Ramblings About Vintage: some things I'd like to see in the future.

[forests failed you]

I love playing Vintage Magic the gathering; however comparatively to the other formats Vintage does not have the same potential for reward as the others do.  Don't get me wrong; I'm not  a hater.  Vintage is one of my favorite formats, and probably my preferred format (tied with maybe team draft) to play for fun.  The thing about Vintage is that it is in many ways awful.  Vintage for all of its qualities has at least two fundamental flaws.  Firstly, it is extremely expensive to start up in, and the majority of the formats players don't own all of the cards in their decks; and secondly, it is unreliably broken to the extent that it is difficult to take the actual game play serious at times. 

Allow me to contine with this second part.  In Vintage, the power level of the cards is so high that often times a good hand simply gets beaten by a broken hand.  In the course of a short two turn game there is literally no way that player A's solid hand can actually win, and since the game is so fast, due to the power level of the cards, there isn't a chance for any sort of recovery.  People tend to get frustrated by this fact, and generalize that Vintage is a dumb format because there is very little skill required.  Although I reverently disagree that saying Vintage requires no skill, merely lucky brokenness, is incorrect;  I cannot deny that sometimes the games are very stupid because of the power level of the cards.  Perhaps the most infuriating thing about Vintage is when on turn one the entire game is reduced to one sentence "do you have it"  (regarding Force of Will and a blue card)  if not you lost. 

In spite of these two problematic aspects (which ultimately lead to Vintages two greatest flaws as I will later explain)  Vintage has a lot of really awesome factors going in its favor.  Firstly, Vintage is known the world over for having the coolest, most chill, fantastic players and community.  The best part of a SCG event isn't actually playing, or winning, its the road trip down with my buddies, and partying with Samite Healer, the Colorado guys, or Jdizzle and his Meandeck Cronies.  Vintage is full of great people and great times, which is a large part of why people continue to want to play this format.  I personally, have met a huge number of great people playing Vintage, and many of those friendships have extended outside of the game.  I really can't say the same about people I've met playing any of the other formats.  Vintage tends to attract a different crowd than the other constructed formats.  In general Vintage players tend to be a little bit older and a little bit wiser and a little bit more mature.  The other thing that is unique to Vintage is that it gives players an opportunity to play with the most powerful and expensive cards.  The collectability aspect of Vintage is another quality that appeals to certain players, and makes them want to play the format.  Having a nine page of every type two shock land may be spicy for a collector, but I guarantee it doesn't even come close to the feeling of satisfaction one feels when they pick up that ninth piece of beta power.   Not to mention the fact that you get to play the most powerful decks in existence.

However, though the expensiveness of the cards may be a lure to some players, it definitely hinders the growth of the format in general.  The fact that many of the formats players, as well as people who would like to play the format, can't afford to build their decks is a huge problem as it makes it difficult for Wizards to actually support and provide events for the formats.  Since, proxies are not allowed in DCI sanctioned events it is difficult to find actual supported events.

So with all of these things in mind:  Here is the actual problem.

For all of its awesomeness and its large community; Vintage receives very little attention comparatively to the other formats.  The reason for this is largely because of the two problems I mentioned earlier:  Expensiveness and Brokenness.  However, I'm not sure those are longer legitimate excuses for the lack of events and event coverage.  The main problem I see isn't that Vintage sucks, or is an awful format with a stagnant metagame.  I believe the opposite.  It is a very rapidly evolving metagame that hasn't even been completely figured out yet.  It varies from region to region, that is how wide open it is.  Vintage is actually one of the most interesting formats at the moment in the world of MTG; simply because of how much its grown and how quickly its grown. 

I was at GP Richmond two weeks ago and it made a few things abundantly clear to me.  Firstly, GP Richmond was much nicer, professionally run, and well organized than any Vintage event I have ever attended.  By comparison it absolutely dwarfed Vintage Worlds in every way possible.  It makes Vintage Worlds look like a joke.  Secondly, it made me realize how cultivated the other formats of MTG are.  Wizards had feature matches, event coverage, and tons of publicity for this event both on line and at the event.  Vintage never gets this kind of attention.  This year's Vintage worlds got zero feature matches on the Wizards website, no live event coverage or updates, and one post tournament article.  and come to think of it I don't recall reading much else on Wizards.com about Vintage since.  In order for Vintage to continue to grow it needs coverage, players need to know who its stars are and what they are playing, and they need to know what is going on.  Also, exposure encourages growth in the format; it adds to the stakes and the glory involved in being sucessful at the format, and would encourage more players to play.  The ohter thing that I noticed that I find extremely upsetting is that Vintage Worlds distributes no Byes based on Eternal rating.  I see no reason for what at a Vintage World championship that features no proxies, there should be no byes given out based on player who have a high rating based on playing no proxy vintage.  It actually doesn't make sense.  The counter arguement is that most of the big events are ten proxy SCG P9 or Waterbury like events; to which I retort, the Bye tournaments at gencon and Origens are both no proxy.  Why not allow the good players, the stars of the format who actually play to be awarded byes at the world Champs?  All it does is allow the marquee players to not have to play against random jank in the first few rounds and ensures that better, more notable players are given the opportunity to compete in the later rounds.  that is why they do it at GPs, to promote the format and reward its loyal dedicated players;  I see no reason why Vintage players should recieve any less respect from the DCI.  The paintings are kind of a neat idea, however the prize support at Vintage's premier event fucking sucks.  Since its the only big Vintage DCI'd event of the year they should put up something better than that;  getting to design an invitational style card would be hot but maybe too much.  What about putting the Vintage World champ on one of those stupid pro cards that come in the tournament packs.  Just something to advertise our format, and get our players some props for their accomplishments.

