that multi-coloured control was no longer the deck to play or beat. When people stopped tweaking multi-coloured control decklists, and started designing and playing other decks, the format shifted in a way that changed everything. TnT and GaT were the catalysts for that, but another point was that RnD were pushing the design envelope again, after the massive upheavals of Urza's Block (although Mirage and Tempest Block had plenty of interesting cards as well...). Masques Block didn't have much, but Invasion Block saw the printing of Fact or Fiction and Quirion Dryad, while Odyssey Block saw the printing of Psychatog and the Wishes (particularly Cunning and Burning Wish), Onslaught Block saw the (new) Fetchlands and Goblins, and Mirrodin was Mirrodin. Kamigawa Block has Gifts Ungiven to play with, so the tradition continues...

However, while that gives some idea of the change in deck design and development going on in the last 5 years, it's also true that Vintage has become much more similar to other tournament environments, thanks to the incremental improvement in prizes and attendances. Once, a tournament that gave away a Mox was big, while a Lotus tournament was huge. Now, a Mox tourney is small,  and huge GP-style tourneys (French Vintage Championship, GenCon, SCG P9, Waterbury for example) are relatively common events. With such a massive increase in prize support, players playing in these put substantial amounts of effort into designing and developing decks, as well as improving their playing skills. With the influx of newcomers with that level of dedication, it has become much harder for the names of old to keep up, and with the attitudes (win-at-all-costs, rules-lawyering etc.) and rough edges of a lot of these newcomers, tournaments just aren't the fun times they used to be for many names of old, hence the drop-off rate.

To answer the particular question (has Vintage bled out the Casual Players?), it has, but only out of tournaments. There are plenty of casual players at the shops playing in $5, 15-20 player tournaments, and no doubt having a blast doing it. There are probably plenty of them playing Legacy these days as well, but that's another matter.

[Machinus]

Type One isnt changing on the local level that has to be made clear. Its changing on the broader more competitive level just how we all wanted, right?

I wanted it. A lot of people want it. I still want it. We all have to cope with the loss of the timmy's, but it doesn't feel good to beat enchantress in a tournament. I go to exercise my tight game, and my jedi mind tricks. I go to demolish other players with my skill, and possibly win something. That is what tournament magic is, and type 1 players for a long time never understood this.

Steve said something in a post before that I have mentioned several times because I recognized it immediately. There are those type 1 players who just get people into the game. They love playing. They are fun to watch, fun to play against, and they really care about the format. I am sure there are many people here on TMD, including the mods and adepts, who enjoy this hobby because someone showed it to them and convinced them to give it a try. This is how the format grows. This is how we get new players and how the community exists at all. A multi thousand dollar entry barrier is not sexy to younger players. An eight-thousand-card card pool is not sexy to players who don't love deckbuilding. Print runs of a few thousand and tournaments 100 miles away are not sexy to ANY magic player. But TMD has almost 4000 members anyway, and moxes are getting more expensive every day.

I am one of those people in my area. I have done a lot towards getting the first sanctioned Vintage tournaments in Asheville in over 5 years. I get new players into the game, and I build budget decks and lend cards to players so that they can play. I got them to try Legacy. I built them decks and helped convince my TO to get into it. It is hard work to get people to play. You all may know how great Vintage is, but they are NEVER going to learn unless someone shows it to them. Everyone on these boards who loves Vintage has a responsibility to keep the game alive. It is your job to show the game to players who have never experienced it. Without your involvement, the carrying capacity of the format plummets, and the community dwindles.

Over the last 2.5 years, the unprecedented growth we have witnessed has been wonderful. When Pete announced the 2005 series, I think a lot of us felt that this was it, that we had finally got to where we wanted to be. This opportunity for growth may never come again. They may not announce another P9 series. Waterbury might not get bigger again. Forsythe might stop talking about Vintage because people might get bored of it. Local TOs might permanently replace Vintage with Legacy. These are all realistic possibilities. Legacy, while a great format that I know most Vintage players enjoy, just doesn't compare. It has way more support and will have way more players, but it's just not the same. I don't want to say bad things about a new and promising format, but it really threatens the Vintage community of the future.

