Six of One, Half Dozen of the Other

[Smmenen]

These are questions tournament organizers need to consider and decide among themselves.  

The idea behind proxies is to make Vintage affordable.  When people who own power proxy cards that cost as little as $1, like Inkwell Leviathan, I think it undermines the case for proxies.  There are benefits that accrue from owning cards (attachment etc).  Also, a less proxy heavy environment would promote a different culture in Vintage, where borrowing cards and card pools are more common (as used to exist in Vintage).  

 I'm certainly guilty of it as well.  I've proxied Pithing Needles on numerous occasions now.  

I thought it would be useful for the community to actually have the stats/data as this issue is debated.

[Demonic Attorney]

I thought I'd chime in here, as someone who is often cited as one of the most shameful offenders in terms of proxying low-end cards.  When I played Long in Waterbury VI, I had a real Lotus sitting atop a proxied Eye of Nowhere.  Yeah that's right.  Eye of Nowhere.  Look that one up on Gatherer if you don't remember it.  Now look it up on Troll and Toad to check its value.  Yup.  That card.

I look at it like this.  One of the central appeals of Vintage versus other formats is that it's largely a one-time investment to get into, versus Block, Standard, or even Extended, which all involve a metronomic pattern of chasing new rares, trading them all away before they lose their value, and beginning the process all over again.  When I played other formats, I found that obnoxious.  So I won, traded, saved, and purchased my way to a set of power towards the end of high school, and told myself that would be the last time I'd need to invest significant money and effort in accumulating Magic cards. 

For the most part, it was.  Every so often a Vintage-relevant card comes along (Mindslaver, Gifts, Pithing Needle, Tezzeret, etc.) and if I can snag one or two while drafting, I'm happy to hold onto them.  But I'm not going to go out of my way to get new chase rares, especially at this stage of my life.  I have trouble enough justifying the investment in Magic it takes just to go to regular tournaments.  Call it a lack of commitment or a shift in my priorities, but being forced to go out and get a set of Pithing Needles is almost as much of an obstacle for me as getting a Mox might be to someone in college.  I'm just not going to do it.

What's more, as my "generation" of gamers gets older, we have other financial priorities to juggle, like student loans, rent/mortgage payments, or even families to support.  For the players who sometimes oscillate between playing and not playing Vintage, the flexibility that proxies offer keep them in the game.  One specific example is a good friend of mine who's thinking of getting back into Vintage just because of the opportunity created by the unlimited proxy events at Scholars'; all his cards were wrecked in a basement flood and he doesn't have another $2,000 to drop on a replacement set of power/drains/duals.  Other players I know have sold their power because they can't reconcile keeping $3,000+ tied up in Vintage cards when they have so many other expenses; they keep playing because of the availability of proxies.  Without that, I think the exodus of some of the old guard from Vintage would accelerate.

That's not to say there's no validity to the point that fewer proxies makes prizes in the form of Moxes and other power cards worth more.  It does.  And I'm not advocating for a second that Scholars' unlimited proxy model is the way to go. But, from the perspective of a player who does own a full set of power/drains/duals, proxies still hold value and keep me coming back to Vintage tournaments.

[Yare]

I thought I'd chime in here, as someone who is often cited as one of the most shameful offenders in terms of proxying low-end cards.  When I played Long in Waterbury VI, I had a real Lotus sitting atop a proxied Eye of Nowhere.  Yeah that's right.  Eye of Nowhere.  Look that one up on Gatherer if you don't remember it.  Now look it up on Troll and Toad to check its value.  Yup.  That card.

I look at it like this.  One of the central appeals of Vintage versus other formats is that it's largely a one-time investment to get into, versus Block, Standard, or even Extended, which all involve a metronomic pattern of chasing new rares, trading them all away before they lose their value, and beginning the process all over again.  When I played other formats, I found that obnoxious.  So I won, traded, saved, and purchased my way to a set of power towards the end of high school, and told myself that would be the last time I'd need to invest significant money and effort in accumulating Magic cards.  

For the most part, it was.  Every so often a Vintage-relevant card comes along (Mindslaver, Gifts, Pithing Needle, Tezzeret, etc.) and if I can snag one or two while drafting, I'm happy to hold onto them.  But I'm not going to go out of my way to get new chase rares, especially at this stage of my life.  I have trouble enough justifying the investment in Magic it takes just to go to regular tournaments.  Call it a lack of commitment or a shift in my priorities, but being forced to go out and get a set of Pithing Needles is almost as much of an obstacle for me as getting a Mox might be to someone in college.  I'm just not going to do it.

What's more, as my "generation" of gamers gets older, we have other financial priorities to juggle, like student loans, rent/mortgage payments, or even families to support.  For the players who sometimes oscillate between playing and not playing Vintage, the flexibility that proxies offer keep them in the game.  One specific example is a good friend of mine who's thinking of getting back into Vintage just because of the opportunity created by the unlimited proxy events at Scholars'; all his cards were wrecked in a basement flood and he doesn't have another $2,000 to drop on a replacement set of power/drains/duals.  Other players I know have sold their power because they can't reconcile keeping $3,000+ tied up in Vintage cards when they have so many other expenses; they keep playing because of the availability of proxies.  Without that, I think the exodus of some of the old guard from Vintage would accelerate.

That's not to say there's no validity to the point that fewer proxies makes prizes in the form of Moxes and other power cards worth more.  It does.  And I'm not advocating for a second that Scholars' unlimited proxy model is the way to go. But, from the perspective of a player who does own a full set of power/drains/duals, proxies still hold value and keep me coming back to Vintage tournaments.

I wanted to say that I thought this was an outstanding post. I agree with pretty much everything that was said here, particularly the "other financial priorities" part. Regarding Needle, I don't own any of them, even though it's a fairly substantial Vintage staple. I don't play enough to justify putting more money (slight as it may be relative to the value of my collection) and effort into getting that particular set of cards when I know I can proxy it and/or that the value will drop over time when it rotates out of Standard. This was exactly my thinking regarding Tarmogoyf in particular (which I also don't own as of yet).