Vintage doesn't recieve these basic things because it has earned an undeserved bad wrap.  People see it as broken expensive and unaccessable; or at least that is how I believe Wizards perception of how people view the format stands.  I don't think this is how players in general, of Vintage or otherwise see the format.  At GP Richmond I had the pleasure of talking to a lot of pro players including Neil Reives among others.  Many of the pros had been following Vintage with interest and thought it looked like a really awesome format.  In fact many of them even knew who I was based on my Vintage performance, and even what deck i was playing.  Also, many of them informed me that they really wanted to play Vintage and were working on accumulating the cards to do so.  How is that for format expansion?  The standard pros WANT to play our format because they think it is interesting and really cool.  The attitude of the people I was talking to wasn't that Vintage was too broken or dumb, rather it was that it seemed really cool and really skill intensive.  What most people don't understand is that whereas some games don't require skill to win, or skill can't save you; the primary skill in vintage is actually metagaming and deck construction.  That is how you win, and that is what the pros I was talking to really seemed to appreciate about the format.  Also, for every game where you get brokened shamelessly, there are ten games you can steal by out playing an opponent.  Vintage requires a lot of skill to actually play close games correctly.

Another major criticism I have is that in spite of the fact that SCG has done so much to promote Vintage and has sponsored the P9 events; they have really slacked off with their coverage.  The coverage is key.  It is how new players learn about the format and it was our number one source of outside promotion as a format.  Standard players could randomly read about Vintage P9 events, and perhaps have their interest in the format sparked.  Also, reading about the players and their feature match is a big reason that players who normally wouldn't drive five hours to play Vintage, might actually change their minds.  Wizards never really gave Vintage worthwhile coverage, and now that SCG has stopped publishing coverage the situation has gone from bad to worse.  It is great that SCG posts lists for the events, but having the featurematches and event coverage was really great; and I believe totally necessary for the future of a healthy growing format.

Lastly, aside from pride and team bragging rites there is really nowhere to go in Vintage.  this is okay I suppose.  The fact that there is no PT doesn't make me want to quit, but it can be discouraging at times.  It would be really great if Wizards did something to incorporate Vintage into mainstream MTG or publicize it better.  It is probably to hard to ever have a Vintage GP, since they wouldn't get enough people.  So, I've thought long and hard about it.  Here is what I came up with.  Sideboard magizine used to put on a high profile magic Masters team tournament back in the day.  The last one took place during Odyssey block.  It was a three player team with a seat a, b, and c.
respectively seat a's played the other a's, b's against b's, c's against c's.  a's were Standard decks, b's were extended decks, and c's were Vintage decks.  I think that it would be really hot for Wizards to sponsor a tournament like that again.  It would put Vintage's best players up against one another, as well as be well covered.  The coolest thing would be that Vintage's best players would be competing alongside standards best players.  It would be really awesome.  It would be a neat kind of invitational.

So that is what I'm thinking about at the moment.  I'd like to see Vintage grow, become more popular, or maybe even just better represented by Wizards.  To recap:  I'd like to see the following thngs happen over time.

-SCG Feature matches and event coverage for P9 events.
-Wizards coverage of major DCI sanctioned events, Worlds, Origens;  this would include feature matches and live updates for the tourney.
-Byes awarded based on rating for Worlds
-Some sort of Vintage invitational event.  Possibly team oriented with other formats. 
-More recognition and support from Wizards, possibly better prizes;  for Wizards to publicize and show support for its own format.

Cheers,
FFY

[Meddling Mike]

-SCG Feature matches and event coverage for P9 events.

Well, they did this before, and then came to the decision that it wasn't worthwhile anymore. I suppose it's a nice thing to work on, but I'm sure SCG had it's reasons for ending the feature match and event coverage of it's P9 events.

-Wizards coverage of major DCI sanctioned events, Worlds, Origens;  this would include feature matches and live updates for the tourney.

