[Free Article] So Many Insane Plays - Restrict Mana Drain? the Nov/Dec Report

[Smmenen]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/16987_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Restrict_Mana_Drain_The_NovemberDecember_Metagame_Report.html

Editor's Blurb:

Monday, January 19th - The Vintage metagame, it seems, is forever in flux. However, if you take a closer look at the most successful decks of the past two months, there are interesting similarities to be found, and Mana Drain appears to be dominant. Should something be done about this powerful counterspell? With a breakdown of the relevant statistics, Stephen reveals all… [Editor’s Note – Patrick Chapin, fresh from Grand Prix: Los Angeles, will run later in the week!]

[beder]

With Tezzeret and drain decks being so dominant, I really feel like painter and its x blasts is going to come back in the game.

I don't think that storm combos or null/rod strategies will be sufficent to balance Tezzeret decks. Indeed, I feel like  Tezzeret is pretty different from all the other drain decks we have seen in the past : this is a drain/control deck that is at the same time a very good/fast combo deck. Thanks to vault/key/tezzeret and the tutor suite, this deck is a damn good hybrid, being able to win on the spot from nearly anywhere. This is no longer a control deck like what we were used to address, the one that has to stop your first threat, to survive the first turns, to outdraw you (some Tezzeret lists even play only 3 thirsts...) and then to build its win.

I can't really remember a deck that was as efficent as it is in the "Combo/Control" field (or Control/Combo, with Tezzeret I am not even sure which is the most important dimension between Combo and Control).

[LordHomerCat]

With Tezzeret and drain decks being so dominant, I really feel like painter and its x blasts is going to come back in the game.

I don't think that storm combos or null/rod strategies will be sufficent to balance Tezzeret decks. Indeed, I feel like  Tezzeret is pretty different from all the other drain decks we have seen in the past : this is a drain/control deck that is at the same time a very good/fast combo deck. Thanks to vault/key/tezzeret and the tutor suite, this deck is a damn good hybrid, being able to win on the spot from nearly anywhere. This is no longer a control deck like what we were used to address, the one that has to stop your first threat, to survive the first turns, to outdraw you (some Tezzeret lists even play only 3 thirsts...) and then to build its win.

I can't really remember a deck that was as efficent as it is in the "Combo/Control" field (or Control/Combo, with Tezzeret I am not even sure which is the most important dimension between Combo and Control).

Meandeck Gifts was a pretty good comparison.  That deck would do some pretty nasty things out of nowhere.  Key-Vault makes FlameVault look like Legacy and Tendrils seem like super overkill.  I think MD Gifts was a stronger deck, but Tezz definitely has some advantages.

[Akuma]

It’s my personal view that Vintage is fantastic right now.

I guess you must really enjoy this "Mana Drain" metagame. I don't know exactly how long you have been playing Magic, but I'm sick and tired of the "Mana Drain" metagame. Vintage is crap right now, Tezzeret.dec is nothing more than Control Slaver minus the old Welder components. It's not "new", no real innovation here, just the evolution of what we had back in 04.

There really isn't very much room for any divergence in Vintage given how the B&R list is operated. Anything that is half way decent will be restricted until we are left with the "Mana Drain" metagame. We had a great thing going before June 20th, your "Year in Review" article on Wizard's site was an excellent example of this, with the metagame evolving to fight the current top dog.

I really enjoy reading your articles, they are the reason for my premium account at SCG, and I understand that you have to write these articles with a positive spin on Vintage. After all, you want to draw in more players and not scare them away by telling them that the format sucks and they are better off playing Highlander, but I really hope that you are still working behind-the-scenes with your WotC contacts to set things right...

[reaperbong]

please for the love of Vintage NO!

The suggestion/mentioning of restricting Mana Drain truly saddens me. IMHO no matter how the metagame shifts the 3 main pillars of Vintage will always be 4x Bazaar, 4x Mishra's Workshop or 4x Mana Drain.

It should be taboo to discuss restricting any of these 3 cards as it would put Vintage on very shaky ground. Also many long term players would be outraged as it is a quite an investment in the format to aquire a playset of any 1 of these 3 cards. It'd be a slap in the face to anyone with a proven dedication to Vintage. This isn't Brainstorm, these cards cost a little more then a quarter.

