[Article] Latest Developments by Devin Low

[moxpearl]

...at the bottom of today's "Latest Developments" is a very very brief explanation of the latest Vintage restrictions (and a picture of the Champs painting).  Would have expected more than that.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/dl40


The DCI is continually looking to do what is best for the health of the Vintage format.

The combination of Flash with only a few cards, leads to too many turn zero and turn one kills. The speed and ease of these Flash combos led to Flash being added to the Restricted list.

Merchant Scroll, Brainstorm and Ponder have all been added to the restricted list. Merchant Scroll tutors for the most powerful cards. Likewise the access power of Brainstorm and Ponder make finding the powerful restricted cards in a deck too easy.

Gush returns to the restricted list. Last year, we removed four cards from the Vintage Restricted list. Of those cards only Gush has proven problematic as a free card-drawing instant.

[Zherbus]

That's not an explanation. That's pointing out that grass is green.

[Zombie Shakespeare]

I was expecting and hoping for a bit more than a few sentences.

The art for the Vintage Champs prize is nice though.

[bdg4life]

A very lame explanation. If they truly cared about the vintage format, there would have been a legit reason for the restrictions of brainstorm and ponder, this was garbage.

[Cyphern]

I for one would like to thank them for devoting an entire 19 words to the rational for restricting Brainstorm and Ponder. Clearly they have dedicated a monumental amount of effort to explaining the change.

[Klep]

This was insulting and condescending.  They promised an explanation and then told us in nine sentences that they restricted some cards.  If they are really trying to do what's best for the health of the Vintage format, they can start by treating its players with a basic amount of respect.  We deserve better than this.

EDIT: I feel I should note, in case someone from Wizards happens to see this thread, that I am not necessarily opposed to the restrictions.  I did, in fact, strongly agree with restricting Scroll, Gush, and Flash, and was ambivalent about Brainstorm.  Ponder was weird.  Nonetheless, I was looking forward to hearing the rational for such a major shakeup of the format, and instead I got barely a paragraph.  I'm quite disgusted by the lack of concern Wizards displayed with this "explanation," sentence 1) notwithstanding.

[Yare]

I personally found this explanation inadequate. It's "too easy" to get cards does not constitute an explanation. I agree with Steve.

[Drudger57]

And I thought the restriction announcement itself was going to get people the maddest. This explanation, or rather the lack thereof, is worse as it will only fan the flames of hatred. If they had said, "Brainstorm and Ponder have been restricted because we at the DCI hate blue decks and all those who play them." at least we would've gotten a laugh.

[Nydaeli]

It would have been nice to hear more than one sentence about the most significant and controversial restriction in recent history.

[AngryPheldagrif]

The combination of Flash with only a few cards, leads to too many turn zero and turn one kills. The speed and ease of these Flash combos led to Flash being added to the Restricted list.

Turn zero kills? What exactly am I missing here? I know what I'm not missing and that is that Wizards obviously cares about as much about Vintage as I do about Coldsnap drafting. Hint: not at all

[Implacable]

Step 1) End Devin Low's tenure immediately
2) Bring back Forsythe
3) Have him do the dignity of writing us, say, a paragraph or two, just like he did for the last massive change.  This is the largest single event in the entire bloody history of the format.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

Even though I'm fine with the retriction, I expected the organization that cares about the format and players to do more than the absolute minimum in explaining the changes.
The most influential change to the format in nearly a decade was handled in a few sentences, that maybe took 5 min to write, tacked onto the end of something about another format. Is it really to much to ask about the researched they did before making the choices they made, maybe even their thought process? Some one would have to be a fool to think somthing this game changing, and caused such strong initial reactions, could be dealt with by such an obvious lack of effort.
I'd expect an addition more in depth announcement, if the organization pays any attention to in format at all.
This sort of thing would never be handled in this manner had it pertained to the standard format.

Edit: not to mention some of the "explanations" they did give point towards a lack of understanding and formiliarity with the format. This worries me.

[T00L]

I found this half assed explanation quite upsetting. What I found more upsetting was that the first sentence of that paragraph was an outright lie because R&D does not care about vintage. If anyone is as upset as I am about this gigantic middle finger to the vintage community feel free to voice your concerns to Mr. Turian at Michael.Turian@wizards.com

[Chaos Lord 21]

 I have to agree that this explanation was underwhelming at best, and I also agree that Aaron Forsythe was much more attuned to and attentive to the Vintage format. The "Latest Developments" column is now completely devoid of Vintage content now that Devin Low writes it, whereas at least Vintage topics were sporadically covered by Forsythe, and most certainly an issue of this magnitude would have had a significant and thorough explanation given. 
  Also, I believe it was PChapin who pointed out on the other boards that this B&R decision was the first one that Erik Lauer has been in charge of. I'd like some commentary from them as to whether this represents a shift in their policy towards how they choose to restrict cards under his watch.
  Hopefully there will be some Vintage content on Wizards site over these two months preceding the Championships. That would show they truly "care what's best for the format". 