[Smmenen]

Just as a point of clarification: I don't think there is anyone would say that there is something wrong, per se, with proxying low end cards.   If proxies are legal, it's perfectly sensible for players to run proxies of low-end cards that may or may not be used 6 months later.  

The issue is whether tournament organizers should permit players to play 15 proxies, or some other number.  

The purpose of proxies is to make Vintage affordable.  No one expects players to invest thousands of dollars into the game.  But if the vast majority of proxies over 10 or 12 or some other number goes to very low end cards, then a case could be made that the proxy limit should be adjusted accordingly.  

[Yare]

Just as a point of clarification: I don't think there is anyone would say that there is something wrong, per se, with proxying low end cards.   If proxies are legal, it's perfectly sensible for players to run proxies of low-end cards that may or may not be used 6 months later.   

The issue is whether tournament organizers should permit players to play 15 proxies, or some other number.   

The purpose of proxies is to make Vintage affordable.  No one expects players to invest thousands of dollars into the game.  But if the vast majority of proxies over 10 or 12 or some other number goes to very low end cards, then a case could be made that the proxy limit should be adjusted accordingly.   

I agree with this too. I just wanted to point out that I don't see anything wrong with proxying Eye of Nowhere if others are proxying Mox Emerald, and I think we agree on this point, in addition to the proper number of proxies issue.

[wiley]

I figured I would chime in for another possible point of view.

I went to the Dan Herd event in Philly over the weekend (20 proxies) and had my deck made within 4 proxies (what I used at the meandeck open that only allowed 5 proxies).  2 weeks ago my best friend, who used to play magic, says he wants to take a vacation and figured playing in the Philly tournament (and eating at Pat's again) sounded like a lot of fun.  I then set out to make the deck again, as it was mostly my deck that got him interested in doing the tournament.  I ponied out nearly $100 to get a second set of life from the loams and 2 wooded foothills (and multiple other cards like ak, colossus, lorescale coatls etc) and was able to get to two copies of the deck with a total of 37 proxies between them.

If the proxy limit had been any different I would probably not have been able to take him to the tournament, as while I wanted to get the foothills to finish my fetch land collection and needed non-foil LftLs anyway, I was not willing to buy extra copies of null rods or tarmogoyfs or engineered explosives etc.

All this is coming from someone who only needs ~4 proxies to make UbaStax.  My situation might not be common, but lowering the proxy limit does decrease the possibility of re/introducing people to the format (and raising tournament attendance, even if it is one shot).

[Diakonov]

I still believe that there is no "correct proxy number," and it should vary based on the type of tournament you are holding.  The smaller the tournament, the more proxies should be allowed.  Look at it like this: if a new player were to be introduced to the game, I think in general you'd rather bring him/her to smaller, more inexpensive tournaments anyway.  Bringing somebody who is a novice to a giant event could be extremely discouraging, especially if it was expensive to enter.  As you become more serious, you invest more money in cards, and you start to look at larger events.

If larger events allowed tons of proxies, then virtually anyone could just show up for a day and then never go back again.  I think it would be a smart idea to have some kind of curve that makes people want to invest more in cards, so that someday they could attend a huge event and still compete to win it.  And once they've invested more money in cards, they will be more likely to stay in the game.

The one wrench in this model is the population of players who have proven to have an undying love for the game but are now having trouble keeping up financially (due to families, etc.).  On the other hand, it would be fair to say that these players generally only have the time to show up at major events on rare occasion to begin with, but it still would be tragic to lose those players from major events entirely.  If this problem could be worked out, I think the aforementioned model would be appropriate.

A couple of possible ideas to get started:

1. Hold a couple specific major tournaments throughout the year that offer more proxies than usual, just as a nostalgic festival-tournament-event that would allow those players to show up and compete.

2. Establish a thread for borrowing, and maybe players could offer some type of "rent surcharge" for players who only need cards for a specific event.

3. Other ideas...?

[Diakonov]

So I put together a list that shows the intersections of all the decks in the Top 32 of the TMD Open that are running Time Vault.

16/16
Time Vault
Black Lotus
Mox Emerald
Mox Sapphire
Mox Ruby
Mox Pearl
Mox Jet
Sol Ring
Ancestral Recall
4 Force of Will
Tinker
Brainstorm
Demonic Tutor
Time Walk
At least 3 Mana Drain
At least 4 fetches
At least 2 Underground Sea
At least 2 Island/Snow-covered Island

15/16
Voltaic Key
Yawgmoth's Will
Vampiric Tutor
At least 5 fetches

14/16
Mana Crypt
4 Mana Drain
At least 1 Thirst for Knowledge

13/16
Tolarian Academy
At least 2 Thirst for Knowledge
At least 2 Duress/Thoughtseize

12/16
Mystical Tutor
Fact or Fiction
At least 1 Tezzeret
At least 3 Thirst for Knowledge
At least 3 Island/Snow-covered Island

11/16
Library of Alexandria
Merchant Scroll
Gifts Ungiven

10/16
3 Underground Sea

9/16
At least 1 Sensei's Divining Top

8/16
4 Thirst for Knowledge
At least 2 Volcanic Island
At least 1 Tropical Island
At least 3 Duress/Thoughtseize
Echoing Truth
Inkwell Leviathan

7/16
Mana Vault
Ponder

6/16
Regrowth

5/16
At least 6 fetches
At least 4 Duress/Thoughtseize
2 Tropical Island

4/16
At least 4 Island
3 Volcanic Island
At least 1 Trinket Mage
At least 1 Commandeer
Sundering Titan
Darksteel Colossus
Rebuild

3/16
2 Tezzeret
Misdirection
Relic of Progenitus
4 Mystic Remora
7 fetches
At least 1 Tundra
At least 2 Commandeer
At least 1 REB/Pyroblast
Chain of Vapor
At least 1 Tarmogoyf
Gorilla Shaman
Skeletal Scrying

2/16
At least 5 Island
Cunning Wish
2 REB/Pyroblast
2 Grindstone
3 Painter's Servant
Lotus Petal
At least 3 Tarmogoyfs
Tormod's Crypt
Engineered Explosives
Mindslaver
At least 2 Goblin Welder
Recoup
Timetwister
3 Repeal
Tendrils of Agony
4 Dark Confidant

1/16
6 Island
Swamp
5 Duress/Thoughtseize
3 Trinket Mage
2 Tundra
3 Sensei's Divining Top
3 Commandeer
2 Impulse
4 Tarmogoyfs
Strip Mine
2 Auriok Salvagers
AEther Spellbomb
Argivian Find
Pithing Needle
4 Meditate
Psychatog
2 Sower of Temptation
Triskelavus
Intuition
Fire/Ice
3 Goblin Welder
2 Glen-Endra Archmage
Rack and Ruin


I know it's not organized very well, but it took a lot of time to put together so I just wanted to throw it up here.  I don't know how much can be taken away from this, but it's at least interesting to look at.

