T1 Stagnation

[Nehptis]

To add on  to the conversation going on here.

http://www.themanadrain.com/forums/index.php?topic=26633.0

What do we need to do to breath new life into T1?  Things seem to be predictable and stagnant as of late.  In my opinion, more community support, reports, tournaments are great, but insufficient to revitalize the format.  I think we need a major shake-up.  Traditionalists and Conservatives will not agree with this.  But, I think we need some serious changes to the card pool to force new ideas and a less predictable meta-game.  Since our format does not rotate and automatically refresh itself, restrictions and un-restrictions are the only tool to force change.  So, I'm suggesting restrictions as a means to refresh the format and not because cards are too powerful as 4-of's today.  I'm talking about something like restricting at LEAST the following:

Dark Ritual
Gifts Ungiven
Mana Drain
Workshop
Goblin Welder
Oath of Druids

This could shake up Vintage to its core.  Although we would need to be careful of a power surge towards Fish and Goblins.  This is at least a start.

[Moxlotus]

You want to restrict something to "shake up" the format?  That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of.  The restriction list is not to be used to change the format around for no particular reason.  Restrictions are not the only tool for change-there are tons of cards to be used.  Have you not seen the 2-3 Dredge decks that are developing.  Other storm decks are also available and can be developed.  Are you completely oblivious that people may be saving new decks for tournamnets-which there haven't been for a while?  I mean-Waterbury is TOMORROW.  The Midwest will be having 3 power tournaments within a month starting at the end of Feb-that's not counting any SCG either.  Could it be possible that people aren't releasing new decklists yet because they want to play in a tournament first?

OMG STAGNATION-a new deck hasn't taken 3 top 8 slots yet in the last 2 months.

[Cross]

Well said MoxL.

[Nehptis]

You want to restrict something to "shake up" the format?  That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of.  The restriction list is not to be used to change the format around for no particular reason..

Obviously you are one of the traditionalists that I mentioned.  Nothing wrong with that, just a different viewpoint.  But, having a non-traditional view is not incorrect either.  It is completely viable to use all methods of control at our disposal, including Restrictions and Un-restrictions, to force change.

Restrictions are not the only tool for change-there are tons of cards to be used.

In a format that does not rotate Restrictions and un-Restrictions are a MAJOR tool for change.  Yes, new sets can introduce change, too.  But, the argument that players will introduce change simply because there is a large card pool is weak IMO.  Vintage is so competitive (which is why I like it) that players are more likely to play established decks that win as opposed to trying something new and different.  Hell, I've been playing Storm for a year plus now.  Why, because it wins and I like it.

Have you not seen the 2-3 Dredge decks that are developing.  Other storm decks are also available and can be developed..

Sorry, I have not seen and new COMPETITIVE Dredge decks.  I'd be happy to though, so post me a link.  Other storm decks, like what?  Gifts storm, and Ritual storm, what else is there?

Are you completely oblivious that people may be saving new decks for tournaments-which there haven't been for a while?  I mean-Waterbury is TOMORROW.  The Midwest will be having 3 power tournaments within a month starting at the end of Feb-that's not counting any SCG either.  Could it be possible that people aren't releasing new decklists yet because they want to play in a tournament first?

Of course I'm not oblivious to saving tech for tourneys.  Are you oblivious to methods of self control and how to engage in a normal discussion?  I hope that Waterbury and the other upcoming tourneys highlight some new decks.  But, from my perspective Vintage is stagnating.

[Polynomial P]

Check out the discussion about dredge decks here: http://www.themanadrain.com/forums/index.php?topic=26901.0

The decks are obviously rough in design, but it took months for decks like CS to become polished. The restricted list is not a tool to "shake up the format", but to adjust the power level of format warping decks and to keep magic "fun". Right now many different types of decks are viable, which is a sign of a healthy format. By restricting the cards you propose to restrict the format would indeed change and it would actually look alot like legacy.

Change does not come quickly to this format, especially in months without major tournaments.

[Komatteru]

While there were some improvements/innovations made to existing archetypes at the last SCG (Peter's gifts list, most notably), SCG Chicago brought two combo decks out of the woodwork and back into the spotlight.  I don't know what you're looking for, but a revival of both storm combo and the landless deck seems pretty good to me.

SCG Richmond is the big event coming up.  It's not for 2 months still.  I personally don't like to plaster the internet with my latest creation before I get to win at SCG with it.