[LordHomerCat]

What a joke.  'We restricted these cards because the let you draw cards.'  Seriously, I am more upset about the lack of an explanation than the restrictions themselves, at least they could have given us a good reason why they killed them, particularly Ponder.

[Polynomial P]

Email sent to Michael Turian:


Dear Michael,

My name is Jacob Riehm and I go by the name polynomial p on themanadrain.com. I have been involved in many Vintage debates, including a recent one on Mox Diamond, found here: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=35600.0

Vintage is a format that I play almost exclusively and care deeply about. In my opinion, it is one of the toughest formats to play because of the rapid swings from being in an excellent position to win the game  to losing the game in a single turn. I have put in over 3 years and logged hundreds of hours into deckbuilding and honing my skills.

Frankly, your nine sentence "summary" on the latest banned and restricted list update was no more than a slap in the face. I am not going to argue what should have been restricted and what should not be restricted, but I feel that your minimal input on the latest restrictions was worse than saying nothing at all. You offered no insight into why Ponder was restricted and Portent was not. You offered no opinion as to why Gush was unrestricted in the first place (My TMD.com signature was "Who would have thought free, instant speed draw would be good in type 1?" for a good 7 months). You offered absolutely no reason as to why Flash was restricted along with the cards that find and protect Flash (Merchant scroll, Brainstorm, Ponder). You offered no insight into why Gifts Ungiven was restricted a year ago over the more obvious and problematic tutor, Merchant Scroll. You neglected to rationalize the most dramatic change to the Vintage format since 1999. How is the restriction of Brainstorm and Ponder going to improve the health of the format instead of having the format degenerate into who has the most restricted cards in their opening seven? How does restricting Brainstorm improve the health of the format when Brainstorm was used more often to find Force of Will than to find restricted bombs? How does restricting Brainstorm and Ponder help to increase interactivity and the skill required to play Vintage?

I feel that the laziness portrayed in your nine sentence "summary" of the banned and restricted update is a true reflection of the update itself. I do not believe that you, or anyone involved with the DCI, have put in more than nine sentences worth of thought into the banned and restricted updated of the format that I care most about. I feel that your inability to explain or rationalize the changes reflect a complete negligence towards the Vintage community that can only be described as egregious.

I sincerely hope that you, or a member of the WotC staff, takes the time to rationalize or otherwise explain the most drastic changes to the Vintage tournament scene in 9 years.

-Jacob Riehm

P.S. I am disappointed that the Vintage champs will not be held at Gencon and that the announcement that the Vintage champs were moved did not come until so recently. I had pre-registered to go to Gencon fully expecting the Vintage champs to be held there, as it has been for the past several years, and am dismayed that it has been moved.

[fury]

The explanations seem to be very short, indeed. But I understand wizards don't want to create a public debate to justify their choice. The decision has been taken, let us adapt to the new restrictions.

[mogote]

The combination of Flash with only a few cards, leads to too many turn zero and turn one kills. The speed and ease of these Flash combos led to Flash being added to the Restricted list.

I haven't followed the development of Flash decks closely but I had the impression that Gemstone Caverns was tested in Flash and being dismissed. That would be the only way to get turn 0 kills if I'm not mistaken. And how often do turn 1 kills actually occur with Flash?

The explanation of the restrictions is worse than the announcement. It's just stating the obvious: Merchant Scroll tutors for good cards, Brainstorm and Ponder dig for cards and Gush is problematic. Who would've thought?

If you take away someones toys you'd better have a good explanation beyond "because we can". Is an in-depth explanation behind the DCI's thought process too much to ask? That way one would be at least be able to understand their intentions better even if one is not 100% o.k. with them.

All in all this is very disappointing.

[fury]

Frankly, gentlemen, what did you expect from the explanations of the DCI ? I don't see what they should have said in addition of that.

To summarise their arguments :

- Flash allowed a too powerful 2 cards-combo, making the format too quick => restrict
- Merchant Scroll : is a tutor, which allowed reaching a powerful card (there are a lot of powerful blue instant cards in Vintage) => restrict, as the other tutors.
- Brainstorm / Ponder : let draw cards to find bombs => restrict

What more can the DCI say ?

[TimeBeing]

- Brainstorm / Ponder : let draw cards to find bombs => restrict

What more can the DCI say ?

why cards like Impulse and Sleight of Hand, which are as good if not better then ponder where not restricted too? Ponder makes one think they are just throwing darts at a wall when it comes to these restrictions. Even flash people thought was kind of stupid since it wasn't an all dominate deck.

i my self was very insulted reading that, after waiting all week hoping to hear their well thought out decisions on the restrictions.

[The Atog Lord]

why cards like Impulse and Sleight of Hand, which are as good if not better then ponder where not restricted too?

Because Ponder is much, much better than either of those cards.

I really wish we had been given more of an explanation. I had been looking forward to it, and this was disappointing.