[Smmenen]

Interesting.  Thanks for that.  

I also agree with that you there is probably no 'correct' number of proxies.   My concern is this:  The benefits of proxies are well known.  The costs, broadly speaking, of using proxies are less well understood.   Proxies are a necessary evil; but they are still an evil.  

[Anusien]

I know Stephen doesn't think this addresses the ultimate proxy problem (and maybe it doesn't), but it seems to me that a lot of the proxy problems would be solved by restricting proxies to cards that are banned in Legacy.  It's clearly not unreasonable to require players to own Legacy staples, and people only seem to have problems with proxies when they proxy things that are easily available (like Pithing Needle).  But is proxying a $5 card any better or worse if you own power?

[ErkBek]

Totally agree with all that's been said here. Back in college, I'd proxy the cheap stuff that I didn't feel like picking up and played real power. Now days, I don't own power, so I buy/borrow the cheap stuff and proxy the power. Vintage is a convenient format.

It sounds like the solution lies with the TO's. Instead of always giving out FoW's or duals as 3rd and 4th place prizes, they could give out Needles, Thoughtseizes, or Goyfs. Tolarian Academies make great prizes for 5th-8th in mid sized tournaments.

Time Vault has functionally replaced Timetwister as the 9th piece of power. TO's shouldn't bother with Twister, give out Time Vaults.

[LordHomerCat]

I know Stephen doesn't think this addresses the ultimate proxy problem (and maybe it doesn't), but it seems to me that a lot of the proxy problems would be solved by restricting proxies to cards that are banned in Legacy.  It's clearly not unreasonable to require players to own Legacy staples, and people only seem to have problems with proxies when they proxy things that are easily available (like Pithing Needle).  But is proxying a $5 card any better or worse if you own power?

So Joey can proxy 4 moxes which I spent like $1200 on, but I can't proxy 4 Goyfs which he spent $80 on?  A system like that creates even less incentive to ever buy power.  Plus is tells the people who do own power that they made a bad choice and should have bought sets of Goyfs and Seizes and Needles and stuff instead of that Mox (or, that they should sell their power and turn it into cheaper cards so they can play).  Very few players keep prizes as is; if I had the choice of a Mox which I can proxy everywhere or playsets of a bunch of pricier standard cards which I can only play if I own them, which do you expect me to choose?  What problems do you think it solves to tell players and buying power is a much worse choice than buying standard cards?  The problem of investment in the format?  The problem of Mox prizes not being as desirable now as they used to be?

[Harlequin]

Actually I see your counter argument as support for this idea.  I would be all for allowing proxy of Legacy-banned cards only.  

Why do we accept such a gigantic disparity in prices between the best out of print rares and other rares.  Think of it from the business end:

Power aka super-rare out of print powerful cards
 - Big commitment only playable in one format
 - Very difficult to turn profit, because the retail price is very close to the purchase price.  Specifically because power is owned by the public.  And most power owners will opt to sell on ebay or to a friend rather than to a store (who is not paying retail).  

In summary, Hard to buy, hard to Sell, hard to make money with.

T2 Rares / Mythics
 - Easy to get ahold of.  Not only can you open packs yourself, but you can usually find players willing to "give" allittle for the convince of selling to a dealer (from the consumers perspective selling my in rint rare card to a dealer who will give me $4 is probably better than spending a week trying to sell it on Ebay even for $10; the same is usually not true for when you amplify that to $400 v $1000 for power).
 - Easy to move.  People want in print cards, because the majority of players fall into two catagories: 1) competitive~ish spike T2 players, or 2) casually players who like new Jonny rares!  Win-Win for what whatever rares you happen to have in stock.


So If I were a business like ... oh I don't know Wizards of the Cost.  Or even a shop owner who sells singles.  I would be ecstatic if they changed it so you could only proxy cards that were banned in Legacy.

Price of power goes down a little (for the reasons you outline), Expected "Buy Price" of power would naturally go down a little too.  Perhaps lower demand, but maybe an increase in volume of sales to go along with it.

Meanwhile I get a nice little kick-up for demand of in print cards.  So now things like Inkwell Leviathan aren’t $2 rares anymore because now SOMEONE wants them... And this business will be steady, I know every 4 months my T1 customers are going to come in the store and pick up sets of the latest and greatest cards from the new set (which today are just gathering dust because the T1ers can just proxy them).  Spending a couple-a-twenty bucks each.  A much better model than going 8 months thinking "Boy-oh-Boy I hope a T1 guy comes in the store today with $2000 burnin a hole in his pocket!"

And even if Power went from $250 to $150 it would help T1 tournaments.  Perhaps the reason we don't keep our prizes is that they are worth SO MUCH money.  Wouldn't it be better if a 30 person event was $10 for a mox; or $20 for a Mox+ for 1st, Mox for 2nd... or dare I say Lotus/Recall/Walk for 1st, mox for 2nd.  

I think if the price of power went down a little, it would help vintage more than hurt it.

[Anusien]

One of the principle arguments against proxies is that there's no incentive for players to buy new cards.  This fixes that.

[Smmenen]

The biggest problem with high proxy counts is that it actually makes it stupid to own power, aside from the enjoyment derived from being a collector.    this produces a number of harmful side effects.  foremost among them is the ensuing detachment from the format, which makes it easier to quit the format, test it less, and become generally disinterested.   it also hurts the community because people don't own power, and the culture of borrowing from friends declines, in part because people just don't own cards like they used to.