I don't think you're really thinking about this from Wizards point of view, do they really want to work to promote vintage? Vintage encourages people to make large investments into cards that they no longer sell, dealers and card stores (like SCG) make money off making vintage more popular because they sell moxen. Wizards on the other hand no longer does and hasn't done so for many years, what Wizards is aiming for is for you to buy boosters of guildpact until you're blue in the face because that's where their money comes from, if we're all busy buying moxen instead of boxes of guildpact wizards isn't making it's money, and that's a big frown for them. So from a business perspective, pushing vintage on it's player base may even be detrimental to it's business.

-Byes awarded based on rating for Worlds

I could be wrong, but weren't byes issued at worlds?

-More recognition and support from Wizards, possibly better prizes;  for Wizards to publicize and show support for its own format.

Personally, I thought the prizes issued at worlds was fantastic given the player base present, there was fairly solid prize support going well down into the standings. I myself walked away with numerous draft sets and legends boosters.

I think the appeal of vintage is different for different people, I play vintage because I like the community and I think the payout for vintage is typically better than your average PTQ, I've known store owners to often break even and at times take a loss supporting the prize structure for a vintage event. One of the local store owners discussed vintage events with me and told me he didn't want to run them because the profit margins appeared to be too low for him to invest in it. I know Rich Shay played strictly vintage for quite some time after PT Boston because his rating qualified him for the Pro Tour and he wanted to play magic without threatening his rating, this seems to be the same appeal of WotC employees and perhaps why your Pro friends find Vintage Magic appealing.

[dicemanx]

I doubt anyone would disagree that all of these things would help boost the popularity of the format, but what do you suppose is in it for WotC? Someone has to fund the coverage, the invitational etc. How do you go about convincing that supporting a "dead" format is going to be beneficial from a business perspective? Would it actually be beneficial? Just to put it in perspective on a much smaller scale, one of our local organizers has recently stopped running T1 events because he would get more business attracting T2/limited players and sell some packs/singles. The T1 players simply did not make any purchases.


I just want to briefly address your two statements leading up to the suggestions. Although they aren't your primary focus, they represent misconceptions that I think you should be *fighting*, not highlighting as the truth in threads like these. We might disagree whether they happen to be misconceptions, but since I actually addressed this very issue on another site, let me reiterate some of the points I made:

1. T1's barrier of entry is no longer prohibitive given that the average unsanctioned event is 10 proxy. This only creates barriers to sanctioned events, which without reprints will never go anywhere or expand in size. The barrier for 10 proxy events is rivaled by the barrier to T2/extended. For instance - I *cannot* play T2 right now because the cost of being competitive and flexible in my deck construction options is much too high. This doesn't even factor in the fact that I will have to keep updating my inventory, AND my purchases will diminish in value over time on average. In T1, the purchases are more like swapping currency than making a purchase.

2. The "brokenness" factor. Before I discuss this, I was intrigued by your anecdote mentioning that some pros were interested in the format and weren't too concerned with the inflated power levels. However, I think that the stigma of T1 being all about the one sided crushing early wins is still a barrier to growth, especially when coupled to the perceived barrier #1 above. In any case, the way I often look at it is in the way that Smmenen described turns in T1 - the action is compressed, so that instead of a battle unfolding over many turns we have multiple actions being performed in the span of one turn. I think it might be fair to say that in a format like T2, we experience similar swings and crushing one sided victories, *but we just don't know it yet* as they are unfolding. Its sort of like playing out a T1 turn over many turns, where you only "find out" that you really had no chance by the time turn 5 or 6 rolled around based on your draw. Now granted this is a gross oversimplification, but I don't think that T1 is so radically unique when it comes to one sided victories based on the power of the cards and how rapidly the action unfolds and the game could be decided.

Ultimately we must focus on what you said in your post - T1 requires a *lot* of skill to play perfectly and maximize your chances, except that its all too easy for players to attribute their loss to "lucky topdecks" or "broken hands" rather than admit or recognize, for example, that the land they played which weakened their TfK or Brainstorm down the line essentially cost them the game. The mistakes in Vintage are so *subtle* and often difficult to recognize, which makes it very difficult for players to learn from their mistakes and improve in the technical skill department. Since they are unable to identify mistakes, they turn to the only logical explanation left for them - immense amount of luck in the format.

[Pyromaniac]

Firstly: I agree 100% with Peter on this matter.



