Proxies: Yet another re-evaluation of a touchy subject

[the19inchgecko]

One thing that I think proxies add to the format is an easy way to gain an understanding of the format.  All the reading in the world can't substitute for at least some "field experience" if you will.  I believe that an understanding of the format is a basic requirement for making a deck that will diversify the metagame.  After all, how can you create a metagame deck without knowing the metagame.  Decks that stomp the field don't pop out of thin air.

I agree that playing is the best way to get better as a player, but you don't have to play with the best cards.  I learn and have learned a lot just by playing against power decks.

[cherub_daemon]

To quote an obvious example, Fish started out as a pure budget deck, and gains some things from being lightly powered. I don't think anyone here would say that the creation of Fish was a bad day for Vintage--the question is, would it have come into existance in a 60 proxy environment? (Arguments are fun, and I'm admittedly trying to start one. I'll say bad things about your mother, if that's what it takes.)

This is actually inaccurate.  Fish was originally created as a joke by a fully powered player.  He just then happened to note that it beat the pants off Keeper.  The deck eventually evolved into U/R Fish, at which point people started paying serious attention to it.  It was not conceived as a budget deck, it merely ended up being a deck that required little power.  I have little doubt that even in an unlimited proxy environment it would have evolved in some fashion to fill its slot in the metagame.

I was not aware of this. My apologies for polluting the board with faulty history. If it's not too off topic, who was this prankster?

Five.

Justification: It lets you play a budget deck with a little bit of power and near power (Workshop, Drain...), but nothing really power-intensive. This way, you can "sweeten" a fundamentally decent idea, but you can't just Sharpie up Uba.

The problem is that most budget decks are terrible.  I don't want to see a metagame where almost everyone is playing Fish because that's the only decent deck they can afford to build.  The moniker 'Power 9' was not granted lightly; those cards really are that powerful and critical to success in this format.  If you don't allow people access to those cards, you end up returning to the days where the same people won every tournament because they could just outbroken those unfortunate enough to not be able to afford to drop more than a grand on their hobby.  That is not healthy for the format, and that is why we need more than 5 proxies.

You make a good point, but in the metagame you describe, where Fish is "the only decent deck [most people] can afford", there will exist other decent affordable decks. Why? Because in a Fish-heavy meta, a deck that beats Fish is 'the proverbial l33t haX'. Enter Better Than Fish. If BTF becomes popular, Fish will go down, and Better Than Better Than Fish will crop up. (It could well be argued that there will be powered decks which are both BTF and BTBTF, I know) The point here is that in that metagame, there has been no loss in richness, only a loss in brokenness and degeneracy, imposed by a low proxy limit.

Regarding the comment that the same Powered people will win every tourney. Yeah, probably true. The 5 proxy doesn't really allow you to build the best thing out there, but it may let you play without getting wasted.

[the19inchgecko]

Regarding the comment that the same Powered people will win every tourney. Yeah, probably true. The 5 proxy doesn't really allow you to build the best thing out there, but it may let you play without getting wasted.

And if you want to win then you should buy the cards you need to win.  That's what I am trying to do and a lot of other players that own power have done. 

[Jacob Orlove]

And if you want to win then you should buy the cards you need to win. 

If that's true, then why do most pros just borrow the cards they need for their decks? It's only at PTQs that card access is ever really an issue, and I just don't see why we should be emulating PTQs over PTs.

[the19inchgecko]

And if you want to win then you should buy the cards you need to win. 

If that's true, then why do most pros just borrow the cards they need for their decks? It's only at PTQs that card access is ever really an issue, and I just don't see why we should be emulating PTQs over PTs.

very true, but I was not really thinking about borrowing cards, I have done it in the past and I have also let friend borrow my cards, but somewhere down the line someone bought, traded or found those cards.  I am not sure what PTQs and PTs are but I am still new to magic and I know that I will never proxy a black lotus in a tournament setting.