While one might think when people sell power because of proxies this 'frees' power for other players, this is actually not the case.   it acts as a disincentive to even acquire power in the first place.   People who win their first power are encouraged to sell that prize for cash rather than to pursue the accumulation of further power.   

These costs are not well understood.   Anyone who played Vintage alot during the 2003-4 era, when proxies were first being used, will better understand the difference in the culture and the attitudes towards power as prizes, when people were excited to win power and when there were lots of people in the format who could easily loan sets of power. 

[Harlequin]

foremost among them is the ensuing detachment from the format, which makes it easier to quit the format, test it less, and become generally disinterested.

Its interesting that want to see cost of entry and exit as a form of RETENTION, rather than what that keeps people from even trying it out in the first place. 

If two new card games came out this summer and you thought it might be fun to try one.  But there was one key differance:

Game-A)
Extremely expensive to get started.  And as a result, the volume of buying and selling is very low.  Meaning if you decided "this isn't for me" you'd likely have to either take a big financial loss to liquidate your investment - or - spend months trying to find someone with cash on hand willing to buy.

Game-B)
More reasonable cost of entry, and more reasonable volume of transaction.  Meaning you invest less, and in the event you don't like the game its relatively quick and painless to exit.

So you have your X-Hundred dollars to put on the table.  Which Game do you pick up this summer? 
Which Game do you still think will be thriving by next summer?

As a person who owns power - I would be thrilled if I woke up tomorrow and Power had sudden lost half its values over night.  Not as an investor, or collector... But thrilled as a person who is interested in a healthy and thriving vintage scene. 

[Smmenen]

Retention is absolutely essential for Vintage.   In fact, it's probably the number one most important aspect to keeping Vintage alive and healthy, far more so than for any other format.

I wrote about this a few months ago:

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/17370_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Split_Article_Debating_Vintage_A_Legacy_Tournament_Report_Top_4.html



There are only two ways to increase tournament attendance: 1) acquire new players, 2) retain old players better. It’s a simple stock and flows issue. The pipeline to Vintage flows at a trickle. All of the formats that springboard into Vintage have their own springboards, which makes the flow of players into Vintage much lighter than for any other format. That doesn’t mean that younger players won’t discover Vintage. They are. Up and comers like AJ Grasso are the next generation of Vintage players. And ensuring that the pathways to new Vintage competitors is open is very important.

But it is just as important, if not more important, to find ways to keep older players involved and engaged in the tournament scene. The reason is simple. Acquiring a new player requires overcoming all of the barriers described. But a Vintage Magic player like myself might find ways to play Vintage Magic for the rest of my life. Assuming I play 6 tournaments a year (The Vintage Champs and prelim event, 1-2 Power Nine level events, like the Waterbury or Steel City Power Nine on August 1, and 3-4 local tournaments) for the rest of my life, that’s potentially over 300 tournaments. Although Vintage can experience rapid shifts, as any year in review attests, much of the card pool remains the same. A player who quits Vintage this year can return to Vintage three years from now and pick it up again quickly.

This is the problem with proxies. The current American model, in which it is actually stupid to own power, fosters detachment and fails to create the mechanisms that help keep older players around. Equally problematic, it rusts and decays some of the best pipelines for bringing new players into the format. Let me explain.



And I go on to elaborate on this point...

But, as I said, it's a simple stock and flows issue.   The trickle of new players into Vintage is small, and therefore in order to grow its essential that Vintage retain existing players.

It should be far less work to retain existing players than to recruit new ones, and our energies should be focused there.    An existing Vintage player can be expected to participate in far more tournaments over time than a potential new player.  

[Harlequin]

I agree that Retention is key to our survival.  

The comment I was responding to was that you seem to be implying that Proxies make it "easier to quit the format."  Correct me If I'm wrong, but I can only assume you mean it's "easier" because you are less finantically attached to the format.  And thus if you own power, there is a financial barrier to leaving.

I'm saying that mentality where "If power is really really REALLY expensive No one can afford to Quit!!" is a backwards way to acheive this goal.  Not only because it turns the "Trickle" of new players into a dry tap, but also it means the people who "play" only do so because they've invested, and now they can't un-invest... so they might as well play?

[Smmenen]

I agree that Retention is key to our survival.  

The comment I was responding to was that you seem to be implying that Proxies make it "easier to quit the format."  Correct me If I'm wrong, but I can only assume you mean it's "easier" because you are less finantically attached to the format.  And thus if you own power, there is a financial barrier to leaving.

No, I think it's more subtle than that.    People sometimes think that they can sell their power but still maintain the same level of interest in the format, only to find out later that once they've sold their power they no longer care about Vintage.

If a player owns power, they are more likely to think about their cards, enjoy playing/testing with their cards, and feel an attachment to the well-being of the format and its community.   When a player sells out, they become less likely to test, think about, or involved in the vintage scene.  It fosters detachment generally, and makes retention harder and harder.   Competing demands seem more pressing, etc.

It's a fairly complex process.  But the factors that influence how a person feels about the format are related to investment in the format, both monetarily and psychologically.  I try to spell this out in my article on "reviving Vintage", and the follow-up. 

[Harlequin]

If a player owns power, they are more likely to think about their cards, enjoy playing/testing with their cards, and feel an attachment to the well-being of the format and its community.   When a player sells out, they become less likely to test, think about, or involved in the vintage scene.  It fosters detachment generally, and makes retention harder and harder.   Competing demands seem more pressing, etc.

Yes, this is well put.  I think we see more eye to eye than I originally thought.  However, While High Proxy tournaments may be at the root of this, I disagree that the remedy is to decide as a group to switch to Low Proxy tournaments (and allow CE cards).   I think that will ultimately damage the community more than heal it. 

My prescription would be to do away with the reserve list, and print a huge pile of essentially "Sanctioned Proxies" for expensive out of print rare cards.  That allow TO's to run sanctioned vintage, and re-stimulates more transaction volume in an otherwise dead zone of current secondary market.   Then Let's say that everyone's doomsday scenario is true and this "kills" the secondary market price for existing power.  I say (as an owner of power) 'good riddance', those prices have become too expensive to serve any role other than a collector's piece.  This would bring the price of entry and exit into at least the same ballpark as Legacy, Extended, and T2 - which don't seem to have any trouble with either end of the stock and flow system.