[LordHomerCat]

please for the love of Vintage NO!

The suggestion/mentioning of restricting Mana Drain truly saddens me. IMHO no matter how the metagame shifts the 3 main pillars of Vintage will always be 4x Bazaar, 4x Mishra's Workshop or 4x Mana Drain.

It should be taboo to discuss restricting any of these 3 cards as it would put Vintage on very shaky ground. Also many long term players would be outraged as it is a quite an investment in the format to aquire a playset of any 1 of these 3 cards. It'd be a slap in the face to anyone with a proven dedication to Vintage. This isn't Brainstorm, these cards cost a little more then a quarter.

The generally accepted Vintage Pillars are Drain, Shop, and Ritual.  Bazaar and Null Rod are more of fringe things in the grand Vintage scheme, and are likely remain that way.  Those first 3 have been the basis since Vintage became a reasonable format (IE after Sligh and Sui Black went away).

[breed]

Well, Drain is a such mythic card that I dont think it would be a good choice to restrict it. Also, I dont think Drain deck are a problem. Indeed in the US meta, Tezz decks are dominating but in Europe, not so much. Also it would kill some other decks like Bomberman.

[pocky]

why would you want to re-errata Time Vault, but then restrict Mana drain? Mana drain is not that good, and it is a component for control decks. Do you really want control to disappear? First Wizards takes away Brainstorm and ponder and merchant scroll, which hurts FoW (and some element of control), and now this? So much for being the 'ambassador' for Vintage. In my opinion, proactive decks have an edge on reactive decks, and Mana drain, for the most part is reactive.

It seems to me the author of this article prefers combo in Vintage. I can tell you that winning on turn 0/1 is a negative aspect of vintage; it turns off alot of players to this format. Taking control away would further alienate new players.

[Dark4Ever]

Last week I read the article "Insider Trading - Are Proxies Hurting Vintage Tournament Attendance?," and then having read this article on the current state of the metagame and should we restrict mana drain I had a thought.
The thought was "Is the metagame different for a non-proxied vs a proxied environment?" and an associated thought with that "On which environment should we base the banned and restricted list?".
It seems to me that restricting or even banning a card like Mishra's Workshop in a proxied enviornment is not the same as doing the same in a non-proxied environment finanically but should have a similar effect on both metagames.
If players are only playing full powered or staks with Workshop and Bazaars because its a proxied environment doesn't that sufficiently change the nature of that metagame from a non-proxied environment?
I certainly don't have the data or the time to answer these questions. I'm not even sure how relevant or real they are.
As player with full power, a set of mana drains, 3 grim tutors, a time vault, 1 bazaar and a library in a pear tree I for one would not be happy with banning or restrictions being done a) based on a proxied environment and b) possibly by people playing in said environment.
Not angry or annoyed just had a thought that's all.
Happy vintage playing.

[LordHomerCat]

why would you want to re-errata Time Vault, but then restrict Mana drain? Mana drain is not that good, and it is a component for control decks. Do you really want control to disappear? First Wizards takes away Brainstorm and ponder and merchant scroll, which hurts FoW (and some element of control), and now this? So much for being the 'ambassador' for Vintage. In my opinion, proactive decks have an edge on reactive decks, and Mana drain, for the most part is reactive.

It seems to me the author of this article prefers combo in Vintage. I can tell you that winning on turn 0/1 is a negative aspect of vintage; it turns off alot of players to this format. Taking control away would further alienate new players.

You might try actually reading the article instead of just reading the title.  Seriously.

Also:

As player with full power, a set of mana drains, 3 grim tutors, a time vault, 1 bazaar and a library in a pear tree I for one would not be happy with banning or restrictions being done a) based on a proxied environment and b) possibly by people playing in said environment.