[benthetenor]

This is a game after all.  People like to have a chance at winning.  If the same 2-3 people win every tournament week after week eventually someone is going to say to themselves, "Why am I wasting my money and time?  Clearly in this limited proxy metagame my meticulously engineered deck is going to keep getting stomped because the opposition keeps drawing the broken a not insignificant percentage of the time and has the gas to back it up."

If that's a true view of things, then why do tournaments in Europe where proxies are a nonissue show a consistently higher turnout than tournaments here? Theories are all well and good, but there's a perfectly good bank of data that can and should be used in the discussion of what would happen with fewer/no proxies.

To be fair, the same 2-3 people don't win those tournaments. I don't know anywhere, even small shop metagames, where it's any less than 10 people who of 25 who consistently win, and even the remaining 15 occasionally make it to the money.

While we're on the subject, I'm not sure how much relevance there is in arguments that were true before Vintage really began to evolve. Saying that the one player who owns power will win all the time even if he's terrible is not really true. Sure, the brokenness of the cards will win him the occasional game that he really had no business winning, an effect that is even more profound when he only has to win 3 rounds, but skill will always win out in the long run. Always. The fact of the matter is, back when there were tournaments where only one or two people would show up with powered decks, the format had undergone very, very little development and the overall skill level of everyone playing Vintage was hovering around 0. There wasn't a sufficient skill deficit to show this principle, as there is in Europe today. Lacking proxies, players with power who are terrible will finish above where they should, but in a 300 person tournament, that may amount to 200th place or 100th place, but well out of the money. Those who win the tournament are the best players there.

I think the real question is, can 0 proxies work in a place where the average tournament turnout is only about 100 people? It seems to me that the greatest counter to the brokenness factor is having lots of rounds, so if we can no longer raise the number of attendees without proxies, and our only artificial recourse to attempt to boost tournament attendance is to raise the number of proxies, are we doomed to having proxies here in the states?

[Harkius]

If that's a true view of things, then why do tournaments in Europe where proxies are a nonissue show a consistently higher turnout than tournaments here? Theories are all well and good, but there's a perfectly good bank of data that can and should be used in the discussion of what would happen with fewer/no proxies.

I think that your point is not quite as valid as you think. As many people have pointed out, European and American tournaments are very different animals. If the European tournaments do well with/without proxies (I am not entirely certain what the policies are there, but I think that they play without, hence all the "unpowered" comments), then more power to them.

I think many people are missing the issue at hand. Until SCG actually asks for input, we have to accept that their policies are making them happy. If they think that there is a way to make players happier, I am sure that they will do it. So will other tournament organizers, since many, doubtlessly, follow the way that SCG paves, since they are the most consistently successful large tournament organizer here in the US. SCG does what they do because it makes them money, but that doesn't mean that they don't care about their players. I am sure that the guys who run that shop do care, otherwise they wouldn't bother running the shop; they would move on to more profitable existences. Profit margins in card/hobby shops are not very steep, you know.

However, until they actually ask, it is foolish to assume that any amount of kvitching will actually accomplish anything. I hate to say it, as it sounds like I am trying to squelch conversation, which I am not, but this thread is not really accomplishing anything. Neither is the same thread with the same arguments on the SCG Board. Let's discuss something else, please. Smmenen spends a lot of time, I think, coming up with interesting questions for discussion about strategy and correct plays in Type I. Instead of simply assuming that he is trying to be elitist, let's wander on over there and give those discussions some thought, eh?

Cheers.
Harkius

Quote Fixed. -Klep

[Komatteru]

However, until they actually ask, it is foolish to assume that any amount of kvitching will actually accomplish anything. I hate to say it, as it sounds like I am trying to squelch conversation, which I am not, but this thread is not really accomplishing anything. Neither is the same thread with the same arguments on the SCG Board. Let's discuss something else, please. Smmenen spends a lot of time, I think, coming up with interesting questions for discussion about strategy and correct plays in Type I. Instead of simply assuming that he is trying to be elitist, let's wander on over there and give those discussions some thought, eh?

