B&R Results are In - No Change for Vintage

[GrandpaBelcher]

Announcement Date: March 1, 2007
Magic Online Effective Date: Thursday, March 22, 2007
(after the regularly scheduled Thursday downtime)

Standard, Extended, Legacy, Vintage, Time Spiral Block Constructed, Two-Headed Giant Constructed

No changes

Online Formats:

Prismatic

Supply/Demand is banned
Demonic Collusion is banned
Mystical Teachings is banned

Tribal Wars, Classic, Freeform, Singleton, Vanguard

No changes

For an explanation of the changes (or lack thereof) from Magic R&D, tune in to Aaron Forsythe's "Latest Developments" column on magicthegathering.com on Friday, March 2, 2007.

I'm okay with them not banning Will or restricting anything else.  I'd like a bit of a format shakeup, I guess, but there are lots of good decks and more in development.  I don't know why they didn't take stuff off the list, though.  I always hope they have something coming out that will be insane with 4x Voltaic Key, which is why they won't unrestrict it, but it never happens.

Thoughts?

[Yare]

I think we waited far too long to "discuss" the B/R if we expected anything to change this cycle.  The conversation really needs to start about a month before the date, rather than the 2 weeks (or even less) we started this time around.  I think if we really want change, that's how it is going to have to happen.

That being said, no big deal that nothing changed, at least for now.

[Sam Best]

Personally I don't think much needs to be changed. I know a lot of people wanted Gifts Ungiven restricted, but there are also solutions to the card. Really I really think DCI made a good call on nothing being changed, but that is just me.

[dicemanx]

The timing of our conversations isn't the problem - it is reaching a consensus about what cards need to be restricted or unrestricted, AND making a concerted effort to make the changes happen.

The only suggestion thus far that has a legitimate chance of happening is the banning of Yawgmoth's Will, but there is almost NO CHANCE that this will happen unless we have unanimous support, write articles about it from many perspectives (one person writing a B/R piece isn't enough), and have people voice their opinions to WotC/DCI. Even then, it is tough to make that sell. The last card to be put on the list, Trinisphere, was by comparison easier to get restricted - the fact that it ended games immediately on turn 1, albeit inconsistently, was almost reason enough. Yawgmoth's Will doesn't do that. You cannot even call it a "lucky" game ender - decks that use Yawgmoth's Will are *designed* to use Will as a finisher, much the same way that a Craw Wurm can be a finisher in a green beatdown deck. You wouldn't complain that the opponent is lucky when Craw Wurm beats down for the final 6 points, much the same way you cannot complain that the control/combo deck is achieving its strategic goal when Will resolves.

[vroman]

if it takes unanimity to ban yawgwill, then consider this a hung jury.
Yawgmoth will = Not guilty

[Yare]

I just had a thought concerning the cycle of B/R changes.  In an environment where there is relative controversy about a deck (Tog would be an obvious example), unrestrictions are not really considered as much, as the metagame is more concerned about being fixed.  However, when you have something resembling what we have now, a relatively healthy environment with no truly dominant deck, the discussion tends to center around unrestriction.  Does this seem reasonable?

[Razvan]

I am just waiting until people stop talking about Yawgmoth's Will to be banned. I won't hold my breath.

[Sam Best]

Yeah. I seriously doubt it will ever get banned. There is way too much graveyard hate. There are plenty of solutions to the card.

[Dxfiler]

Meh.  I still think gifts should get the boot.

The format really is in a state where you're either playing the card or aiming specifically to beat it.  It's dominating many tourneys and where it isn't flat out winning, it's typically taking up 3-4 spots in every top 8 of tourneys over 20 people.  Decks that don't even build around gifts now regularly run multiple copies, such as dry slaver, because the card is simply too good.

I cannot fathom fact or fiction being restricted and gifts running free at this point.  It's just insane.