I think I ended up sounding harsher and more demanding than I intended, but we need to recognize the power we have over the future of our format, and use it.

[Revvik]

Well, it's true that success makes you want to play this format - but I am not convinced that success with a deck like, say Fish, is really the best gateway to Vintage.  It isn't a bad gateway, but it doesn't give you a real taste of what can be done in the format.  You're getting people into tournaments, but if that is what they think of Vintage, is it going to keep them there?  I had high hopes for Dday combo becuase it was budget and fun as hell to play.  Unforunately, that fell flat.

Unfortunately, you're right.  Fish was definitely not the most fun way to get people into the format, and as soon as possible, I picked up something stronger (Sapphire Oath, I think).
However, it provides a way for newer players to utilize their Standard skills, like combat math, while getting used to the pace of the format.  On a funnier note, I was pretty nervous about going into a field dominated by Hulk Smash decks with my little blue fish deck 

I am also wondering if skill isn't a huge barrier that didn't used to exist.  Is it possible that the decks are getting just so complicated to play that this format is nearly impenetrable?

Doomsday was, unfortunately.  Other than that, it was loads of fun, and certainly lived up to the title "most elegant win condition in Magic."
Mana Drain control decks are not a part of that skill barrier, though.  I think it works like this, if you're going to play in Vintage, then you have to overcome one of these three:
- Drain Control: Price Barrier (8 Power Cards, 4 Drains, maybe LoA)
- Combo: Skill Barrier (I've heard of maybe three people capable of playing Death Wish-enabled storm combo decks)
- Budget: Competitiveness barrier (less broken plays available, can be severely outpaced)

Jp Meyer doesn't play anymore.  Zherbus is gone.  David Allen has sold his cards.  Shane doesn't really play much anymore.  Josh Reynalds is more interested in judging.  That's the OLD guard - the old paragons.  Basically, I'm the only pre-carl winter paragon still playing and actively innovating.  Other upstarts are on the wane: Marc Perez put 10 testing games into Richmond.  Kowal, the newest upstart seems disenchanted with the game.  Others have dissapeared: Eastman, Kerz, etc.

I quit too, at one point.  So did a majority of the people I know that still play the game.  I'm not saying they'll all come clamoring back, but I certainly am hopeful.  I haven't had my ass kicked by any of these people yet, and it was something I was looking forward to 

We may not be replacing them with the same calibre of players, but I think that's an unfair statement.  The newer players are just that - newer.  They have not been playing nearly as much as the "old guard" of Vintage.
Is it the format itself causing this mass exodus of the name players?  I know that if I was on top of my game for years, and the speed of the format allowed me to be brutally outpaced and outlucked by someone who picked up a deck that I helped design, I would be MORE than disheartened. 

Granted, I'm glad that people are playing even more strongly now than before, since I get challenged more and win despite.  But when the same guy who boards in Red Elemental Blast to counteract his opponents Dazes (direct motherfucking quote, swear to God) lucks into Boseiju and Tinker to lock me out of the game, I lose more than a little desire to keep playing.

I think that the standard number of proxies needs to grow even more.  The prices are such huge barriers to the format that we simply can't get new players in unless it is commonly accepted and respected.  The price of Black Lotus is just absurd right now.  The flip side of the attendence records is that the price of Vintage staples keeps going up at the same time that we are trying to grow the format.  If we want the SCG touranments to continue next year, Pete has to continue to do well on them.  Breaking even is not likely to make him want to continue the effort.  And let's face it, and this is hard fact to face right now, without SCG circuit, what is Vintage right now? 

Wait wait wait - didn't we JUST institute a 10-proxy rule?
How about, in order to facilitate Pete's success, we set a base limit, and charge for additional proxies?  It's been suggested before, but I can't for the life of me remember why it was rejected.
As for where we'd be without the P9 series:
I hear Legacy is starting to take off  , and that's probably where I'd go for competitive play.