[Kasuras]

If this will become a reason to restrict cards, then vintage will soon become nothing more than highlander because every card breaks something. And, in highlander Tendrils also OWNS the place; so that's not something you want either. Hell, even just these restrictions will make Tendrils WTFPWN.

Sure, these restrictions will lead to innovation on the short term. Whether it is a good idea to risk losing half of the current vintage players and the chance of getting a format where there is no innovation at all anymore in the longer term, I do not know. I tend to lean towards a big no towards this though.

[Limbo]

It is completely viable to use all methods of control at our disposal

Since when are restrictions at "our disposal"? They are controlled by the DCI, and I don't think they will restrict anything any time soon. Unrestricting voltaic key might be seen in the near future though.

And besides, indeed there is still development going on, although not at the insane speed after Mirrodin. I have said it before, and I will say it again, I like the format as is. Loads of decks are viable, nothing dominating at the moment. And yes, sometimes broken stuff happens that ends games quickly, but there are plenty of fun games left to enjoy. And I even enjoy it if my deck (or my opponents for that matter) goes insane and wins in some uberfast way.

FYI, I can even create an unpowered kobold-deck that can pull of turn 1 kills, so if that is possible, of course nutty stuff can happen if you add a lotus or so in the mix...

[dicemanx]

It is completely viable to use all methods of control at our disposal

Since when are restrictions at "our disposal"? They are controlled by the DCI, and I don't think they will restrict anything any time soon. Unrestricting voltaic key might be seen in the near future though.

The DCI listens. If the format reaches a true stagnation point and players lose interest, the DCI would certainly consider and implement suggestions of stirring up interest in the format again via the B/R list. However, I think we are *very* far from such a scenario.

[forests failed you]

There is lots of room for growth in the current metagame.  Not to mention, there is PLENTY of room to metagame and revise decklists. 

Type one is not about constantly shaking things up or having all kinds of new decks popping up all over the place every month (IE standard, extended).  Think about it, the card pool NEVER changes; therefore the cards that are great, stay great until something usurps them.  It takes a long time.  In the past few years the metagame has changed completely from Keeper, Academy and Argo to Slaver, Gifts, Tendrils, Oath, St ax, Agro Shop, Fish.  That is huge, and it is the biggest overhaul the format has EVER had. 

I fail to see the format as stagnet at the moment;  In fact I would venture to say that it is at an all time high for diversity and viable deck choices.  Perhaps you have mistaken a Stagnet general Vintage format with your own personal boredom at the moment.  The two are very different things.

[Lunar]

That list of restrictions will directly lead to T1 becoming the exact same thing as Legacy...and since Legacy at least gets people DCI points, people will drop vintage and go there...that is definatly NOT what we want...in fact those cards listed are the main reasons I play Vintage in the first place.

The format has become stagnant because that is what the majority of good players actually want, heh..many players have found their comfort zone and I think the number of bad decks has reduced greatly in the format...we have had time to analyze what actually is good in the format and most players dont want to play bad decks...

if YOU want innovation...then go innovate, its up to the people complaining about lack of innovation to change things...having the DCI do it for you is a bad approach and a terrible way to approach the problem. Do something like I did and go write an article about something not discussed often and see what happens...my dredge article (linked to above) aims at getting people to discuss the innovation of a new deck type without any restrictions/bannings/unrestrictions...stiring things up from time to time is a good thing, just make sure you do it responsibly.

[Nantuko Rice]

Waterbury is tomorrow. And then the new masterpeice shall be unveiled. I've got a new deck in a shoebox for about 2 months waiting for waterbury.

[Matt]

Have you not seen the 2-3 Dredge decks that are developing.  Other storm decks are also available and can be developed..

Sorry, I have not seen and new COMPETITIVE Dredge decks.  I'd be happy to though, so post me a link.  Other storm decks, like what?  Gifts storm, and Ritual storm, what else is there?

New, competetive decks don't just happen on their own. What have YOU broken today?

[dicemanx]

To be fair to Nehptis, and as a challenge to what FFY has claimed in a similar thread, I think people try to innovate *all the time*. We get a barrage of new ideas weekly/monthly in these forums alone, and some of them are very reasonable and theoretically should have merit. However, the reality is that it is much more difficult to make new ideas work, because the power levels of the major archetypes are so high that, as Dandan explained in that similar thread in the other community forum, the question often becomes "why should I play this new idea over an existing established powerful archetype?".