Now I'll add some of my own rantings, which can/should be taken with a grain (or bucket)bucket of salt

I was at GP Richmond two weeks ago and it made a few things abundantly clear to me.  Firstly, GP Richmond was much nicer, professionally run, and well organized than any Vintage event I have ever attended.  By comparison it absolutely dwarfed Vintage Worlds in every way possible.  It makes Vintage Worlds look like a joke.  Secondly, it made me realize how cultivated the other formats of MTG are.  Wizards had feature matches, event coverage, and tons of publicity for this event both on line and at the event.  Vintage never gets this kind of attention.  This year's Vintage worlds got zero feature matches on the Wizards website, no live event coverage or updates, and one post tournament article.  and come to think of it I don't recall reading much else on Wizards.com about Vintage since.  In order for Vintage to continue to grow it needs coverage, players need to know who its stars are and what they are playing, and they need to know what is going on.  Also, exposure encourages growth in the format; it adds to the stakes and the glory involved in being sucessful at the format, and would encourage more players to play.  The ohter thing that I noticed that I find extremely upsetting is that Vintage Worlds distributes no Byes based on Eternal rating.  I see no reason for what at a Vintage World championship that features no proxies, there should be no byes given out based on player who have a high rating based on playing no proxy vintage.  It actually doesn't make sense.  The counter arguement is that most of the big events are ten proxy SCG P9 or Waterbury like events; to which I retort, the Bye tournaments at gencon and Origens are both no proxy.  Why not allow the good players, the stars of the format who actually play to be awarded byes at the world Champs?  All it does is allow the marquee players to not have to play against random jank in the first few rounds and ensures that better, more notable players are given the opportunity to compete in the later rounds.  that is why they do it at GPs, to promote the format and reward its loyal dedicated players;  I see no reason why Vintage players should recieve any less respect from the DCI.  The paintings are kind of a neat idea, however the prize support at Vintage's premier event fucking sucks.  Since its the only big Vintage DCI'd event of the year they should put up something better than that;  getting to design an invitational style card would be hot but maybe too much.  What about putting the Vintage World champ on one of those stupid pro cards that come in the tournament packs.  Just something to advertise our format, and get our players some props for their accomplishments.

Vintage doesn't recieve these basic things because it has earned an undeserved bad wrap.  People see it as broken expensive and unaccessable; or at least that is how I believe Wizards perception of how people view the format stands.  I don't think this is how players in general, of Vintage or otherwise see the format.  At GP Richmond I had the pleasure of talking to a lot of pro players including Neil Reives among others.  Many of the pros had been following Vintage with interest and thought it looked like a really awesome format.  In fact many of them even knew who I was based on my Vintage performance, and even what deck i was playing.  Also, many of them informed me that they really wanted to play Vintage and were working on accumulating the cards to do so.  How is that for format expansion?  The standard pros WANT to play our format because they think it is interesting and really cool.  The attitude of the people I was talking to wasn't that Vintage was too broken or dumb, rather it was that it seemed really cool and really skill intensive.  What most people don't understand is that whereas some games don't require skill to win, or skill can't save you; the primary skill in vintage is actually metagaming and deck construction.  That is how you win, and that is what the pros I was talking to really seemed to appreciate about the format.  Also, for every game where you get brokened shamelessly, there are ten games you can steal by out playing an opponent.  Vintage requires a lot of skill to actually play close games correctly.

Another major criticism I have is that in spite of the fact that SCG has done so much to promote Vintage and has sponsored the P9 events; they have really slacked off with their coverage.  The coverage is key.  It is how new players learn about the format and it was our number one source of outside promotion as a format.  Standard players could randomly read about Vintage P9 events, and perhaps have their interest in the format sparked.  Also, reading about the players and their feature match is a big reason that players who normally wouldn't drive five hours to play Vintage, might actually change their minds.  Wizards never really gave Vintage worthwhile coverage, and now that SCG has stopped publishing coverage the situation has gone from bad to worse.  It is great that SCG posts lists for the events, but having the featurematches and event coverage was really great; and I believe totally necessary for the future of a healthy growing format.

Lastly, aside from pride and team bragging rites there is really nowhere to go in Vintage.  this is okay I suppose.  The fact that there is no PT doesn't make me want to quit, but it can be discouraging at times.  It would be really great if Wizards did something to incorporate Vintage into mainstream MTG or publicize it better.  It is probably to hard to ever have a Vintage GP, since they wouldn't get enough people.  So, I've thought long and hard about it.  Here is what I came up with.  Sideboard magizine used to put on a high profile magic Masters team tournament back in the day.  The last one took place during Odyssey block.  It was a three player team with a seat a, b, and c.
respectively seat a's played the other a's, b's against b's, c's against c's.  a's were Standard decks, b's were extended decks, and c's were Vintage decks.  I think that it would be really hot for Wizards to sponsor a tournament like that again.  It would put Vintage's best players up against one another, as well as be well covered.  The coolest thing would be that Vintage's best players would be competing alongside standards best players.  It would be really awesome.  It would be a neat kind of invitational.