[Eandori]

Why bring your 'fun' deck to a tournament?  I thought winning was the fun part.

For you maybe.  For others maybe.  For everyone?  NO!!!!!

Did you ever consider that it's "fun" to run your casual deck against tournament ready decks at a tournament?  It is!  Yes I have done exactly that!  I AM a compeditive player and I DO win tournaments, but I also sometimes build something new and try it out because I enjoy the process of refining a deck.  Refining a deck means you are going to lose sometimes, and that's ok.  Because it's the journey that I enjoy, not just the goal.

If I want to make money, I'll work overtime.  If I want more power cards, I will buy them.  I'm not going to ruin my favorite hobby by putting so much pressure on myself that if I don't win every game I don't enjoy myself.  Does that mean I'm "casual?"  NO!  People in my situation can be EVERY BIT as good a player as somebody you consider to be elite.  We just don't "have to" win every game to feel satisfied.

[Vegeta2711]

Why bring your 'fun' deck to a tournament?  I thought winning was the fun part.

People in my situation can be EVERY BIT as good a player as somebody you consider to be elite.

Just for the record, no you can't. Look at just about every other competitve game ever for examples of this. Your own attitude automatically makes you worse than anyone of a similar skill level just because they have to drive and focus to win. Meanwhile you do not.

As for the topic:
Agree mostly with Kerz.

Ever since the prizes got SO BIG, it was a commonly understood fact that more and more of the casual atmosphere would be taken away eventually.

[lplaat]

Here is my problem with the "casual" crowd.

When I go to a tournament with a huge casual contingent, it isn't very fun.   It isn't fun for several reasons.  First of all, if I put alot of work into the tournament through testing and preparation and I play against someone who just took out their deck for the weekend (maybe the only tournament they play in all year) and I LOSE, I feel really crappy.  Matters are made worse becubecausey are usually quite smug about it.  This happened to me in Cleveland.  I took my Intuition Gifts list to a 16 person tournament in Cleveland in April (?) and there were like 3 competitive players.  I went 0-3 drop.  It was my worst performance ever.

My round one opponent was a teammate.  But my round two opponent was a local who plays mono blue control with Phids, Morhpling and Rootwater Theif!  I made some play mistakes to be sure, but this guy pwned me and was gloating the whole time. 

Think about it this way: If I beat a casual player, it means almost nothing.  But if i lose, then it feels really bad for me - esp. if I put alot of work into it.  Thankfully that doesn't happen very much (I'm not used to losing in Vintage anymore), but it just seems to me that the casual crowd makes things "less fun" for the competitive players.  And I think its a viscious cycle. 

I honestly want to play in tournaments with lots of good players, lots of great competition, and a tough day.   If you win, it feels great.  If you lose, it isn't good - but at least you had fun playing the games.  In a casual field, it isn't even fun playing the game.

Sadly by my own admission, I have been addicted to type one for probably four years now.  I was always astounded when people would tell me that they didn't want to play Vintage or had other more fun things to do.  JP, for example, doesn't like playing.   That blew my mind.  For the first time that I can remember I actually had those thoughts recently.  I just don't want to play Type One if the field isn't strong.  If you lose, it was a waste of time.  If you win, it still feels like a waste of time. 

That's the price you have to pay for being (one of) the best. In every competition the no1 is the one to beat, while the no1 is always supposed to beat the rest.

Your statement seems to imply you only want to play against the decks  you qualify as good and put some (a lot) testing into. This sounds like the reverse of the way it's supposed to be. Your deck shouldn't be able to beat all the other "good" decks. It should be able to beat all other decks. In my opinion this should be a challenge instead of a reason to lose enjoyment of the game. I don't see why it isn't fun being beaten down by a rogue elephant, while it is fun being beaten down by the newest netdecked fish version.