You seem to have forgotten this thread: http://www.starcitygames.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=276911.  Within 6 days of the thread's posting, Pete made this announcement: http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/9525.html.  He might have been thinking of doing it anyway, but it does indeed seem that there is precedence for a thread discussing the number of proxies leading to changes in the way tournaments are run.

What would you like to discuss?  If you have something you think needs to be discussed, why don't you start a thread for it then?  That is how discussions get started.

I'd also like to point out that discussion about a discussion is an even bigger waste of time if the original was already a waste.

[Harkius]

Touche. I stand corrected.

Harkius

[Dozer]

I’m all for the Power to the people thing…

Power to the people! If that's not the perfect slogan for proxy tournaments, I don't know what is.

To all those who say that they won't use proxies in a tournament even if they could: I feel with you. Proxies give me a dirty feeling, too, and on the rare occasions where I could proxy, I try to get the cards I need beforehand or play a different one. My collection has most of the (expensive) cards I need to fill out decks even with slightly unconventional ideas. But from a competitive standpoint, even I would use a proxy if I really needed it. If proxies are allowed at a tournament and you cannot build a decent deck that has a shot at winning without proxies... would you *not* use them?

If so, major props to you for stubborness, but why did you come to the tournament in the first place? When I go to tournaments, I do so trying to win the shebang. Even if I don't succeed (as is usually the case), I have tried. If you don't use all (legal) resources that might get you closer to winning, why are you at a competitive event? I know the feeling to go to a tournament just for the people and to play some. I played Mono-U at the Legacy GP in Lille to a 2-4 drop record. I *knew* it would be difficult, and the result did not exactly surprise me. I did not have the cards for Threshhold, Goblins or Affinity, and I did not want to invest heavily for that tournament. My cards gave me LftL-Tog or Mono-Blue, and I chose the deck I had more experience with. Even though I came for the people, I still tried to play good Magic instead of just doodling around with colored cardboard.

I had no expectations for the GP, none at all. I mostly went there to meet people (in which I succeeded), so my deck didn't matter as much. And here's the catch in regards to the proxy discussion: Had I been allowed to play 10 proxies, I probably would have tried to piece a higher-powered deck together. I'd at least have run more Pithing Needles and a third Shackles, stuff that I wasn't able to get before the tournament.

So my point here is that even if you despise proxies, if there is a card you cannot buy or borrow, you should proxy it before settling for a suboptimal version of your deck. Magic is about the cards *and* the game, and tournaments definitely emphasize the gameplay over the actual cards. If you can afford to blow 30€ gas, food and entry on a tournament only to lose a match (or more) where that one proxied card would have helped you win, so be it. But I cannot.

And therefore I am happy that most European tournament allow no proxies, because I ain't forced to play with or against them. But if I couldn't get a card I definitely need otherwise, I'd proxy before not playing with it. And so should you...

Dozer

Quote Fixed. -Klep

[Harkius]

Power to the people! If that's not the perfect slogan for proxy tournaments, I don't know what is.

To all those who say that they won't use proxies in a tournament even if they could: I feel with you. Proxies give me a dirty feeling, too, and on the rare occasions where I could proxy, I try to get the cards I need beforehand or play a different one. My collection has most of the (expensive) cards I need to fill out decks even with slightly unconventional ideas. But from a competitive standpoint, even I would use a proxy if I really needed it. If proxies are allowed at a tournament and you cannot build a decent deck that has a shot at winning without proxies... would you *not* use them?

If so, major props to you for stubborness, but why did you come to the tournament in the first place? When I go to tournaments, I do so trying to win the shebang. Even if I don't succeed (as is usually the case), I have tried. If you don't use all (legal) resources that might get you closer to winning, why are you at a competitive event? I know the feeling to go to a tournament just for the people and to play some. I played Mono-U at the Legacy GP in Lille to a 2-4 drop record. I *knew* it would be difficult, and the result did not exactly surprise me. I did not have the cards for Threshhold, Goblins or Affinity, and I did not want to invest heavily for that tournament. My cards gave me LftL-Tog or Mono-Blue, and I chose the deck I had more experience with. Even though I came for the people, I still tried to play good Magic instead of just doodling around with colored cardboard.