But as you've said: The impact of Proxies on the format is not well understood.  So who knows

[nataz]

"My prescription would be to do away with the reserve list, and print a huge pile of essentially "Sanctioned Proxies" for expensive out of print rare cards.  That allow TO's to run sanctioned vintage, and re-stimulates more transaction volume in an otherwise dead zone of current secondary market.   Then Let's say that everyone's doomsday scenario is true and this "kills" the secondary market price for existing power.  I say (as an owner of power) 'good riddance', those prices have become too expensive to serve any role other than a collector's piece.  This would bring the price of entry and exit into at least the same ballpark as Legacy, Extended, and T2 - which don't seem to have any trouble with either end of the stock and flow system."

This would be my dream. I have a bunch of local friends who have zero interest in spending all that money on power, drains, timevault, etc., but would love to play type 1. The initial cost of entry is just not worth it to the when there are so many more options both in magic, and in other areas. Plus, if they played more, I could play more too since it would be an incentive to travel together and playtest.

[hitman]

The problem with suggestions like this is that you can't disregard the collectors/dealers.  If you lower the cost of their goods through greater supply, you're giving them a huge hit financially.  The only way I could see reprints working is if the reprints were so ugly only people who desperately wanted to play would buy them because they were legal.  There would still be a market for "real" power and also access to the format through ugly reprints that no one really wants but is forced to use due to cost issues. 

I think there's another issue, though.  I've been playing Vintage for a while now and I can personally attest to feeling boredom towards the format.  After you've played so many matchups with the same cards and, largely, the same people, the format kind of becomes ho-hum.  The players who stick around are the Vintage purists who just love Vintage the way it is and always will be.  I don't think the majority of players fall into this group.  This may account for a fair percentage of players leaving the format.  Personally, that's what got me looking at other formats like limited. 

If we had a rotating restricted list, I think we could solve boredom issues in the format.  We don't have to restrict based on retarded format dominance or the unfun factor.  It could simply be to spice up the format.  We have this idea in mind that the restricted list is only for overly powerful strategies and should largely stay static.  What if we added another element or use to the restricted list and use it as an engine for new life in a stagnant format simply for the sake of change.  The restricted list doesn't have to stay the same for long periods of time.  We could have a list that's around for a year and then changes.  We could see new interactions between engines that never existed together.  People wouldn't have to worry about buying a card that they think will be restricted and forever doomed to un-use.  We would just have a rotating metagame and restricted lists would go through cycles.  Players would have reasons to attain all manner of cards and hold on to them for future use in future metagames. 

How does a format whose cardpool stays the same be vibrant?  Excitement over card interactions and mechanics are what attract the foundational base of players to Magic.  We need to find a realistic way to spur that excitement within the existing Vintage player base.  Due to the nature of other formats, they have these qualities already built in.  We have to be more creative than them to retain our player base.

[Smmenen]

I don't want to discount your point Re: Boredom, because you could very well be right.    There are reasons to think that you are.  The format is, in many ways, as stagnant as its been in several years. 

However, I think it's fair to say that a large element of that boredom has to do with lack of enthusiasm.  When people own less cards, they are less likely to be testing the format.    Rather than meeting up every week or so to flip cards and enjoy Vintage, players are more likely to test -- if at all -- exclusively for tournaments.   Those losses are more intangible and harder to measure.  But if people aren't interested in testing, aren't talking about the format, that saps the energy from the format.   

There are more things competing for Vintage's niche than ever before.   Legacy has a thriving scene and EDH is quite popular.   Magic Online makes playing magic easier than ever.   

In short: I believe that the disinterest in the format, while rooted in the format's metagame, is influenced in large and small ways by factors outside of the metagame itself. 

[zeus-online]

Then Let's say that everyone's doomsday scenario is true and this "kills" the secondary market price for existing power.  I say (as an owner of power) 'good riddance', those prices have become too expensive to serve any role other than a collector's piece.

I just wanted to say that i complete agree with this, as a owner of power and player of type1 i'd love it if everyone could afford to play type1, this would also give wizard real reasons to support the format. While i might loose some value (And alot of people would) getting to play more type1 with new people greatly outweights this, i'd rather loose money and have more use for my power cards then the other way around.

[Troy_Costisick]

Then Let's say that everyone's doomsday scenario is true and this "kills" the secondary market price for existing power.  I say (as an owner of power) 'good riddance', those prices have become too expensive to serve any role other than a collector's piece.

I just wanted to say that i complete agree with this, as a owner of power and player of type1 i'd love it if everyone could afford to play type1, this would also give wizard real reasons to support the format. While i might loose some value (And alot of people would) getting to play more type1 with new people greatly outweights this, i'd rather loose money and have more use for my power cards then the other way around.

I support this as well.  I definately sympathize with store owners who need to make a living and don't want to lose their investment.  But the problem w/ Vintage retention, like Steve has said, is two fold: the price of Power is so high that it makes no sense to keep it and the existance of 10+ proxy tournaments creates a meta where there's not much incentive to keep your power.  Solutions to each problem will necessarily make different groups upset.  As will doing nothing.  The decsion that has to be made by players, TO's, and WotC itself is whether or not it's worth making various groups that upset over implementing a solution.  We need the game stores to help support Magic, but the declining availability of Power is choking Vintage.  The player loss due to detachment through proxies is choking it at the same time.  This is a very difficult problem in which all solutions look painful in one way or another.

[hitman]

The declining availability of power is not killing Vintage.  We don't even need it to play here.  What's killing Vintage is a lack of interest or ability to attend tournaments.  The question is, "Why are people losing interest?"  Steve says he thinks people are losing interest because they don't have as much of a tangible attachment to the format because they don't own power.  If availability was the problem, why does everyone sell their power off after they win it??? 