[zeus-online]

Man, what a bummer....And the most disturbing thing is as quoted by others:
"The combination of Flash with only a few cards, leads to too many turn zero and turn one kills. The speed and ease of these Flash combos led to Flash being added to the Restricted list."

Turn 0 kills?...

I had expected them to write a little more then that! If they did this in type2 there'd be an outrage.

I'm fine with the restrictions, but this explanation is an insult.

/Zeus

[mogote]

What more can the DCI say ?

The list of their "explanations" for restrictions could be endless, e.g.:
- Oath of Druids tutors for some of the best creatures in Magic circumventing their cost.
- Mishra's Workshop is a reusable Black Lotus for artifacts.
- Bazaar of Baghdad is a very powerful draw engine.
This wouldn't clarify anything without putting their decisions into a context.

They could have explained why
- Gush needed to be re-restricted when the restriction of Scoll, Brainstorm and Ponder already weakens the Gush engine
- the DCI restricted 5 cards at once when they used to be conservative about restrictions before
- Ichorid was left untouched
etc.

[bluemage55]

Can't say I didn't see this coming.

After all, it's pretty clear what their real motivations were.

[Troy_Costisick]

He told us nothing today.  Those are empty words.

-Troy

[Wagner]

Well, that is a slap in the face, so yes I took 5 minutes to politely reply and I think more should do the same (avoid insult and bad words, even though you are frustrated, it removes credibility).

Hello Mr Turian,

As you have probably received a lot of hate mail about this matter already, I will try to keep it short.

Your article attached at the very bottom of a totally unrelated article was a slap in the face of an explanation regarding the most important restrictions in the Vintage scene in 9 years.

You basically stated obvious facts in 9 sentences with little or nothing regarding the DCI policy about restricting cards and made very few arguments to explain the restrictions other than "This card is good and this card gets good cards".

Although I am happy with the restriction, a short written explanation without any argumentation makes me question the actual process that went behind the whole restriction.

I hope, if not for this one, the next restricted list will have a better explanation and will have an article of it's own.

Sincerely,

[thorme]

Mr. Turian,

I for one would like to thank you for your well thought-out and comprehensive explanation for the recent Vintage restrictions.  Oftentimes, members of the Vintage community such as myself have too little faith in Wizards consideration for the format, but the staggering scope and breadth of your article clearly display not only your mastery of the format's intricacies, but also the dedication you have to making sure the player community is well-informed regarding wizards policy. 

I was so pleased to find that rather than the trite summation that many expected, you graced us with the new benchmark in clear and open communication and gave us true insight into all the various thought processes that went on in making this momentous format change.  I can now say with confidence that the restrictions were completely justified - how can anyone think differently after the persuasive prose that you crafted? 

I can only imagine how long it took to create such a masterpiece, the lonely hours you must have spent lovingly reworking every word and phrase to arrive at perfection.  In the past, various critics have chosen to extol previously-considered epics such as Tolstoy's War and Peace, Dicken's A Tale of Two Cities, or Nabokov's Lolita.  I feel so privileged to be alive today when a new hallmark classic has surpassed these gems to set the new standard in literary magnificence.

Thank you, thank you, thank you,

Thorme

[Nefarias]

For reference, here's Forsythe's article on Gifts and the unrestrictions (and the nerfing of Flash in the other formats):

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af173

He spent almost as many words telling us why we could have Mind Twist back as Turian did on the whole thing. I literally scrolled up and down today's article three times looking for the Turian section, just reading the article headers, disregarding the insert because it was so tiny and thinking that it couldn't possibly be it.

[Mr. Nightmare]

I literally scrolled up and down today's article three times looking for the Turian section, just reading the article headers, disregarding the insert because it was so tiny and thinking that it couldn't possibly be it.

Same.  It was pretty depressing realizing it took me longer to find it than it did to read it.  Probably longer than he took to write it, too.

[bluemage55]

I found a neat summary of the explanations at the SCG forums:

The DCI is continually looking to do what is best for the health of the Our Money Vintage format.

The combination of Flash with only a few cards, leads to too many turn zero and turn one kills. The speed and ease of these Flash combos led to Flash being added to the Restricted list. How ever we decided to print a combo that requires the same number of cards, and less deck space dedicated to it, becasue that way you need to all go out and buy packs to find your 4 painters servant.

Merchant Scroll, Brainstorm and Ponder have all been added to the restricted list. Merchant Scroll tutors for the most powerful cards. Likewise the access power of Brainstorm and Ponder make finding the powerful restricted cards in a deck too easy. you should have to pay at least 15$ a card to have that kind of effect, and the fact that they were common makes us too little.

Gush returns to the restricted list. Last year, we removed four cards from the Vintage Restricted list. Of those cards only Gush has proven problematic as a free card-drawing instant. This is actually the only thing we did with no evil motives, and proves that we do have a soul. Dont worry we are working on that, and soon youll see 2 new cards that do the same thing printed only as super bizaroo mythic crunchy rares, 1 per case.

mike turian