I had no expectations for the GP, none at all. I mostly went there to meet people (in which I succeeded), so my deck didn't matter as much. And here's the catch in regards to the proxy discussion: Had I been allowed to play 10 proxies, I probably would have tried to piece a higher-powered deck together. I'd at least have run more Pithing Needles and a third Shackles, stuff that I wasn't able to get before the tournament.

So my point here is that even if you despise proxies, if there is a card you cannot buy or borrow, you should proxy it before settling for a suboptimal version of your deck. Magic is about the cards *and* the game, and tournaments definitely emphasize the gameplay over the actual cards. If you can afford to blow 30€ gas, food and entry on a tournament only to lose a match (or more) where that one proxied card would have helped you win, so be it. But I cannot.

And therefore I am happy that most European tournament allow no proxies, because I ain't forced to play with or against them. But if I couldn't get a card I definitely need otherwise, I'd proxy before not playing with it. And so should you...

Dozer

Not sure if you were talking to me or not, so I will respond.

Usually when I play in tournaments, even though it is a competitive event, I will not play something just because it is most likely to win. If I really cared about winning money playing Magic, I wouldn't be playing Vintage, I would be playing...everything else. Instead, I play Type I. I play it because it is the format that I enjoy the most.

If proxies were allowed at tournaments I was in, I may or may not use them. It would depend on what I was trying to play with. If it was a single card that was necessary to play my deck, then I may proxy it. Otherwise, I wouldn't. There are some decks that only require one card to really play, and in that case I might do it. Until then, I doubt it. I play Magic because I enjoy it. I compete because I enjoy it. But, I wouldn't ever, in my entire life, run a deck with Oath of Druids in it. I simply loathe that card. Therefore, it doesn't matter whether it would win or not, I wouldn't play it. Playing with proxies at a tournament wouldn't be any fun. I playtest with them, but come tourney day, the paper comes out and the cards go in. I wouldn't even playtest with proxies, but the wear and tear on the cards becomes a bit much over time. I have a few cards that look like they are about to wear clean through in the middle from riffle shuffling. The environment is different, and the expectations are as well.

As far as being stubborn, guilty as charged. I don't enjoy playing with them, and I don't enjoy playing against them. I can't control what my opponents play with (even if I can control what they play), so I simply shrug and accept it and try not to let it spoil my day. I play because its fun. If I win, then that is better. But, I am not going to play something like Oath or Slaver, because I don't have any fun playing them.

Harkius

[Eandori]

Why not make the admission price 50% or 30% of the full price for non P9 decks.  This would attract more casual players, that might have a chance, and i'm sure most vintage players wouldn't mind the inherent advantage of playing against non-powered opponents.

Wow, what a great idea that is.  I'm sure there are complications though, like what if the guy had only 4 moxes and wanted the lower price... etc.

But still, the basic idea has merit.  I'll tell you this much, I REALLY DON'T fear an unpowered deck going through 5 rounds of swiss and going home with the prize.  Beyond that, I really gotta say that it would do great things for the format.  If it's $20 for the powered deck to join, but $5 for the non-powered deck, you might see tons of other decks that would not typically get played.

That would change the WHOLE meta...  ya know, lots of super Vintage decks out there really are NOT good at winning any game.  They are good at winning games against other vintage decks.

Very cool.

[Harkius]

That would change the WHOLE meta... ya know, lots of super Vintage decks out there really are NOT good at winning any game. They are good at winning games against other vintage decks.

No, actually the top decks right now are best at winning against each other because they have been tuned in that direction. The thing is that the top decks are more like unstable tops more than anything else. They basically can only do their tricks if left relatively unmolested. The thing is that these decks will simply lose the ability to dedicate quite as much hate against each other and have to start diversifying their bullets. Eventually, they may end up toppling one or two, but I doubt that this would diversify the meta too much. It may be kind of interesting, though, and it could bring in greater prize pools and more people.