Boy, would I love to beat you down with a dwarven pony deck, but that will never happen unfortunately 

Laurens

[Revvik]

Amen to that "Never happen" with the Dwarven Pony thing.
Here's the thing: if your deck can beat all other decks, everyone would play it. 

I don't see why it isn't fun being beaten down by a rogue elephant...

Because decks utilizing this style are, by definition, unable to compete with an optimized, fully-powered field.  Which means if you get beaten down, you feel like you have failed yourself or your deck has failed you.

By "playing against the decks that Smmenen has referred to as good, and has put playtesting time into," the game becomes more about skill than "I combo out turn three across from the guy with the Plains.  That don't also tap for ."
And because the game doesn't contain some of these elements, a lot of people are starting to feel the casual element has left the game.  Hence the purpose behind this thread.

[lplaat]

Amen to that "Never happen" with the Dwarven Pony thing.
Here's the thing: if your deck can beat all other decks, everyone would play it. 

What I was trying to say was that it should be a challenge to come to a tournament with a deck that's both able to handle all the tier1 decks as well as sub-par stuff.

I don't see why it isn't fun being beaten down by a rogue elephant...

Because decks utilizing this style are, by definition, unable to compete with an optimized, fully-powered field.  Which means if you get beaten down, you feel like you have failed yourself or your deck has failed you.

Using a semi-quote and than answering is the same to me as not answering at all. Perhaps you could explain the difference I don't understand again, this time answering the full quote instead?

By "playing against the decks that Smmenen has referred to as good, and has put playtesting time into," the game becomes more about skill than "I combo out turn three across from the guy with the Plains.  That don't also tap for ."
And because the game doesn't contain some of these elements, a lot of people are starting to feel the casual element has left the game.  Hence the purpose behind this thread.

I fail to see your point, sorry. On the one hand you want a skilled format, with all tier1 (net)decks, while on the other hand you complain about the casual element fleeing from the game??!!

Must be me (but than again I'm from Holland so maybe that explains my ignorance) 
I understand

[lplaat]

by the way, is it possible to edit your post?

Need to delete the last line from my previous post, namely the
"I understand"

[Law]

 lplaat yes you can just look at the top right for modify. Thats the edit butten.

[Revvik]

There is an edit button on your posts, so yes.

The difference between Fish and the casual decks is that Fish was designed with beating the top-"tier"decks in mind.  So losing to a Fish deck as opposed to losing to a 5-year old Stompy deck is more accepted.
Also, I never complained about the casual element fleeing.  I said other people were concerned.

[DI419]

If you spend hours and hours optimizing your TPS/Deathlong decklist, tuning it to beat every major archetype, and then play against an Type 2 Erayo/Rule of Law deck round 1 and lose 2-0, it's incredibly infuriating.  Not just because you lost; it's because you lost to a bad deck that most likely will go 1-x for the rest of the day, whose player also probably thought he was a good player and acted like an asshole because he scored as your worst matchup possible in such a situation. This makes you feel angry about the game.  If he's playing a KBC Gifts deck, you'll feel pathetic for completely creaming him.   For people who play the game for the mental competition and preparation, this sucks away some enjoyment of the game.  It's not that the guy who beat you metagamed well, or just got lucky in his draws, which will balance out in the end; it's that he just randomly wasted your playtesting by being a scrub.  And you can't prepare for him, because doing so would make your deck be horrible.  So you just lose badly and completely randomly.  This is what frustrates those who treasure the mind games of the format and game.

[Chiz]

SCG has done its part but outside from the SCG circuit, is type one flourishing or stagnant?