I might be going out on a limb here, but "Vintage Worlds" IS a joke. I'm not saying this to bash the format, it's more of a conclusion after seeing what happened there in the last few years. At one time, in 2004, a few of us Dutchies attended, with our own money, no sponsoring from wotc whatsoever. Then last year, a few other europeans showed up, because they managed to win enough "cash" (ok, cards, but w/e) in Paris to actually attend it. It is an event we can't qualify for, no PTQ or even something like a GP trial. Anyone can attend, no questions asked. You can't win a trip by winning a ptq, so that instantly rules out most europeans and others from abroad: "worlds" is thusly a mostly American and Canadian event, and I'm NOT willing to call that "worlds": Over here, we call it the Vintage GP for a reason Also, but this might be my perception: participation has been decreasing steadily since the first year, but I'm not sure of this, can someone confirm this, and can we figure out a reason for it?

Anyways, we were pondering whether/not to go there in 2005. We had an awesome time in 2004 with the Canadians, meeting all kinds of cool people from TMD, so that wasn't the problem. What IS a problem for us is that, no matter what, there's NO way to redeem your trip, and in the end we weren't willing to spend roughly a 1000 dollars each to go there, hotel etc to maybe win a trophy and some boosters. This means it has to be planned as part of a vacation, which was problematic, seeing we probably would have some trouble getting there cause we'd have to plan it all in a rather short time-frame.

I definately want to attend a Waterbury this year if a few others will join me. I have the money for it and if we can hang around with a few Americans for a few days more it'd be a fun short vacation, like a week or so total.

WOTC doesn't have a whole lot going for Type 1: they can't make money on it, cause we use mostly out of print cards, so the money they normally make from booster sales to use for organizing and prize support has already been spent on standard and limited GP's/PT's. SCG stopped doing coverage cause it cost them more money then they make: this is understandable, but they started it and then seemingly in the middel of the "season" they stopped with it again. Just a short note about it, nothing else.

About the brokenness factor: Players from other formats see us playtesting, winning in 2-5 turns, crushing your opponent with a seemingly stupid play: restricted cards make the game look easy, remember this. This only reinforces their opinion, and arguing with them is useless, since they usually don't bother to listen and (unfortunately) fall back at standard replies like "you drew blahblahblah and thus...."

I really don't know what to say to this in the end. I like Type 1 a lot: fast gameplay, broken cards I've played with forever and a nice relaxed atmosphere at tournaments. This to me are really the factors to play this format, above all else. I'd like to see the stuff you want as well, but the problem is that unless we get a Type 1 player working at WOTC/DCI, it's probably NOT gonna happen

[Juggernaut GO]

I think we can all take a step forward by stopping the use of black lotus, I voluntarily will stop playing black lotus in all my decks  starting this weekend WHOS WITH ME !!!!!?!?!?!?!?

[Godder]

In other constructed formats, if someone draws "the nuts" and the opponent doesn't, they win just as surely as in Vintage. It might take 5 turns instead of 1 or 2, but the opponent had no more chance of winning in either. Extended has just rotated, but Affinity and the like can still win on turn 3 with "the nuts". That's the same as a turn one Oath or Colossus (without Time Walk, obviously).

The other thing is that in other constructed formats, match-ups matter a lot more than they do in Vintage. Without making pure hate decks, it's rare for Vintage decks to be able to claim any match-up as being better than 60% (other than aggro, which barely counts). Since the Swiss system in Magic has random pairings within a score group, who you play is heavily luck-based. In a Standard or Extended tournament, two unlucky pairings can destroy a tournament just as surely as if someone had drawn "the nuts". It's possible for a match-up to be so bad that the only way to win is mana screw or drawing "the nuts" vs a bad draw. That's not the case in Vintage, where any good deck can "just win" even against bad match-ups.

[iamfishman]

I'm going to be in the minority here when I say the following:

-I don't want type 1 to get more popular.
-I don't want type 1 to get more publicity.
-I don't want type 1 to get attention from Wizards.

I see the relationship between the casualness/friendliness of the type one environment and its community as inversely proportional to its popularity.  Attention, fame, glory, big prizes, etc. bring with them cheaters, corruption, poor sportsmanship, etc.

I am not a master (de)bator, so I will leave that up to the rest of you, but I believe that a strong argument can be made that the more attention and popularity type 1 gets, the less it will be the type 1 as we know it.  At Vintage Worlds, the touching support that people produced at my loss of power WOULD NEVER have happened at a PTQ, Grand Prix, Etc.

Small is personal
Undeveloped is casual
Communal is friendly

How many of you have liked a band, game, hobby, etc. more before it hit a popularity spike?  I think everyone might have gone through that.  When I think about how Phish was before breaking up, compared to a decade ago and longer, it is striking how far the scene went...from being all about Phish and the music, to just being a mindless wave of drugs making there way around the country.  Very upsetting.

So maybe I'm not understanding an obvious underlying question.  Who says Vintage needs to come out from underneath the radar?