Uhm, this proxy environment you complain about is called Vintage.  Modern vintage is defined by proxies at this point, and if you somehow think that, because people are using proxies their deck choice is irrelevant, then you are discounting the entire American and much of the European scene.  Basically, the only actual vintage tourneys you recognize are Nationals, the odd massive European event, and PT Side Events?  That's a pretty small sample, especially when there is a wealth of relevant data about which cards are ACTUALLY good enough to restrict.

And Steve: seriously, you know how many people comment on your articles without reading them; couldn't you have picked a name less likely to generate 50 "OMG I <3 mana drain so this article sucks and you suck for it" replies?

[Troy_Costisick]

And Steve: seriously, you know how many people comment on your articles without reading them; couldn't you have picked a name less likely to generate 50 "OMG I <3 mana drain so this article sucks and you suck for it" replies?

ROFL, I think he did it on purprose.  For all you guys who read the title and think Stephen is advocating the restriction of Mana Drain, he isn't.  If anything, the utter dominance of Drain Decks (mainly Tez with some Slaver also) highlights how silly the restrictions of Flash and Gush were since niether of them ever made up more than what was it, 25% of the metagame?  Steve, correct me if I'm wrong on any of that.  By the way, "Rest of the Metagame: 20%", how low does that rank on your all time scale since you started doing these bi-monthly reports?  And how far is that down since June 2008?

Peace,

-Troy

[Purple Hat]

And Steve: seriously, you know how many people comment on your articles without reading them; couldn't you have picked a name less likely to generate 50 "OMG I <3 mana drain so this article sucks and you suck for it" replies?

ROFL, I think he did it on purprose.  For all you guys who read the title and think Stephen is advocating the restriction of Mana Drain, he isn't.  If anything, the utter dominance of Drain Decks (mainly Tez with some Slaver also) highlights how silly the restrictions of Flash and Gush were since niether of them ever made up more than what was it, 25% of the metagame?  Steve, correct me if I'm wrong on any of that.  By the way, "Rest of the Metagame: 20%", how low does that rank on your all time scale since you started doing these bi-monthly reports?  And how far is that down since June 2008?

Peace,

-Troy

Other: 20% is kind of something I would expect right now.  Unlike Standard where a rotation drives players to come up with new strategies, in vintage a "rotation" drives players back to the old power cards to try to establish a new meta.  This means that rogueish strategies are temporarily tossed out.  We still don't have a concensus on the best Tezz decks or the best other decks.  Once we settle on those you'll start seeing players picking up other strategies that are foils to them.

[meadbert]

First of all, I think that Steve may have underestimated Thirst for Knowledge to a certain degree.  He briefly addressed the possibility of restricting it and then moved away citing the fact that some lists run Intuition/AK to show that there are other options that are almost as good.

First, I am of the belief that Thirst is actually better than Intuition.  Drain Tendrils, which was basically built with abusing the Intuition/AK engine in mind is a perfect example.  Despite its attempts to abuse Intuition, Drain Tendrils still ends up running merely two Intuitions while it runs a full set of Thirsts.  There are a few reasons.  Thirst is less reliant on game states and frequently is better post board.  Intuition either wants to combo with AK or fill the yard in front of Yawg.  If your graveyard is shut off then Intuition becomes much weaker.  Meanwhile Thirst can be used to abuse Yawg and AK just as Intuition does, but it also can get rid of a DSC or just build card advantage regardless of how well your yard is hated out.

This is just one example.  Although one can argue that Intuition + AK is almost as good in nearly ever deck that has tried either way the conventional "best list" always finished with a full set of Thirsts.

Thirst for Knowledge is also a card that has shown up in a wide variety of decks.  I remember in late 2005 the best decks were something like Oath of Druids, Stax, Slaver and Brassman Gifts.  The fact that the top 4 decks which had a reasonable amount of diversity were still running at least 3 Thirsts each showed how good Thirst was.  At that time Scroll showed up as a 1 or 2 of in Slaver and Brassman Gifts and Gifts was a 2 of in Brassman Gifts, so other than Brainstorm none of the cards that have been restricted since were showing up in near the numbers that Thirst was.  Ultimately Meandeck Gifts prevailed over that metagame and I certainly agree with the restriction of Scroll, but I probably would have restricted Thirst for Knowledge even before Gifts Ungiven.