Worth a shot? Perhaps. Going to happen? Who knows. Perhaps in time, a few people will get around to hosting tournaments aside from stores. The difficulty might be in getting enough people to pay both the venue and the prices, as well as to find some judges willing to participate, etc. I would be interesting in seeing where it goes, though.

Cheers,
Harkius

[Moxlotus]

So random guy wants to play his deck for $5 for a chance to win a mox while I want to play my deck for $20 to win the same mox.  Worst.idea.evar.  Just because I want to play a fully powered deck doesn't mean I should pay more money to play in a tournament.

[the19inchgecko]

So random guy wants to play his deck for $5 for a chance to win a mox while I want to play my deck for $20 to win the same mox.  Worst.idea.evar.  Just because I want to play a fully powered deck doesn't mean I should pay more money to play in a tournament.

I agree.  I think if I am not using proxies I should pay less, because I have already made an investment to play Vintage Magic.  I also think for those places that charge for proxies should charge at least $2 for each proxy and not give any free.  This would help with creating a larger prize structure, which my in turn get a larger turn out.  In all honesty though it will be hard to ban proxies bebecausehey are already out there in great numbers.  I personally think and I have just recently resorted to using a few proxies.  I made that choice when I realized that if at least 90% of the players are using them I would be at a disadvantage to not put in an ancestral recall in my deck.  If proxies weren't allowed there would be a lot of partially powered decks which would even out the field in the long run.  I am sure there are a lot of us 3 power owners out there that could compete at Vintage magic.

[Machinus]

So random guy wants to play his deck for $5 for a chance to win a mox while I want to play my deck for $20 to win the same mox.  Worst.idea.evar.  Just because I want to play a fully powered deck doesn't mean I should pay more money to play in a tournament.

The Europeans actually already solved this problem. They don't allow proxies, but they then give away prizes to the top unpowered finishers. The prize support for unpowered players at the gigantic French tournament was unbelievable.

[Eandori]

So random guy wants to play his deck for $5 for a chance to win a mox while I want to play my deck for $20 to win the same mox.  Worst.idea.evar.  Just because I want to play a fully powered deck doesn't mean I should pay more money to play in a tournament.

As an owner of full P9, a set of drains, Library, 37 dual lands, beta demonic tutor/Sol Ring/Regrowth/Plows/etc. , FoW playset, etc etc etc I can definately see your point.

However... I'm much more worried about this hobby of ours dying off if it gets TOO expensive.  Can some random jank deck have a shot at winning 1 or 2 games against finely tuned vintage?  Sure.  How about winning 10 to 20 games needed to go home with power?  Probably not.  In fact, VERY low chances of that.

Personally, I'm a believer that a Vintage deck SHOULD be able to tromp the rest of the field to win.  If you play a deck that is strong in the "typical" vintage meta, but has serious issues against a goblin aggro deck, then perhaps you do deserve to lose a few games.  Do we, or do we not play VINTAGE.  Where nearly every card is allowed and one of the long forgotten pulls of this format is it's huge diversity.

Let's face facts here.  YOU DO have a huge advantage playing power 9 and other support cards against decks that don't have it.  They are really behind the 8 ball when it comes down to trying to win.  You could make the entry fee a function of how powered your deck was, so the more money you were willing to "risk" meant more powerfull cards you got to play.  You could choose to play a 4-power oath deck instead of 12 (8 and 4 drains).

I'll say this much flat out.  If I could pay $20 in comparison to other unpowered players paying $5 and have the attendance of that tournament go from 30 people, to 150 I would do it in a heartbeat.

[Dozer]

I'll say this much flat out.  If I could pay $20 in comparison to other unpowered players paying $5 and have the attendance of that tournament go from 30 people, to 150 I would do it in a heartbeat.

Why not have everybody pay 5$ and go up to 150? Total income from 30 players @ 20$: 600. Total income from 150 players @5$: 750 dollars.