[forests failed you]

@Meddling Mage - there were byes awarded, but they were for winning a bye tournament, not based on rating.

Secondly -  black lotus is a stupid card.

Thirdly - I just want Vintage to have a premier event that feels like a premiere event.  Worlds felt like a giant side event this year.  Individual Top eight matches were all played at the same table.  It was awful.  Wizards does have an investment in type one:  It is where all of the cards go when they rotate from extended, and it is what ensures stability of their game as an investment, and as a collectable in the long run.

[Moxlotus]

I doubt Wizards has that much of misconceptions about Type 1 recently.  With Randy Buehler playing type 1 and going to Richmond, and I've heard that his coworkers help him test, I believe they know exactly what is going on in the format.

[Godder]

It is where all of the cards go when they rotate from extended, and it is what ensures stability of their game as an investment, and as a collectable in the long run.

They created Legacy for that purpose.

[forests failed you]

Legacy does not incorporate the most expensive or most desireable cards ever printed.  Vintage does.  The fact that Vintage exists allows the most collectable cards, such as  black lotus and moxes to fetch such a high price.  If you think that the prescedent of having cards become that valuable is a bad thing for the future of the game as a collectable game doesn't help Wizards you are being very foolish.  The existence of Vintage adds a whole new level to the collectable aspect of this hobby.  We are the idiots who spend stupid cash on individual cards and have turned their 'game' into a more worthwhile investment than modern sports cards. 

I don't disagree that it is unlikely we will ever see any of the changes I've put forward.  That isn't the point.  The point is that I was thinking about the direction I would ideally like to see the format go in, and putting it out there.  I'd just like to see some love from the WOTC, after all vintage tends to be where most long term magic players eventually end up. 


Supporting Vintage may not blatently sell packs at local hobby store; however it does secure a stable market for older cards which makes the game more appealing to collectors or possibly investers.

This is kind of an indirect effect of supporting Vintage; but nonetheless there is something to be gained for WOT for supporting this format and giving it coverage.  In my opinion it just seems like a common courtesy to the people who play your game, to give its biggest event of the year some coverage and some individual tables maybe.  Or perhaps a feature match or two. 

[Machinus]

I agree with a lot of what has been said, by forcefieldyou, dicemanx, and also iamfishman.

It is important to note that as much as we may want Vintage to receive more support from Wizards, for the most part this is an unrealistic desire. Wizards is just not going to invest in a format that offers very little return for them. So increased prize structure, recognition, and an invitational are probably never going to happen.

The same kind of philosophy applies to SCG. Pete has been extremely generous to the Vintage community, guaranteeing so far almost 200 pieces of power from his tournaments and providing more Vintage content than all other magic sites put together. However, they are still a business, and they can't support Vintage on their own. If coverage wasn't working out, then I am glad they gave it a shot. If players wanted to work for SCG for free, I think there is a chance it could return, but again it's a question of investment vs. returns.

I do think that byes based on rating are both essential and easy to accomplish, so this is one thing we can push for.

Something that I think would be really good for the format would be to have video coverage of the finals of large, sanctioned tournaments, like Gencon. If other players got to watch players playing with real Vintage cards and doing powerful things, but also demonstrating their skill, it could really generate interest. It would be entertaining for players of other formats, as well as educational about the nature of Vintage (i.e, if players saw how long the finals take and how much skill is involved at that level, players' idea of the format might change). WotC seeds torrents of PT finals and things like that, so I think hosting could be accomplished easily enough. The hardest part would be getting someone to make a nice film of the match (perhaps something resembling the camera techniques used at other events). Personally, I think this would be awesome to watch.

Regarding the deterioration of a strong community in the face of competition:

Some time ago I created a thread on this site regarding the carrying capacity of the format, based on the number of cards printed. The obvious reaction was that proxies obsoleted this analysis, and that the format could effectively support a much greater number of players if private tournaments continued to allow proxies. This is true, but it means that Wizards is even less likely to do anything meaningful to support Vintage. As long as this private community is responsible for the continued existence and popularity of the format, Wizards will continue to ignore it in any official capacity.

This is directly related to the nature of the players. Wizards' knows how to sell cards to young kids, and that's how they do business. If Wizards got on board and started recruiting people and generating interest in the format, what do you think would happen to the community? Obviously there would be an influx of younger players that would fail abysmally to meet our standards of conduct, community, and behaviour. The wonderful children from the PT community would bring with them collusion, theft, cheating, and all the other stuff that happens at events like GP Richmond.

So while I do want more competition and interest in Vintage, I realize that it is not going to come from Wizards, and therefore I am not greatly concerned about the nature of the community. I don't think there is much room left for Vintage to grow, and actually the player base may be shrinking due to Wizards direct sponsorship of another large format.