I used to have the 'wait and see' attitude on gifts and didn't really try to push hard for it, but I'm actually at the point where I sincerely feel it's ruining the format.  The instant counter-argument to this is 'FEINSTEIN, IT'S NOT TAKING UP 7-8 SPOTS OF EVERY TOP 8.  IT'S USUALLY HALF THAT AT BEST.'  While that may be true, I don't think a card has to take up 90% of top 8's to be restriction worthy.  When 4x trinisphere was in its glory, typically half the top 8 was that and the other half were decks tweaked to beat it.  A healthy format that does not make.

I'm not going to go much further into it at this point because I've stated it all before, but I really think the card should go.  I know I'm probably still in the minority :p

- Dave Feinstein

[Myriad Games]

I concur that a format that has even 50-60% of a given deck in the top finishes is not necessarily healthy. When that type of domination occurs, the format has the potential to stagnate.

[oneofchaos]

Meh.  I still think gifts should get the boot.

The format really is in a state where you're either playing the card or aiming specifically to beat it.  It's dominating many tourneys and where it isn't flat out winning, it's typically taking up 3-4 spots in every top 8 of tourneys over 20 people.  Decks that don't even build around gifts now regularly run multiple copies, such as dry slaver, because the card is simply too good.

I cannot fathom fact or fiction being restricted and gifts running free at this point.  It's just insane.

I used to have the 'wait and see' attitude on gifts and didn't really try to push hard for it, but I'm actually at the point where I sincerely feel it's ruining the format.  The instant counter-argument to this is 'FEINSTEIN, IT'S NOT TAKING UP 7-8 SPOTS OF EVERY TOP 8.  IT'S USUALLY HALF THAT AT BEST.'  While that may be true, I don't think a card has to take up 90% of top 8's to be restriction worthy.  When 4x trinisphere was in its glory, typically half the top 8 was that and the other half were decks tweaked to beat it.  A healthy format that does not make.

I'm not going to go much further into it at this point because I've stated it all before, but I really think the card should go.  I know I'm probably still in the minority :p

- Dave Feinstein

Waterbury results

Day 1:

Gifts: 2
7/10: 1
GAT: 1
Dry Slaver: 1
Oath: 1
EBA: 1
U/W fish: 1

Day 2:

Buring Slaver: 1
TPS (drain and w/o drain) 1/2 respectively
Dry Slaver: 1
Counterbalance Fish: 1
Gifts: 1
Bob-Bomberman: 1

Now what makes vintage great at this moment I post it, is the diversity of our meta.  If we can keep our meta this diverse by simply having gifts in the format, let it be known as a necessary evil. 

[nataz]

Just for fun, here is a look at the recent top 8's with % of Gifts noted. Taken from Morphde, and our own results page.

Charelston SC Feb 24 0%

1. George Goanos-Xerox
2. Cody Vinci-Drain Tendrils
3.Albert Kyle-Manaless Ichorid
4.Cullen Cox-Hide and Seek Control
5.Brett Mathews-Xerox
6.Steven Goanos-Oath
7.Jonathan Goanos-Arsenal Wins Again
8.Robert Sutherland-The Mountains Win Again


[Report] TempleCon 2007 37%

Top 4   Andy Probasco -- Gifts
Top 4   Dan Joskiewich -- Control Slaver
Top 4   Dan Cunningham -- Salvagers
Top 4   Sam Best -- Gifts
Top 8   Joshua Cutler -- U/W/r Fish
Top 8   Arik Pogrebinsky -- U/W/b Fish
Top 8   Marc Tuttle -- U/R Fish
Top 8   Stefan Ellsworth -- Gifts

[Report] Myriad Games Vintage February 10th, 2007 25%

Top 4   Chad Behre with U/W/B Fish
Top 4   Andy Probasco with Gifts
Top 4   Ray Robillard with Staxless Stax
Top 4   Bill Copes with B/W Stax
Top 8   Jared Carter with Ichorid (w/Mana)
Top 8   Travis Bingham with Goblins
Top 8   Mike Spencer with Gifts
Top 8   Justin Timoney with Crosslong