My problem with the assumption that you need to own power to have a greater attachement to the format is you're basically tricking a person into continued Vintage play.  You're forcing them into a situation where it's advantageous to spend ridiculous amounts of money on cardboard so they can play a format that gets no support from Wizards simply for the sake of continued community support.  Who thinks that way?  I've expressed this before and it's true.  The biggest reason I've seen people leave the format, outside of mounting responsibilities in real life, is the actions Wizards/DCI make to the format they use to like playing.  If Wizards/DCI stopped being dumb-asses, they'd lose less players.
 

However, I think it's fair to say that a large element of that boredom has to do with lack of enthusiasm.  When people own less cards, they are less likely to be testing the format.    Rather than meeting up every week or so to flip cards and enjoy Vintage, players are more likely to test -- if at all -- exclusively for tournaments.   Those losses are more intangible and harder to measure.  But if people aren't interested in testing, aren't talking about the format, that saps the energy from the format.

How do proxies prevent me from meeting up with friends and playing around?  They can do nothing but help you do that because you don't actually have to go out and buy those cards.  Testing never did anything for my enthusiasm towards Vintage.  If anything, it stifled my enthusiasm because the format stopped being fresh and exciting at the cool tournaments out-of-state.  When you test and know how the matchups go and what you need to do and when, you're not so starry-eyed at those all too infrequent events.  It's proxy use that makes it possible for me to be more excited about the format because I can always be trying out new decks that I'm unfamiliar with. 

Proxies have made it easier for people to play with mounting responsibilities, lack of funds to initially start playing and no money to buy all the expensive cards needed to play multiple types of decks in Vintage.  If we limit proxy use, you also limit players ability to play various decks.  It'll be like in Europe where they largely play the same deck for years because they can't afford to buy the cards, or justify buying the cards, to play another deck.  Say you own Drains but want to play Workshops.  You can't unless you have hundreds to thousands of dollars just lying around waiting to be "wasted" on cardboard.

In a format where the most common complaint is higher entry barrier, how is decreasing the proxy count a reasonable solution?  I understand that the proxy count debate revolves more around the retention of existing players but let's face it; you are going to lose players over time and there's practically nothing you can do about it.  We don't stop playing because we wake up, look around and there's no power to be seen in our possession; it's because we think we're a little to old to be doing this anymore, it costs too much, there's no time, there's more important things we have to do, etc.

I just wanted to say that i complete agree with this, as a owner of power and player of type1 i'd love it if everyone could afford to play type1, this would also give wizard real reasons to support the format. While i might loose some value (And alot of people would) getting to play more type1 with new people greatly outweights this, i'd rather loose money and have more use for my power cards then the other way around.

Wizards will never have a good reason to give good support to Vintage because the cards they print are geared toward the popular formats that have shorter periods of time in play.  Vintage is probably a nuisance to them because they have to keep it in the back of their mind when they're trying to come up with cool interactions in their frequently rotating formats.  A diminishing card availability is also key to their lack of support but you can't just reprint cards and hurt the secondary market.  When you do that, who's going to buy expensive and rare cards anymore?  Wizards might do another dumbass thing and hurt the value of the card you just bought.  That's actually an issue for me at this moment.  I was going to buy a playset of Drains yesterday because it was a really good price and, if anything, I can turn a profit reselling them.  However, I'm concerned that the dumb-asses in the DCI might restrict the card and make it infinitely harder for me to sell.  So I'm waiting.  For a week.  In which case, I might have lost my opportunity.  These are real concerns people have.  This is a collectible card game.  When you whore out your principles/quality of game for a temporary profit, you won't find many people supporting you for very long.  While you wouldn't mind losing a substantial amount of money, I find it hard to believe that many people feel that way.  We've moved so far away from a rational society, though, I suppose anything is possible.

[Smmenen]

The declining availability of power is not killing Vintage.  We don't even need it to play here.  What's killing Vintage is a lack of interest or ability to attend tournaments.  The question is, "Why are people losing interest?"  Steve says he thinks people are losing interest because they don't have as much of a tangible attachment to the format because they don't own power.  If availability was the problem, why does everyone sell their power off after they win it???  

My problem with the assumption that you need to own power to have a greater attachement to the format is you're basically tricking a person into continued Vintage play.  

It's not a trick, nor is it manipulative.  

Human beings are tribal.  We like to pick teams (think sports), nations, etc.   Studies in psychology show that if you divide students up into fake groups, they suddenly create ingroup/outgroup dynamics in which they think that the ingroup people are smarter, stronger, harder working etc, even though the groups are artificially created at the outset.  

When I buy stock in a company, I become interested in the company beyond the simple stock price.  I become invested in the company's wellbeing.   I follow the news around the stock, etc.  I am more interested in it.  

As I said in "Reviving Vintage":

People who own power, who physically keep it in their possession, are far more likely to think about Vintage. People who own power have more of a stake in the format just as someone who owns stock has more of a stake in that company, and consequently will follow it more closely and take a greater interest in it. Owning power is like owning a share in Vintage. It not only has value and makes you concerned about its health, it also makes you more interested in it and connected to it.

Back in the day a much greater percentage of the American Vintage player base owned power or most of the cards in their deck.    And tournaments were larger, even in 2003 and early 2004, by far, than they are now, even though the barrier to entry is now lower.  

You're forcing them into a situation where it's advantageous to spend ridiculous amounts of money on cardboard so they can play a format that gets no support from Wizards simply for the sake of continued community support.  Who thinks that way?  

Look, my goal is long-run sustained growth in Vintage.   Whatever serves that goal is what I favor.    Long-run, in my view, does not mean the next 3 months, the next 6 months, or even the next year and a half.   I want to see long-run sustained growth over the next 5 to 10 years.   I think we've taken short-run views too much in Vintage.   Proxies have created a very important short-run benefit by lowering the cost of entry, but they've produced long run costs that we are only now beginning to understand.   A comparison to the European Vintage scene is illustrative.   America's overuse of proxies, something I've supported wholeheartedly, has actualy siphoned large quantities of power out of our borders.    


I want people to play Vintage, and I don't like the fact that the format I love has a ridiculous cost of entry.  So I think it's important to lower that cost of entry so far as possible while minimizing the long-term negative effects.   I think greater balance is needed.