[Whatever Works]

Most of the things said make sense...
Coverage would make a huge difference.
However, I am a little confused on how using eternal ratings would help since sanctioned tourneys wouldnt allow proxies...

Here is an Idea I have been pushing around for a VERY LONG TIME...

Allow Eternal rating to count as 1/3rd of any players composite rating IF and ONLY IF... The Eternal Rating would boost the overall Composite rating... This I think would encourage players who are trying to raise there ratings to get to the tour or whatever by playing vintage/Legacy... However, If people have no interest then having a 1600 eternal rating wouldnt have any negative affects on composite... In essence use having a high eternal rating as a optional benefit that I am sure many people would use to try and take advantage of...

Kyle L.

[nataz]

However, they are still a business, and they can't support Vintage on their own. If coverage wasn't working out, then I am glad they gave it a shot. If players wanted to work for SCG for free, I think there is a chance it could return, but again it's a question of investment vs. returns.

By framing your answer in the context of SCG being a business it implies that Pete stopped the coverage because it wasn't profitable, which is untrue. They stopped because of lack of interest.

Personally, I think making it premium was a mistake, and that it would be very popular if made into a freebie. I really loved the coverage, and was wicked bummed to see it go. At the very least it would certainly help make up for the lack of real vintage articles lately on the site. I'm sure if they tried they could at least get some people to do some impromptu coverage after the 0-2 drop round.

As a bonus, this way Team Meandeck would have something to do after the assumed long drive down. I know I certainly would apprecite Steve and JD writing for SCG again.    

oh, and @ what Demars said,

The paintings are kind of a neat idea, however the prize support at Vintage's premier event fucking sucks.

Yea,
I pretty much have zero interest traveling all the way to Gencon for a painting. I'm just glad I live w/in 8 hours of Waterbury. Fun + honest-to-goodness prize payout.

[Machinus]

However, they are still a business, and they can't support Vintage on their own. If coverage wasn't working out, then I am glad they gave it a shot. If players wanted to work for SCG for free, I think there is a chance it could return, but again it's a question of investment vs. returns.

By framing your answer in the context of SCG being a business it implies that Pete stopped the coverage because it wasn't profitable, which is untrue. They stopped because of lack of interest.

How is that any different?

[Tha Gunslinga]

The paintings are not only unique but are most likely worth more than a set of P9; I wouldn't mind winning one.

[Jacob Orlove]

As a bonus, this way Team Meandeck would have something to do after the assumed long drive down. I know I certainly would apprecite Steve and JD writing for SCG again.    

Yeah, it isn't easy to put all our members in the T8 when we bring more than 8 people to an event. We'll try, but we should have some people left over to do coverage (certainly of the T8, probably of the last few rounds), if SCG is at all set up to put it online.

[Komatteru]

I'd be willing to do match coverage if I don't make it into T8.  That works out well for everyone: people get to read something by me in either case. 

I'll have more to say about all the things in this thread a bit later.

[Godder]

If coverage is being done, try to make it free if possible. I think that would go a long way.

[Moxlotus]

The paintings are not only unique but are most likely worth more than a set of P9; I wouldn't mind winning one.

But foil power 9 that we can play would be even hotter than a painting

[nataz]

How is that any different?

I wasn't clear enough, try this

By framing your answer in the context of SCG being a business it implies that Pete stopped the coverage because it wasn't profitable was losing them money, which is untrue. They stopped because of lack of interest.

From the statements that Pete made it seemed pretty clear to me that it wasn't about money, it was about interest. If they can bring it back as a freebie, even if they don't turn a profit, they can at least do it at minimal/no real net loss. Not to mention the side bonus of what more Vintage coverage can mean to the format. The last few waterburys that I have been too have had top 8 coverage (although its almost never actually posted). If waterbury can manage it, SCG should be able to also.  

and

The paintings are not only unique but are most likely worth more than a set of P9; I wouldn't mind winning one.

I wouldn't mind wining one either, but that prize structure still isnt going to get me to go to Gencon. If Waterbury manages to spread the loving over multiple people, on multiple days. I'd rather have a bunch of smaller (yet still significant) prizes, rather then packs.

Plus, even if the paintings are worth an entire set of P9 (I have no idea exactly what they sold for), SCG gives out the equivalent multiple times/year. Thats like making the WSOP main event payout the same as a satellite. This is the freakn' WORLD CHAMPS, and the przie structure honestly just feels weeeak.     


*edit*
Special foils would be great prizes. Even if they are just hott Judge Foils like Sol Ring or Balance.

[Machinus]

How is that any different?

I wasn't clear enough, try this

By framing your answer in the context of SCG being a business it implies that Pete stopped the coverage because it wasn't profitable was losing them money, which is untrue. They stopped because of lack of interest.