[RESULTS] LCV III 2nd Tournament Top 8 25%

1st - Xavier Hurtado - MUD Domination
2nd - David Pla - U/R Stacks
Top 4 - Jaume Bonet - Pitch Long
Top 4 - Marc Corbella - Oath Intuitive
Top 8 - Narcís Mir - Dark Gifts
Top 8 - Sergi Garcés - Heineken Gifts
Top 8 - David Masip - Bomberman
Top 8 - Oliver Satizábal - Intuitive

[Results - Top 8] Hanau - Germany, 17.02.2007 25%

Vintage Top 8 Decks from: München 24.02.2007 0%
21 people

Vintage Top 8 Decks from: Iserlohn 18.02.2007 12.5%
31 people

Vintage Top 8 Decks from: Roma 18.02.2007 12.5 %
38 people

Vintage Top 8 Decks from: Badalona 17.02.2007 25%
78 people

2/24: Urbana-Champaign, IL – Win Becker’s Mox! 0%

1/2 Vroman - Ubastax
1/2 Jacob Riehm (me) - PMITA man prison
3 Aaron Mclean - UBR storm
4 Blaine Christiansen (BC) - UWB vial fish
5 Becker - UW Dancing Grunts
6 Jim Erlinger (Flux) - Ichorid
7 Kevin Brewer - 5c Aggro stax
8 Justin ??? - SS with maindeck extripates

Report] Myriad Games Vintage January 7th, 2007 37%

1st   Charles Scourbys with Salvagers
2nd   Crossman Wilkins with Combo
3rd   Justin Timoney with Salvagers
4th   Rich Shay with Control Slaver
5th   Andy Probasco with Gifts
6th   Patrick Hereford with Ichorid
7th   Mike Spencer with Gifts
8th   Bill Copes with Suppression Field Stax

Waterbury 2007-01-21 25%

Waterbury 2007-01-14 37%


avg. Gifts.dec in the Top 8
~21%

People need to separate perception and facts. Gifts isn’t taking 40%-50% of all the top 8’s.

[LotusHead]

I concur that a format that has even 50-60% of a given deck in the top finishes is not necessarily healthy. When that type of domination occurs, the format has the potential to stagnate.

Gifts Ungiven doesn't need restriction.

Gifts has been pretty strong from the begining, but then again, so was Trinisphere (albeit, Trini's strength was increased by Crucible in the next set).

The Meta adapted to Trinisphere, and Trinisphere got restricted anyways (due to (cough) noob's unfun experiences with it).

We adapted then (pre-3Sphere restriction), and while the card Gifts Ungiven is prevalent/popular, it's not like Shop/Bazaar/Dark Ritual.

Vintage will adapt and the lack of restricting Gifts Ungiven shows that the DCI trusts us (and correctly analyzes top 8 results proxy or no proxy).

I'm still pretty pissed about Time Vault, but that's a whole 'nother thread.

[Machinus]

The only suggestion thus far that has a legitimate chance of happening is the banning of Yawgmoth's Will Voltaic Key

Fixed. Theres no reason for it to be on there.

[yespuhyren]

Man it just seems like shops are being completely dropped for Drains now.  So sad, really.  Like I stated before, it seems like there is about 4.5 - 6x as many people playing drains now as there are shops.  I guess a lot of the weaker the players are just scared of playing Stax now do to the ease of casting 3-4 storm and ETW and have just dropped it in favor of playing ETW themselves. 

[BreathWeapon]

Man it just seems like shops are being completely dropped for Drains now.  So sad, really.  Like I stated before, it seems like there is about 4.5 - 6x as many people playing drains now as there are shops.  I guess a lot of the weaker the players are just scared of playing Stax now do to the ease of casting 3-4 storm and ETW and have just dropped it in favor of playing ETW themselves. 