The problem is not that people are lazy, but that too many are currently working on absolute dead ends without realizing it. This is misinterpreted as lack of progress in T1, or that the effort has trailed off. Exploring many options and reaching conclusions that the ideas are failures is still progress in terms of furthering our understanding of our format and working to eventually exhaust all of the possibilities. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean that innovation doesn't happen in our format at all - it does, but on a different scale.     

[Nehptis]

I like the discussion thus far.  There are a lot of good points and counterpoints.  My intention was not to discuss which cards should or should not be on the list.  So, I'm glad that the discussion has gone down the path of whether or not we need to revitalize the format and if so how can it be done.  I'm interested to hear more.

Perhaps you have mistaken a Stagnet general Vintage format with your own personal boredom at the moment.  The two are very different things.

This could be very true.  No denying it.  In fact Legacy has peaked my interest, as of late.

The format has become stagnant because that is what the majority of good players actually want, heh..many players have found their comfort zone and I think the number of bad decks has reduced greatly in the format...we have had time to analyze what actually is good in the format and most players dont want to play bad decks...

I agree.  It's just unfortunate that their are players like myself who complain / feel the pain of stagnation but at the same time are not risk takers and choose to play proven archetypes instead of innovating.   I can't help it though, I like to win.  If you tell me to go out and win a Superbowl with any team I'm going with something like the Riggins era Skins, or the 80's Bears or a Montana 49ers team.  Proven and trustworthy.  As cool as it would be to win with Roth and the Bus I'm not picking the 2005/2006 Steelers.  Although they may win it this year!  Anyway, that's why I'd like to see the DCI force my hand by shaking up things and forcing me to innovate.

BTW, the Dredge article was excellent.

I think we are all eager to see the Waterbury scene unfold.  I wish I could make it but can't this time around.  Good luck to all.

[Lunar]

We get a barrage of new ideas weekly/monthly in these forums alone, and some of them are very reasonable and theoretically should have merit. However, the reality is that it is much more difficult to make new ideas work, because the power levels of the major archetypes are so high that, as Dandan explained in that similar thread in the other community forum, the question often becomes "why should I play this new idea over an existing established powerful archetype?".

This is SO true, it does make things difficult to break though, even at the cost of stopping things before they get a chance to develope. (for example the Cerebral Assasin stuff popping up here in the dragon thread and over in the assasin thread on SCG, CA got quashed pretty early on even with the early success of the deck becuase many players simply said "go play dragon instead jerk, heh") You can even look at the thread for my dredge article and take a couple of the posts that write off the idea immediatly...sure those lists are a little rough overall, but the hope is that enough players actually take the time to try and find a good option (even at the risk of it hitting one of dicemanx's "absolute dead ends") I think if you want innovation to be more APPARENT in the format then some people need to be willing to take the risks on hitting dead ends...heck, I find hitting these dead ends an integral part of the game, and im sure EVERYBODY that has put in some serious work on decks in the format has hit their own dead ends.

Exploring many options and reaching conclusions that the ideas are failures is still progress in terms of furthering our understanding of our format and working to eventually exhaust all of the possibilities.

This is solid reasoning, I just hope that people try and solve some of the problems and come to these conclusions on their own...ive seen people say something is bad, then later find its actually not too shabby..the original idea was dropped when somebody of note said "this is bad" so everybody gives up..heh...

my suggestion then is to ignore it and try it on your own if you think it at least looks feasable...if your results are the same in the end then no real harm except some testing time, if you get a good mix then maybe you got something that will win you some prizes and/or respect, heh..

[dicemanx]

The problem is not that people are lazy, but that too many are currently working on absolute dead ends without realizing it.

Just to pre-empt any wrong interpretations of this statement - I don't mean this as a criticism. Its just an unfortunate truth that instead of success coming if you try pushing one idea hard enough, success will instead come by exploring many ideas - having 100 failures before you find something worthwhile. It can therefore be very discouraging that you might be working on something that might not pan out, but its still important to make that "sacrifice" and it is also important that the ideas/results are shared with the community so we don't duplicate our efforts and waste more time/get more discouraged.

This works to an extent though - some manage to strike gold and don't share at all - more power to them of course, as they should take full advantage of their good fortune and hard work.

[Smmenen]

How in gods name does restricted Dark Ritual change the format?  Almost no one plays with it.

You want to shake things up?  Restrict Mana Drain. 

[Lunar]

You want to shake things up?  Restrict Mana Drain

wouldnt this just lead to a restriction of workshop and then ritual anyways?