I've expressed this before and it's true.  The biggest reason I've seen people leave the format, outside of mounting responsibilities in real life, is the actions Wizards/DCI make to the format they use to like playing.  If Wizards/DCI stopped being dumb-asses, they'd lose less players.

I've been playing Vintage for as long as you have, in all likelihood, and you know what?  I find those explanations to be more excuses than real.  

I've seen lots of people leave the format as well.  But you know what?  Invariably, those people encounter opportunities to come back into the format.   There are very few people I've seen quit in the last 5 years that haven't, at some point or another, entertained the idea of coming back.   Magic is, I suppose, (and this is not a very helpful comparison) like cigarettes.  People might quit for a few years, but sooner or later, they'll be back.   It's just a matter of time.

Magic is still a young game, and it's high time that as a community we start to take the long view.  In 2003 when proxies started to see use, and in 2004 when they exploded, I don't think most community members took a long view of Vintage.  What did a long view even mean in 2003 when the game was less than ten years old?  Today, I think we are in a better position to see that.

There are *always* competing demands for time.  There is *always* 'real life'.  But I've seen people get married, have kids, and then rediscover magic.  

If anything, Eternal formats are a perfect format for those players, since the time commitment is minimal, and you will be playing with mostly adults.  

As I said in my follow up article:

In my opinion, part of the long-term, sustained health of Vintage has to turn on supported by mid-twenty-somethings and older. In fact, that's a huge advantage that Vintage has over the rest of competitive Magicdom. It’s an older, more mature crowd.[ ...]Adults may have less time, and they may not be interested in Friday night Magic, but they can certainly be sold on the merits of a Sunday or Saturday afternoon tournament once or twice a month. Vintage should and must find ways to ensure that it’s current player base sticks around. It’s simple math. The flows into Vintage are small. The best way to increase tournament attendance is by keeping existing players in the format. Vintage needs to target those players who are reaching the threshold of college age, and might be seeing themselves leave the format. It needs to find ways to keep them around and engaged. If we can do that, Vintage will thrive in the long run.

[...]

The traditional understanding of Magic, and Vintage as well, was that people will grow out of it as they leave college and build families. I think, to some extent, there has been a stigma or an understanding that once people reach a certain age, they stop playing Magic, and like a self-fulfilling prophesy, it has happened. There is no reason this needs to be true. Ironically, once players settle down and start a family, it's actually easier to play Vintage Magic than in those first few post-college years, since people settle into a more regular routine and the stigma of playing Magic while dating is irrelevant once you are married. As for the time commitment, married men do all sorts of activities on weekends that do not involve their families, whether it is golfing, club sports, watching TV, or hopping to the local movie theatre for an afternoon flick. What’s the difference between playing Magic once a month and any of these activities? The usual excuse given is that people say they no longer have time to play Vintage because of "real life" are really just making excuses. They're actually just doing some other hobby, working on a house project, doing chores, or watching sports. The actual difference is the stigma. Doing those things may seem somehow more ‘legitimate’ or ‘grownup’ than sitting in a card shop with teenagers playing Magic. This is need not be the case, and more and more I am seeing that it is not the case. Instead of hanging out at the card shop, it’s more and more seen as hanging out with your buddies on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon. Luis-Scott Vargas and Patrick Chapin are about the same age as myself. While LSV might slow down his Magic playing in the near future, I don’t see him ever giving up Vintage. I don’t ever see Patrick giving up Magic, even at the Pro level, unless he is completely thrust into some other intriguing enterprise. It's a choice that people make to play Magic, and with the overall aging condition of the Magic population and especially the Vintage crowd, it’s a choice that will carry less stigma and seem more sensible over time.

Ten years from now, the average Vintage player may well be significantly over 25 years old, and possibly closer to 30.   But you know what?  The average age of the regular Magic player will be older as well.    The reason Magic has such a young player base is not simply because of the stigma, but it's because young people learned the game.  But as older players stick around, the stigma of playing magic as an adult will fade.    

One of my central contentions is that people who own power are more likely to think about the format just as people who own sports memorabilia or a stock in a company are more likely to think about those things.   It's just more likely to cross your mind.   That's all.  It's not manipulation or a 'trick' it's just what might cross your mind from time to time.   When people sell their power, their mind is less likely to turn to Vintage, and they are less likely to want to test it and play it as a result.  

 

However, I think it's fair to say that a large element of that boredom has to do with lack of enthusiasm.  When people own less cards, they are less likely to be testing the format.    Rather than meeting up every week or so to flip cards and enjoy Vintage, players are more likely to test -- if at all -- exclusively for tournaments.   Those losses are more intangible and harder to measure.  But if people aren't interested in testing, aren't talking about the format, that saps the energy from the format.

How do proxies prevent me from meeting up with friends and playing around?  

They don't.   They don't *prevent* anyone from doing anything.  It's just that it's less likely to come up.     I think that in most playtest groups there is usually a catalyst person.   There is one person who has a slightly higher level of enthusiasm about the format, about getting together and flipping cards.   If that person doesn't own cards, they are less likely to think about the format, and thus less likely to be enthused about it.    

I used to be that person in my playtest group.  As I wrote:

they are available to test. In 2003-2005 I used to own Mishra’s Workshops, Bazaars, Illusionary Masks, and virtually every playable card in Vintage. A byproduct of this fact was that I’d have most of the Vintage gauntlet sleeved up for people to enjoy. This inadvertently drew many new players into the format. By testing against me using my cards, players became familiar with the format and the metagame. They became comfortable with the idea of playing in a tournament and even had ideas for the tournament that they were interested in testing out. When Vintage players no longer own Vintage cards, they are much less likely to have decks built to test with, since its mostly just proxying anyway. This means that many people that might have been brought into Vintage via the pickup game were lost.

They can do nothing but help you do that because you don't actually have to go out and buy those cards.  Testing never did anything for my enthusiasm towards Vintage.  If anything, it stifled my enthusiasm because the format stopped being fresh and exciting at the cool tournaments out-of-state.  When you test and know how the matchups go and what you need to do and when, you're not so starry-eyed at those all too infrequent events.  It's proxy use that makes it possible for me to be more excited about the format because I can always be trying out new decks that I'm unfamiliar with.  