People haven't put down Shops to pick up Drains, people have put down Shops to pick up Force; not being able to interact with the opponent on their first turn is suicidal in a format with 4 or less turns.

[Smmenen]

avg. Gifts.dec in the Top 8
~21%

People need to separate perception and facts. Gifts isn’t taking 40%-50% of all the top 8’s.

FYI:  GroAtog was 38% of Top 8s I calculated when Gush was restricted.    If Gifts were truly that much of top 8s, then I'd agree with you Dave that something should be done.   But even conceding that, it isn't clear what that "something" should be.   Banning Will seems just as reasonable to me as restricting Gifts, especially when we consider that more cards will be restricted on account of it someday.   

[Yare]

From Aaron Forsythe's article today:

We didn't have time to take the long, hard look at the lists that would preface the removal of cards from it this time around, but we plan on doing so before the June 1 announcement. If you have any opinions and/or data on what you think could come off the B&R Lists, feel free to drop me a line. Perhaps I'll write another article covering the suggestions like I did back in '03.

Seems to me like something is coming off in June.  Obviously, this is speculative, but that is what this says to me.

Additionally, he mentions this article from a while ago, which I'm sure most of you are aware of.  I find it interesting how a number of these things have come to fruition.

[Cross]

Banning Will seems just as reasonable to me as restricting Gifts, especially when we consider that more cards will be restricted on account of it someday.   

It seems unfair to make statements like this, as there’s no way you can say it’s definitely true.

From Aaron Forsythe's article today:

We didn't have time to take the long, hard look at the lists that would preface the removal of cards from it this time around, but we plan on doing so before the June 1 announcement. If you have any opinions and/or data on what you think could come off the B&R Lists, feel free to drop me a line. Perhaps I'll write another article covering the suggestions like I did back in '03.

Seems to me like something is coming off in June.  Obviously, this is speculative, but that is what this says to me.

Additionally, he mentions this article from a while ago, which I'm sure most of you are aware of.  I find it interesting how a number of these things have come to fruition.

That seems like an invitation now more than ever to let them know that voltaic key, and a few other cards just are not worthy of restriction in the modern format.

[Disburden]

You need to write emails for anything to truly happen to the B&R list. I posted in the forum of this article on the subject of unrestricted cards like Key. I also posted links to the threads on TMD about the recent B&R discussions. This is the only way to get anything done in this format. I seriously think if all we do is talk on these forums we will never see any changes. So reply to the article and show that you're willing to speak your mind directly.

[Yare]

You need to write emails for anything to truly happen to the B&R list. I posted in the forum of this article on the subject of unrestricted cards like Key. I also posted links to the threads on TMD about the recent B&R discussions. This is the only way to get anything done in this format. I seriously think if all we do is talk on these forums we will never see any changes. So reply to the article and show that you're willing to speak your mind directly.

Well, the discussions on this board are definitely one way to show WotC that we have interest in changes.  Unfortunately (or fortunately), B/R discussion threads are generally frowned upon except around B/R announcement time, so discussions tend to not happen.  Mass letters won't just get it, either, by the way, as the masses just don't really "know" about Vintage as a format.

[Methuselahn]

I always feel that it would be easier to create some sort of players' union to play in the format that we really want to rather than get a card banned.

WotC created Type 2, or Standard, as a way to keep Magic interesting.  Isn't it obvious that the whole "Vintage can handle it" attitude reflects their general lack of caring.  They've said that they'll carefully alter the B&R list, taking off cards that're not restriction worthy.  Well, throw a dog a friggin' bone here huh.  How about taking Voltaic key off the list??  How about NOT destroying the collectability of your collectable card game because you need to use time counters for your recent set??  How about dedicating some of your empoyees to actually think about Vintage, a product made by your company that is now only whimsically supported.  No, we don't get feedback or squat from WotC, really.   

You gave birth to this format WotC, how about tending to it once in a while. 

We didn't have time to take the long, hard look at the lists that would preface the removal of cards from it this time around.