TO's need some safety net to finance their prize support. It is much more llikely that the 30 powered players come and pay 20 dollars every month than 120 additional randoms who will never win the Mox against the 30 powered players. I like the idea that unpowered players can play for less, but I see so many problems with it that I'd rather have a solid second price structure for the unpowered players.

Dozer

[Whatever Works]

So random guy wants to play his deck for $5 for a chance to win a mox while I want to play my deck for $20 to win the same mox.  Worst.idea.evar.  Just because I want to play a fully powered deck doesn't mean I should pay more money to play in a tournament.

The Europeans actually already solved this problem. They don't allow proxies, but they then give away prizes to the top unpowered finishers. The prize support for unpowered players at the gigantic French tournament was unbelievable.

I have to agree... People arent complaining in Europe... Price of power hasnt dropped $100 a card either in Europe (from what I have heard)...

I dont agree with the "power to the people" statement... for people who own power the statement about proxies could easily be... "Rob from the rich give to the poor"... Because, people who made LARGE investments (that could have gone to getting a nicer car etc.) went to being able to compete because they REALLY CARED about magic... Now proxies are killing the value of the cards both in actual value, and ownership value (why own cards you can proxy?)...

To me there is no win/win situation... Europe currently has the best situation... (Old best situation was 5 proxy)...

I enjoy competition etc... but magic is a "collectable" card game... its not a poker deck...

Kyle

[Moxlotus]

Either Europe's double prize structure or 10 proxy + more for fees is the best I think.  This way it doesn't penalize people that have power for making them pay more.  It also gives people a taste of Vintage and if they enjoy it they will buy power.

[Norm4eva]

The whole proxy/noproxy thing is basically people trying to have their cake and eat it.  You don't want your Ancestral Recall to be worth any less than you paid for it, yet you want more and more people adding to the environment.  They can't print another Recall because that would destroy your investment, but you don't want people bring Plains Ed. Ancestral because it's (a) ugly (b) still diminishing your card's worth because no one necessarily has to buy in the way that you did.  THERE's one of the fundamental issues of the proxy thing; people acquire Power through some great feat (winning the prize, shelling out cash) and they get a little upset when the guy across from them hasn't put in the same kind of work that you did.  They didn't have to earn that Time Walk, all they had to do was scribble on a Backslide.  Fuck that.  If I buy in, so should you.
Right?  Wrong.  The only reason why it's wrong is because you guys asked for it.  You wanted more players, more tourneys, and hopefully even some attention from the folks at WotC who weren't really thinking about your format because it was pretty much a haven for the casual player.  It hadn't really occured to anyone at the time, that maybe by expanding the player base the demand for cards that haven't been printed in 8 years might kinda go through the roof.  Now the movement in the format is to cover its collective ass and try and resolve the situation.. only you still want it your way.  You want that Lotus to sit at $1200+ but somehow, you want everyone to play one against you.  Or maybe you don't.  Maybe you want to be that elite guy who's got the p10 in multiples of 13, one for each deck you could theoretically sport at the next GenCon.  Whatever the motive, you don't want owning a deck of Magic cards to be the equivalent of owning a chess set, and that will always, always prevent the game from transcending this kind of argument.

[Mr. Nightmare]

Hey everyone,  I thought I would bring the other side of the discussion to the forefront.

This is my first post on TMD, although I've been reading it for a while now.  I'm just getting started in Vintage, although I've been playing Legacy/1.5 since Mirage rotated out of the old Type 2.  Up until now, I've never had the urge to play Vintage, mostly due to financial constrictions, as well as a lack of tournaments available.  Recently, both of these issues have been dissolved, as I graduated from college, and some tournaments have cropped up in my area (Syracuse, NY - I know there were SCG tournaments nearby, but I was still away at college).  I'm fortunate enough to have connections in the Magic world that allow me to build a "real" Vintage deck, fully powered, within the constraints of a 10-proxy environment.  This is extremely important to me, because as a competitive and competant player, I would rather not play, than to play a deck that isn't fully optimized based on what cards I have available to me, by my own collection or borrowing.  I'm willing to invest money in staple cards that belong in Vintage decks, (Yawg Will, Crypt, Vault, Forces, etc.) and from Legacy playing have most of them, as well as duals, but at the current time, the 100+ dollar cards are out of the question based on the amount of time I'd get to use them.  Should I be barred from adding my time and input into the format based on this?  Perhaps.  But I really think your format (I can hardly claim it as my own, and even saying 'our' would be a misnomer) would lose a great deal by drawing a thick line between Powered and Unpowered decks.