Tezerret is not the broken card.  What is broken is the Vault Key combo.  Winning the game for 4 colorless mana is just silly good.  This is partly mitigated by the fact that you actually need a "combo."  Basically each part is not THAT good without the other.  Neither card is useless on its own since Key generates mana with Mana Vault or Mana Crypt and Time Vault messes up your opponent's Drains, but they are not as good on their own as other cards in the deck.  What fixes this is largely Thirst for Knowledge.  Thirst allows you to pitch a singleton combo piece so you are not stuck with dead cards in hands.  This removes the combo's primary weakness is really the key to making Key and Vault so powerful.

My point here is that Thirst for Knowledge is good enough to warrant restriction in the sense that it is as good as Ponder and Gifts Ungiven.  (Note:  I was not in favor of restricting any of those cards, but that is off topic)
In my mind, Thirst is similar in power to Fact or Fiction.  In fact Thirst may be better.  Both frequently achieve +1 card advantage although Fact gives a better quality.  Both are instant speed.  Thirst costs less which is it's primary advantage.  Thirst secondary advantage is that it gets rid of DSC from hand.
I would certainly consider restricting Thirst long before I considered restriction of Mana Drain.

On a mostly seperate note:
Mana Drain shows up in the top 8 so much because the best players play Drains.  The best players play Drains for three reasons.  Tezzeret is new so folks want to play with it.  Drains are fun.  Finally, Drains are skill intensive which "rewards" good players.  Basically here is how the Game Theory works out here.

There are several players with varying levels of ability.  There are also several decks.  Decks can be hated out.  This means that there is no "best" deck.  Instead as a deck becomes overplayed the rest of the metagame adapts and hates it out.
Bad players struggle with Drains because they tend to be skill intensive.  I know this from firsthand experience.  I am no longer a vintage newb and I play test a lot but I still make frequent mistakes with Drains decks.  These mistakes are frequent enough to significantly effect my ability to top 8 with Drain decks in major tournaments.  For players with less experience it is even harder.  Because Drains are so skill intensive, newer players are basically forced to choose other archetypes that are a bit easier.  If good players then choose decks randomly this would make non-drain decks "overplayed."  Instead, good players do not choose randomly.  They choose the decks that they have the best chance to win with (and which happens to be fun)
Good players choose Drain decks both because they are fun, but also because if good players did not play them they would be underplayed.  In this manner you end up with an equilibrium where newer players might play Fish, Dredge and Stax while more experienced players play Drains.
Then, not surprisingly, the more experienced players make top 8 and thus many Drains show up in the top 8.  Newer players and some experience players frequently sneak in with Dredge, Rituals or Fish because those decks are competitive with Drains.

My own testing is showing that Oath, BUG Fish and Dredge all do quite well against Tezzeret.  My own testing is flawed in the sense that I am bad with Drains, but back when Meandeck Gifts was king I was actually seeing some dominance by Meandeck Gifts.  Now I am not seeing that at all.  In fact I am not even seeing Tezzeret decks as the best Drain decks.  Both Drain Tendrils and traditional ICBM Oath with Rods and Drains have been doing better.

[Akuma]

First of all, I think that Steve may have underestimated Thirst for Knowledge to a certain degree.

Thirst for Knowledge is currently the best draw engine available in Vintage. This is the problem with inane restrictions, you take the best one out (Gush), we just move to the next one. What's the point? If more cards are available the metagame can adapt, if everything that is decent is removed, we just play with what WotC lets us have until they take that away. In the end, that will leave us with decks that look like: Restricted List + Lands + 4 Force of Will/4 Mana Drain.

[arik124]

Is enfield not counted b/c you could not get lists?

[Smmenen]

Is enfield not counted b/c you could not get lists?

That's correct.

I would have discussed Enfield in my Vintage Year in Review as well (http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/21 ), if I could have gotten the lists.

Travis lost a TON of publicity.   

@ Meadbert and Akuma, the problem is obviously Mana Drain.   Mana Drain decks make up WAAAAAY too much of top 8s, not Thirst for Knowledge.   Mana Drain is actually worse than Merchant Scroll in terms of its percentage of Top 8s.