I read this quote by the venerable Aaron Forsythe and I want to vomit myself completely dry.

[policehq]

Is it really that important to you to get Voltaic Key un-restricted?

I don't believe that Vintage has to be distorted for Gifts Ungiven to need restriction. Just look at the criteria for the restrictions of Demonic Tutor, Fact or Fiction, Ancestral Recall, etc. and the only way to maintain congruency after those established precedents is to restrict Gifts Ungiven.

Right now it would be unheard of to call for an unrestriction of Demonic Tutor. The card grants you any other restricted card in your deck. Gifts Ungiven gives you 2-4 of those cards for two more mana.

-hq

[LotusHead]

avg. Gifts.dec in the Top 8
~21%

People need to separate perception and facts. Gifts isn’t taking 40%-50% of all the top 8’s.

FYI:  GroAtog was 38% of Top 8s I calculated when Gush was restricted.    If Gifts were truly that much of top 8s, then I'd agree with you Dave that something should be done.   But even conceding that, it isn't clear what that "something" should be.   Banning Will seems just as reasonable to me as restricting Gifts, especially when we consider that more cards will be restricted on account of it someday.   

The Gro 38% number is something that happened before my (competetive) time.

If 38% top 8, what was Gro's percentage of the field at the time? (I really don't know. I just heard it was a lot)

For 39+ tourney size, I don't think Gifts Ungiven makes maindeck in 38+% of field. (It, and Long/Intuitive decks and vairous Storm Builds MAY make half the field).

I don't see a problem yet.

That being said, I don't see 4 Voltaic Keys being a problem either.

[Bubbydan]

 

avg. Gifts.dec in the Top 8
~21%

The problem is it seems you were only taking the decks named gifts. There are versions of Slaver that now run it and they weren't counted in that percentage.  I can come up with at least three off the top of my head.
 
  These would be the Dry Slaver varity, which runs at least three Gifts. I think as time goes on Gifts will be abused more and more.

Dan

[diopter]

Is it really that important to you to get Voltaic Key un-restricted?

I don't believe that Vintage has to be distorted for Gifts Ungiven to need restriction. Just look at the criteria for the restrictions of Demonic Tutor, Fact or Fiction, Ancestral Recall, etc. and the only way to maintain congruency after those established precedents is to restrict Gifts Ungiven.

Right now it would be unheard of to call for an unrestriction of Demonic Tutor. The card grants you any other restricted card in your deck. Gifts Ungiven gives you 2-4 of those cards for two more mana.

-hq

By this logic, Demonic Collusion should be restricted because it can get you almost any number of restricted cards from your deck.

Restricting cards "on principle" is not the way to go. A lot of people make these dubious claims that "Gifts Ungiven is 2-4 Demonic Tutors stapled together" and try to use that as an argument to restrict the card.

avg. Gifts.dec in the Top 8
~21%

The problem is it seems you were only taking the decks named gifts. There are versions of Slaver that now run it and they weren't counted in that percentage. I can come up with at least three off the top of my head.
 
 These would be the Dry Slaver varity, which runs at least three Gifts. I think as time goes on Gifts will be abused more and more.

Dan

Nataz counts the Dry slaver variants - if you look at the Myriad Games Vintage (January 7th, 2007), he lists 37% of the Top 8 as being Gifts, even though only 2 Gifts decks are listed - that's because Rich Shay, listed as playing Control Slaver, was actually playing with Dry Slaver.

As time goes on, Gifts may be abused more. Or, it may not. It's speculation at this point. Just as this is speculation:

Banning Will seems just as reasonable to me as restricting Gifts, especially when we consider that more cards will be restricted on account of it someday.

It may happen. It may also not happen. What matter is that right now, right at this moment, Gifts and its variants are only taking 21% of Top 8's. That is less that 2 decks per Top 8 on average. What percentages was Control Slaver taking during its peak, I wonder?