[jazzykat]

I am in favor of a graduated scale like others have suggested. Here is one suggestion:
0<= proxies <= 7: entry fee
8 <= proxies <= 15: entry fee + $0.50 X number of proxies greater than 7 and up to 15
16<= proxies: same as 8 <= proxies <= 15 + $1 for the 16 th. and beyond

That way their is a core amount of proxies that is not so high, with up to 15 being added for a relatively small amount ($4). After 15, people have to decide wether they want to buy smaller cards or pay a buck a piece to proxy them.

I think this is very fair because it rewards people that don't need proxies but provides the what seems to be standard 10 proxies for only a $1.50 more and gives players a chance to move up to 15 proxies for only $4 more.

Now I know that most players are on a budget but if you think of the gasoline you spend to get to a tournament and the food that you eat out (You could pack a bagged lunch????) then I don't think you can say that this system is unfair. Oh and lets not forget how much you payed for your other cards.

The money collected from proxying can be used for overall prize support or can be split. For example half goes into overall prize support and half goes to the highest placing person with more than 7 proxies so that they can get a dual land or something.

The point is that people with cards should be rewarded and people without should be able to be just as competitive for a small amount of money more.

Lastly, everyone has to understand that if our cards are to continue to be worth something then we must allow proxies. Now so more than ever because of people like me who own a set of p9 and haven't looked at them in over a year. More and more will go out of circulation due to older people like myself slowing down playing and hanging on to their cards, loss, theft, etc. I hope that in 10 years I will be able to dust off my cards and play with them at a tournament or something. If I can't play with them then they are worthless to me.

[Jacob Orlove]

There's really no need for a three tiered system. The 10 free proxies plus up to five more at $1 each is simple and addresses most of the concerns inherent in raising the proxy limit, without confusing calculations where you're paying three different prices for your proxies.

[Eandori]

They didn't have to earn that Time Walk, all they had to do was scribble on a Backslide.  Fuck that.  If I buy in, so should you.
Right?  Wrong.  The only reason why it's wrong is because you guys asked for it.  You wanted more players, more tourneys, and hopefully even some attention from the folks at WotC who weren't really thinking about your format because it was pretty much a haven for the casual player.  It hadn't really occured to anyone at the time, that maybe by expanding the player base the demand for cards that haven't been printed in 8 years might kinda go through the roof.  Now the movement in the format is to cover its collective ass and try and resolve the situation.. only you still want it your way.  You want that Lotus to sit at $1200+ but somehow, you want everyone to play one against you.  Or maybe you don't.

This is good, it actually follows what I was saying.

Wanting power to stay high in value, yet wanting people to play this format really do contradict each other.  That's why I still like what I stated above, tournaments where the more power you play, the more you pay.  Power cards ARE an advantage.  Yes I own the real cards, yes I paid for them, yes I want to play them.  And finally, yes I'm very aware that our favorite format is extremely constricted by the huge learning curve and price of power. 

Remember guys, MORE PLAYERS IN A FORMAT MEANS HIGHER VALUE!!!  Standard is a living example of that.

[Evenpence]

There's really no need for a three tiered system. The 10 free proxies plus up to five more at $1 each is simple and addresses most of the concerns inherent in raising the proxy limit, without confusing calculations where you're paying three different prices for your proxies.

Amen.  IMO, this is clearly the way to go, for not only local tournaments but also SCG tournies.  Not only will it attract more people, but it will profit the tournament organizer more, as well as the overall power level of the tournament.