What we see in Québec, is a growth, I think. We almost lost type 1 here: The biggest store offering monthly Type1 stopped their tournaments, they switched to Legacy last december (What an awful idea  ). Me and a lot of people didn't want Vintage to disapear from Québec. We started a Vintage Championship to promote Type1 all around the province of Québec. That works. We have more people in most of our tournaments, we attract new players with the championship and with the proxies (Before, they aren't proxies at all... which is bad!) and people start to make the travel beacause our tourney have a meaning for them: If they want to play in the championship, they must win a Qualifier. Our first annual championship will be held in September with a Prize structure around 2400$ CAN for the championship and the side-event (Money came from the qualifiers we did). Yes, that's not SCG P9, but we have a Black Lotus for the first prize of the championnship and a Library of Alexandria for the side-event, that's certainly the biggest Vintage tourney ever in the province of Québec. Here is our Logo, which I find pretty cool 

I'd like to see Vintage continue to grow - but I'm not sure what needs to be done aside from the obvious:
1) increase the proxy count
2) more prize support for touranaments

It is good to have Big tournaments like SCG P9. Will it help Vintage to grow? Yes, and no... In the short run, yes, more people that actually play Vintage will make the trip (As we see with SCG P9). But the new players won't arrise from those big tournaments. Paying 25$-30$ to always be in the X-2 or X-3 Bracket won't attract the new players. Type1 is really complex, it has its own way to play magic, its own decks. To be a good Vintage player, you need a lot of knowledge about the format: A lot of plays are really important. If you don't discard the right card with duress, if you don't counterspell the right spell with Force of Will of Mana Drain, if you don't name the right card with Meddling Mage, if you don't Rectuit correctly with Goblin Recruiter, if you don't choose the right cards with Gifts Ungiven, well, you may loose the game. If you misunderstand the gameplan of your opponent and the gamplan of your deck, you will make misplay and maybe loose. Yes, sometimes you will just go broken and win anyway, but those plays are really important. To have that knowledge, you need to play a lot of tournaments (or have a really good testing group, but in case of new vintage players, they probably won't have that good group).

If you want a growth of Vintage, you need to attract newer people. To attract them, really good prizes structures and a lot of proxies may work, but if you want them to stay in the format, you need more... You need to provide them "lower profile" tournaments, with cheaper entreace fee and lower prize structure. In those tournaments, newer playsers will test their decks and acquire that Vintage knowledge that they need to stay in the format. I think we can learn something from other format here...

What will happen if the only Type2 tournaments are Worlds and Pro Tour? Will it attract more people to that format? Certainly not... Wizards have a really good way to develop news players in type2: You may start with small local tourneys every friday (FNM)... You acquire some knowledge about the game and become better. Someday, you learn that you can play in that Regonal tournament. The level of play is higher, but you will understand more the games and the decks and the strategy behind... You will become a better player. Maybe someday you will make it to the National or the even the World Championship and you will maybe became the World Champion. Who knows? But if you played in that World Championship as your first tournament and went 0-5 drop, loosing against Kai Bude, Jonh Finkel, etc. , maybe that first tournament would have been your last too...


I think that the best that could happen to Vintage is a structure. I think that you try to go from FNM (Local Type1 Tourney) to Worlds Championship (SCG P9). I Think that's not the way to go if you want the format to grow (to attract more people). If you want more people to stay in the format, you need to give them a chance of learning it.

Instead of trying to get more prize in a big tournament, why not giving that tournament more structure? Something like Grand Prix Trials. You win a Trial, you have 1 ou 2 Round Bye for a Big Event or something like it... You will see a lot of smaller tournament to be played, the good players will make them to have the Bye (And for the fun to play!  ) and that will give newer players a place to learn the format. That's what I did here in Québec. Instead of just a Big Tournament, I made 18 Qualifiers and a Championship. People plays a lot of Type1 because of those qualifiers and outside tournaments (some, like myself, play at least 2 Type1 tourney a month!), and the overall level of play greatly increase over the last 7 months. Newers players (stared playing type1 in January) now Top8 or sometimes win tournaments and the better players makes better decks and plays better (A build from Québec of CS won Rochester, 2 Bomberman (A deck developped in Québec) made 4th and 5th place in Syracuse P9 tournament). When I see that, I'm happy that all that work worth something