I know from experience that people are hesitant to play in tournaments if they don't think they have a chance to make top 8.    They don't want to throw away their money, but they also don't want to get whooped.   Testing makes people comfortable with the format.  While testing for you might not make you more likely to want to play, I think you are the exception, not the rule.

Proxies have made it easier for people to play with mounting responsibilities, lack of funds to initially start playing and no money to buy all the expensive cards needed to play multiple types of decks in Vintage.  If we limit proxy use, you also limit players ability to play various decks.  It'll be like in Europe where they largely play the same deck for years because they can't afford to buy the cards, or justify buying the cards, to play another deck.  Say you own Drains but want to play Workshops.  You can't unless you have hundreds to thousands of dollars just lying around waiting to be "wasted" on cardboard.

This true, and I understand this point.    But it's a question of balancing costs and benefits.  

Also, I think it's important to not lose sight of the fact that back in the day there used to be much larger collections.   For example, both Team Shortbus and Team Meandeck had extensive lending networks.    Marc Perez alone owned 4-5 sets of power he could loan out.   I owned every card in Vintage with many pieces of additional power to loan out.   The proxy environment made these networks superfluous and they dried up.   In some ways, it's now harder to play any given deck than ever before!   Which is quite ironic.

[Smmenen]

Facts are facts.

Tournaments in the United States tend to be smaller than they were in 2003.   Yet Vintage has never been more accessible.  

What are the possible explanations for this fact?

1) Tournament Support/Prizes

It is 100% true that visible tournaments and excellent prize support help formats out.    Legacy went from being a tiny format to a gigantic one through one major change: 4 Grand Prix tournaments, as well as being featured in team competition and 5 rounds of the last two Magic World Championships.   Vintage has lost the SCG p9 series, it's most visible American tournament circuit.  

2) DCI Actions in Tinkering with the Banned and Restricted List

I think it's important to understand prisicely which actions have driven away players.   For example, the restriction of Trinisphere was done precisely to *keep* players around.   Yet, you are claiming that it has driven away players.    Is this because of the restriction of Brainstorm, or what?

3) Metagame Stagnation/Format Boredom

How much of a factor is this?   Just last year we had one of the most dynamic metagames EVER.    I tracked the rapid, massive format changes from month to month last year, yet last year saw the biggest decline in attendance ever.  http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/21

I think that it's a combination of all of these, but the general disinterest that makes (1)-(3) triggers -- that make people say 'enough is enough' -- is the detachment fostered by proxies.  

[Troy_Costisick]

2) DCI Actions in Tinkering with the Banned and Restricted List

I think it's important to understand prisicely which actions have driven away players.   For example, the restriction of Trinisphere was done precisely to *keep* players around.   Yet, you are claiming that it has driven away players.    Is this because of the restriction of Brainstorm, or what?

I think, from my personal experience on these boards and in real life, the only B/R change that actually drove away players since 2003 was the June 2008 announcement.  While more credit is being given to that announcement as a major culprit for the current situation, I still feel its impact is largely underestimated.  It is, without a doubt, the worst decision the DCI made since '03.  But as you say, it is not the only reason for Vintage's decline.  I believe that decline, however, did not start until more recently.  I point you to this thread that you started back in 2005: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=23788.0  In that you wrote:

One of the arguments against proxies (the practical argument) is that it is hard to monitor.  SCG makes you proxy on lands for that reason.  We need solutions becuase ten proxies isn't getting it done and will soon be dire constraint if it already isn't.  What do you think?  How many proxies should be standard?  15?  20?  What other issues would arise as a result?  Ten just seems way too few....

So, I think we can probably say that somewhere between mid 2005 and late 2008 something happend to drop the bottom out of Vintage attendance.  I've got a quick timeline of things that may have lead to that decline, perhaps you can fill in the blanks with more relevant stuff:

10 Proxies becomes the Norm
Trinisphere Restricted
Gifts Printed
The Rise of Dredge
Higher Proxy Tournaments Gain Popularity
Time Spiral Block Printed
Gifts Dominated Meta
Gifts Restricted
Flash Erratta
2nd Gush-bond Era
SCG Indy and Chicago get rave reviews
The Vintage "Golden Age" begins
Lorwyn Printed
SCG Ends it P9 Tournaments
June 2008 Restrictions
The Vintage "Golden Age" ends
Mana Drain Dominated Meta
Tezzeret Printed
Time Vault Errata
The Global Economy Melts Down

The items I have in red I believe have contributed to Vintage's current decline- especially here in America.  Do you see any other contributing factors?  Or items you'd like to add?

Peace,

-Troy

[hitman]

My point of view may be too personal.  Other areas haven't dried up as much as Michigan has.  We use to have thirty man tournaments all the time.  The other players on these boards can attest to this.  Michigan is a Vintage wasteland now.  There's literally nothing here anymore.  Every now and then, someone tries to motivate RIW to start them up again but no one shows up and they quit.  I have to admit that my situation isn't necessarily the same around the country.  I know that Ohio, southeast Wisconsin/Chicago and New England have a good number of tournaments and turnouts. 

With that in mind, my point of view is heavily biased by the opinions I hear from the players that use to play here.  It was never a proxy issue here.  We've been hit hard economically and real life issues are more pressing than card games right now.  Stepping back for a moment and thinking about it has made me realize that few states have experienced the downturn we have and that does shade my opinions.  Your statement about excuses got me thinking.  It is possible that the players that quit around here only used excuses like the DCI to quit Magic because they couldn't afford to buy new decks and things of this nature.  I've become pretty bitter towards the DCI and Wizards as of late because it seems like everything they do makes us spend more money to play.  I understand that as a business, that's their goal.  I don't know if a five proxy model is good for the long term health of the format but I do know that I couldn't/wouldn't play without ten proxies.  To play on an equal level (deckwise) I would need ten.  I wouldn't play if I thought I had a disadvantage.

In regards to testing, I don't think it kills enthusiasm.  My point was that testing didn't make me more enthusiastic than I already was.  If anything, an argument could be made in my case that it diminished my enthusiasm because the format lost a degree of excitement or unexpectability.