From the statements that Pete made it seemed pretty clear to me that it wasn't about money, it was about interest. If they can bring it back as a freebie, even if they don't turn a profit, they can at least do it at minimal/no real net loss. Not to mention the side bonus of what more Vintage coverage can mean to the format. The last few waterburys that I have been too have had top 8 coverage (although its almost never actually posted). If waterbury can manage it, SCG should be able to also.

As generous as Pete has been, he is still in charge of a large business, and I am pretty sure that "lack of interest" means that not enough people were buying premium accounts and reading the coverage. If he was doing it as a service, he would have kept it going because the coverage was interesting and really useful. So in the end, it is about profit, both directly and indirectly.

[Juggernaut GO]

At the very least it would certainly help make up for the lack of real vintage articles lately on the site.

It's not for the lack of people writing vintage articles, I can tell you that much.  I submitted 2 articles in january alone, and they flat out won't print them.  Instead I see 500 replica articles on "WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THIS DRAFT POOL"   How many times does SCG have to print the same article for people to not care?

[forests failed you]

The paintings are not only unique but are most likely worth more than a set of P9; I wouldn't mind winning one.

Not even close.  They are worth roughly $1000.00 a piece.  However I sincerely doubt wizards has to pay that much in order to commission the painting.  Other than that they gave out Gemstone Mines and Italian Legends packs and some product.  The painting is cool;  but you have to win first place to get it.  They get over 150 for Vintage worlds at $25.OO.  Do that math, there is a lot of room to give out better prizes than Gemstone Mines, and packs.  This is our Formats World Champs, top eight should get something really spicy.  They should at least give out half of what they take in as prize, at least.  Vintage Worlds is ass;  the only thing really on the line is pride.

They don't even have tiered prizes for second through eighth.  Second gets the same prize as eighth.  Bull Schnikies that is even remotely cool.

[49 Cents]

So why did Wizards decide to give out such an amazing pricepool for the tourney in Paris last year? (you know, with complete beta sets of power, boxes and airplane tickets). If I recall correctly, I've never seen anything on MTG.com about it. But they did sponsor it, right?

Why doesn't Wizard just spread those prices? Why doesn't Wizards organize GPQ's for free flights to GenCon? I basically agree with everything Pyromaniac said about your so called Worlds.. Seriously, how may non-Canadian foreigners were there exactly last year?

[Klep]

So why did Wizards decide to give out such an amazing pricepool for the tourney in Paris last year?

That wasn't Wizards giving away the insanity, but rather the TO.

[vartemis]

Something that I think would be really good for the format would be to have video coverage of the finals of large, sanctioned tournaments, like Gencon. If other players got to watch players playing with real Vintage cards and doing powerful things, but also demonstrating their skill, it could really generate interest. It would be entertaining for players of other formats, as well as educational about the nature of Vintage (i.e, if players saw how long the finals take and how much skill is involved at that level, players' idea of the format might change). WotC seeds torrents of PT finals and things like that, so I think hosting could be accomplished easily enough. The hardest part would be getting someone to make a nice film of the match (perhaps something resembling the camera techniques used at other events). Personally, I think this would be awesome to watch.

I have thought about doing that.  I am looking at buying a couple of cameras for my business, and thought this would be a neat trial.  For a feature match, I would set up 3 cameras.  1 for the play area and 1 on each players hand.  You could then put cut ins on the top and bottom or sides, much like like poker, allowing you to see the players' hands.  Or maybe just show the active players hand.  Then in the upper corner you could have phase and life totals.

Anyone else got any ideas on how to do this?

j

[Jacob Orlove]

Waterbury did that a few times, but getting everything coordinated, and then putting it up online was a huge hassle.

[Machinus]

Waterbury did that a few times, but getting everything coordinated, and then putting it up online was a huge hassle.

Yeah, I'm only suggesting it for really large sanctioned events, of which there are very few. Obviously Gencon, but there are others. If I had video of the finals of the French championship, I don't know if I would ever stop seeding it.

I still watch old matches all the time, from several formats, like old extended (maher is great to watch).

[Apollyon]

On the France Vintage Champs: France is whacky because of various laws there. The French DCI is separate from the regular DCI, in some respects.

Wizards is also the TO for Euro GPs, which is different than in the US, where Premiere stores are the TOs of the GPs. As such, they usually do a better job at the GPs, because they are experienced at how to do GPs.

On the videos: Waterbury has done videos, but there were a few people who complained about the quality of the free videos + the slow download speed of the free videos + why the feature matches were shitty + how the players were shitty + how type 2 will kill Magic + how splitting the type 1/2 B/R List will kill Magic + how Steve Menendian will show you how to kill Magic, but you won't understand it anyways, etc.

If you wish to do something like that, it would be much appreciated, and I know several people who would love to help you in your project (although some of the hlp might not be on-site).