[Tha Gunslinga]

I'm talking about something like restricting at LEAST the following:

Dark Ritual
Gifts Ungiven
Mana Drain
Workshop
Goblin Welder
Oath of Druids

This would CRUCIFY vintage, and players would quit en masse.  Is that what you want, to destroy the format?

[Nehptis]

You want to shake things up?  Restrict Mana Drain

wouldnt this just lead to a restriction of workshop and then ritual anyways?

That would be my guess, as well.  Each single restriction would cascade players to the next available powerful card / deck.  So, a mass re-structuring would be best.  But, again my intention is not to get into a discussion about what to restrict / unrestrict.  But, rather to focus on if /why / how to re-vitalize T1.

This would CRUCIFY vintage, and players would quit en masse.  Is that what you want, to destroy the format?

Of course not, I love Vintage and have invested a lot of time and money into it.  What I am suggesting is a major shake-up.  A reset almost that forces everyone to re-think everything.  Too far?  Maybe.  But, still something I'm sure a lot of players would be interested in seeing happen.  Obviously, most TMDer's are Vintage traditionalists, which is great.  The format needs that.  But, topics like this are probably too progressive for most on this board to discuss rationally.

[wardo]

While these restrictions could do small agreement for those who are not "conservatives", the day drain/workshop get restricted is the day where a big part of vintage players and collectors are just going to quit (in disgust), so it would be silly to do it to revive the format.

There's also a good old argument here, that vintage without Ritual-Gifts-Drain-Workshop-Welder-Oath exists, it's called Legacy.

[Limbo]

The DCI listens.

but thinks for itself as well. If the DCI listened to the "majority" of the community (and by majority I mean the people that raise their voice the highest), then Workshop would have been banned long ago, Berserk would still be restricted, Yawgmoth's Will would have gotten the Banhammer, Worldgorger Dragon would have received an errata, etc, etc. I thought we had come to the conclusion that the DCI has shown that they understand the format that is Vintage, and know when to (un)restrict stuff.

@Nephtis: Although it is nice to have new ideas, if you look at the amount of people that reply on this thread that are against massive restrictions, then maybe it is time to accept that apparently most people do like Vintage at the moment.

What I am suggesting is a major shake-up.  A reset almost that forces everyone to re-think everything.

Couldn't you just explore the mostly undiscovered territory that is Legacy?

Edit: Apparently Wardo beat me on this last comment.

[Lou]

Any restrictions right now would be a horrible idea.  Why are cards restricted?  Because the cards in question dominate, or appear to be heading very close to domination.  Type 1 is NOT stagnant.  As Brian has said, you are just bored.

Here are my two suggestions to everyone that is complaining of a lack of innovation/stagnation in Type 1.

1.)  Take your Ritalin, because your ADD is obviously out of control.

2.)  INNOVATE yourself.  Don't bitch because other people aren't doing the work for you.  Quit being a lazy bitch, and do some leg work.

[Fubar]

The DCI listens. If the format reaches a true stagnation point and players lose interest, the DCI would certainly consider and implement suggestions of stirring up interest in the format again via the B/R list. However, I think we are *very* far from such a scenario.

Would this be similar to what happened to the "dead" format of T1.5 & the seperations of the lists + birth of a new format?  I guess if you take out drains & shops then your not changing the format, you're killing + replacing it.
Although a world without drains/stax would be interesting. .  . And a shakeup would be timely.  Control and Prison could and would live on without drains/shops, as legacy proves.

[Lunar]

Although a world without drains/stax would be interesting. .  . And a shakeup would be timely

This is what legacy is for, and a shakeup would be terrible...did you see the top 16 for waterbury?

[BigMac]

Quote

Although a world without drains/stax would be interesting. .  . And a shakeup would be timely

This is what legacy is for, and a shakeup would be terrible...did you see the top 16 for waterbury?

Exactly Lunar. Vintage is very much alive and very much a stable metagame with many decks that can win or do well during a big tournament. I doubt there is a format next to vintage (legacy perhaps) with so many viable deck choices. Very healthy and not even close to restricting cards.

As for the cards that were given as an example to restrict. Most cards now can be replaced by only slightly less powerfull cards keeping the same decks alive. It would not mean a changing metagame, it would just mean people will play the same decks with somewhat different cards.

[Evenpence]

Dude.

Play Legacy.  Most of the cards you've listed are banned, and some are unrestricted (lotus petal, lion's eye diamond, etc).

GAT just won Waterbury, with Tog coming in second.

This thread should be closed, locked, deleted, stored away in the deep recesses of our forgettable memories.