[LordHomerCat]

That's why I still like what I stated above, tournaments where the more power you play, the more you pay. 

But why should you pay more.  I mean, this is Type 1, right?  The format that you get to play ALL of your cards?  I just can't believe that it would be a good idea to look through someone's deck when they show up and go through a checklist: "Recall, $1... Time walk, $1... Lotus, $2..."  This really just seems like its punishing players for building more powerful decks.  Yes, they have a better chance to win, given the quality of their deck.  But it doesn't make sense to me to base the entry fee on how crappy your deck is, so that you have to look at each piece of power and wonder "Is this worth the extra $2 I have to pay just to play, or would I rather run a suboptimal card which doesn't force me to pay more?"

Again, this format is not meant to be budget-minded, unfortuneatley.  I am all for proxies, considering I don't own any power or even real Duals for that matter.  But punishing the people who have already spent $3000 on their decks by making them pay even more to play is just ludicrous.

[[FtN|FH] Negator]

That's why I still like what I stated above, tournaments where the more power you play, the more you pay. 

But why should you pay more.  I mean, this is Type 1, right?  The format that you get to play ALL of your cards?  I just can't believe that it would be a good idea to look through someone's deck when they show up and go through a checklist: "Recall, $1... Time walk, $1... Lotus, $2..."  This really just seems like its punishing players for building more powerful decks.  Yes, they have a better chance to win, given the quality of their deck.  But it doesn't make sense to me to base the entry fee on how crappy your deck is, so that you have to look at each piece of power and wonder "Is this worth the extra $2 I have to pay just to play, or would I rather run a suboptimal card which doesn't force me to pay more?"

Again, this format is not meant to be budget-minded, unfortuneatley.  I am all for proxies, considering I don't own any power or even real Duals for that matter.  But punishing the people who have already spent $3000 on their decks by making them pay even more to play is just ludicrous.

You somehow mist the whole point...
Only if you use more than a "set" number of proxys (for example 7)   you have to pay more entry fee for every proxy about the number.

[Lunar]

Just to chime in real quick...

I just ran my first ever tournament...I did it via 12 proxies...I made the choice of 12 proxies for several reasons...

#1: It let people play more decks...5 mox 1 lotus 1 ancestral 1 timewalk 4 drains/shops this makes it better than 10 proxy where people get left out...

#2: I didnt want to feel like a jackhole by making some people pay more than others...I think that it should either be 10 free or 12 free or 15 free...I think charging more for something you claim you think should be availible to people is a contradiction...The only option I like for charging people is something like $10 for a proxy that you can use forever in tournaments that are legal in most/all T1 events in say the US (or at the very least forever at one shop) but even this I think is a bad way to go in the long run.

#3: I think 12 is already being generous and is enough for now...

[Jacob Orlove]

That's why I still like what I stated above, tournaments where the more power you play, the more you pay. 

But why should you pay more.  I mean, this is Type 1, right?  The format that you get to play ALL of your cards?  I just can't believe that it would be a good idea to look through someone's deck when they show up and go through a checklist: "Recall, $1... Time walk, $1... Lotus, $2..."  This really just seems like its punishing players for building more powerful decks.  Yes, they have a better chance to win, given the quality of their deck.  But it doesn't make sense to me to base the entry fee on how crappy your deck is, so that you have to look at each piece of power and wonder "Is this worth the extra $2 I have to pay just to play, or would I rather run a suboptimal card which doesn't force me to pay more?"

Again, this format is not meant to be budget-minded, unfortuneatley.  I am all for proxies, considering I don't own any power or even real Duals for that matter.  But punishing the people who have already spent $3000 on their decks by making them pay even more to play is just ludicrous.

You somehow mist the whole point...
Only if you use more than a "set" number of proxys (for example 7)   you have to pay more entry fee for every proxy about the number.

No, he's responding to a different proposal--one where powerless decks can enter the tournament at a lower cost than powered decks. Supposedly, this would drive up attendance, because everyone loves playing unpowered decks as long as they save $5 on entry fees. Or something.