[Nehptis]

Restriction and Banning determinations are not about counting the Decks named Gifts and the ones that use Gifts.  When deciding to Restrict or Ban a card the impact the card has on deck building (for, and against it) and game interaction must be considered.  If the determination was based on % of a card appearing in decks then Brainstorm would be a huge candidate for Restriction.  But, we know that it is not the case.  For further evidence of this look at the decision to restrict Trinisphere, only Shop decks ran that card (meaning lower overall % of card use) and it received Restriction do to its "unfun-ness."

Will falls in a similar category, but is even worse.  Seeing T1--> Shop-->3Sphere is "unfun" and usually ='s GG.  Seeing Turn 3+ -->Gifts for Will, Recoup, Lotus, Ritual is equally un-fun and is also usually game.  The difference is this.  Restricting 3Sphere addressed the problem.  And, addressed it without impacting any other cards, like having to restrict Shop, as well.  So there was no collateral damage.  In the Will example, you could restrict Gifts to lessen the chance of this pile occurring.  (Restricting a one-of like Recoup is senseless.)  But, I'm in the camp that thinks that Will's power can not be addressed by Restriction.  So you either ban Will so that the problem goes away without any further collateral damage.  Or you accept the fact that its existence will inevitably cause more restrictions and continue to stifle interaction at some level.  Today cards like Burning Wish were impacted, tomorrow it could be Gifts, Grim Tutor, or even Intuition.

[Bubbydan]

  The problem with banning anything in vintage is we start down a slippery slope. Vintage is suppose to be the format in which all cards should be playable to a certain extent. The ones that have been banned fall under certain criteria. Being too powerfull not being one of them.
  Think about if Will was banned and you started getting gifts piles of Tinker, Time Walk, Burning Wish and Recoup ? How is that anyless powerful than a Will plan? Both ways tend to mean game over assuming you have the countermagic to back it up.
  Now people start looking at Tinker and say that card is almost as powerfull as Y. Will was, than a couple more years pass by and peoples memories fade on the true power of Will and start saying Tinker is more broken than Will ever was. We should Ban that card too.
   Try playing some of these decks that abuse Will and remove it from them. Play as if its already Banned. Do the still win? In my testing, the type that gets hit the hardest are the Tendrils decks..ie Long style. They tend to have a much more random nature to them. Gifts is still able to force through its wins...even more so now due to ETW. Slaver still runs the way it should.  I can't think of any other types that abuse Will the way these three decks do.
   In conclusion I feel that Banning Will is not the way to go. It will weaken cmbo, but will it weaken it to the point of extinction? Who knows? I would rather not start banning things just to see how different the environment is.

Dan J

Dan

[dicemanx]

The "slippery slope" argument has been tried before, but it usually has little merit. Trinisphere (where this argument was used unsuccessfully in the past) and Yawgmoth's Will are unique cases. We're currently only considering banning Yawgmoth's Will because of how it shapes and warps the format. No other card comes remotely close, and this isn't going to open any floodgates.

Incidentally, why is there are need to point out that Trinisphere was restricted because it was "unfun", suggesting that it is a bad criterion. EVERY B/R decision had the intention of making the game more fun, and "fun" is a always a consideration, regardless of whether you are a pro or a casual player. Furthermore, there is always a reason that something causes the game to be "unfun" - in Trini's case, there were a number of factors including gross distortion, similar to what we are seeing now with Will. You don't need to see 40-50% Will decks in t8s for there to be a problem that might need addressing.

[zeus-online]

I'd like to point out to everyone that two cards have once been banned due to powerlevel, in type1:
Channel
Mind twist

So wizards have in the past banned cards in vintage due to powerlevel.

Oh and to those who pointed out that Control Slaver took alot more slots of the top8 back in the day....well...i'd wager that alot of those wins where due to a certain 2B Sorcery.

I honestly don't think combo decks would go extinct, they'd change and possibly (hopefully) become a turn slower, or atleast a bit more inconsistent.

/Zeus