And Steve: seriously, you know how many people comment on your articles without reading them; couldn't you have picked a name less likely to generate 50 "OMG I <3 mana drain so this article sucks and you suck for it" replies?

ROFL, I think he did it on purprose.  For all you guys who read the title and think Stephen is advocating the restriction of Mana Drain, he isn't.  If anything, the utter dominance of Drain Decks (mainly Tez with some Slaver also) highlights how silly the restrictions of Flash and Gush were since niether of them ever made up more than what was it, 25% of the metagame?  Steve, correct me if I'm wrong on any of that.  By the way, "Rest of the Metagame: 20%", how low does that rank on your all time scale since you started doing these bi-monthly reports?  And how far is that down since June 2008?

Peace,

-Troy

Troy, that's a good question.  You can go back into my article archive and tell us the answer!   

You have basically captured my view.  Vintage should be diverse as much as possible. It makes little sense to have every other restriction based on LESS tournament dominance than we are seeing right now with Tezzeret. 

If we are in the same position 6 months from now, well, I might actually be serious about the need to do something about these decks. 

[TheShop]

The restriction of Ponder and Personal Tutor showed how far restrictions are from the reality of the needs of the format.  In the case of Mana Drain, I would prefer that we not dangle the carrot in front of the DCI.  My reasoning is that Drain, unlike Flash, is very interactive.  Blue has already taken a huge hit for loss of blue count in decks.  The number of drains run in decks before the mass restrictions took place were very low.  Don't take the second best thing and kill it too.  We need to move the power curve up, and not down. 

I also believe that if we are willing to take drain away, that dark ritual needs to go as well (listed alone just to see if I can touch a nerve).  However, I would rather not see any of these restrictions because I do not want to turn the format into LEGACY or Highlander.  I think that vault is at the wording that follows original intent also (IE-don't change).  It is hard to adapt to change, I love playing 5 color stax more than anything else in Magic in any format.  However, when Flash was legal, I played it...because I wanted to win games and the game evolved over time.

On the proxy vs. non thing:  Make restrictions based on the real thing(otherwise the real thing will be stupid broken).  I would like to see more non-proxy events

[Troy_Costisick]

And Steve: seriously, you know how many people comment on your articles without reading them; couldn't you have picked a name less likely to generate 50 "OMG I <3 mana drain so this article sucks and you suck for it" replies?

ROFL, I think he did it on purprose.  For all you guys who read the title and think Stephen is advocating the restriction of Mana Drain, he isn't.  If anything, the utter dominance of Drain Decks (mainly Tez with some Slaver also) highlights how silly the restrictions of Flash and Gush were since niether of them ever made up more than what was it, 25% of the metagame?  Steve, correct me if I'm wrong on any of that.  By the way, "Rest of the Metagame: 20%", how low does that rank on your all time scale since you started doing these bi-monthly reports?  And how far is that down since June 2008?

Troy, that's a good question.  You can go back into my article archive and tell us the answer!   

You have basically captured my view.  Vintage should be diverse as much as possible. It makes little sense to have every other restriction based on LESS tournament dominance than we are seeing right now with Tezzeret. 

Soooo go find it myself, huh?  That’s cool 

Here’s what I discovered.  The current meta breakdown is this:

Current:

Tezzeret Control (23%)
Ichorid (10%)
Control Slaver (10%)
Fish (9%)
TPS (7%)
MUD (6%)
Painter Combo (5%)
European Control (5%)
Oath (5%)
Rest of the Metagame: 20%

This meta is totally dominated by Drain decks.  If you count Slaver and Oath in that group, better than 1 in 3 opponents is likely running Drains.  “Rest of the Meta” is at a scant 20%.

Prior to the May/June Restrictions the meta breakdown was the following:

May-June Pre-Restrictions:

MUD (12.5%)
Painter’s Combo (9.8%)
Workshop Aggro (8%)
Flash (8%)
Tyrant Oath (6.3%)
Grow (6.3%)
Rest of the Metagame: 49%

The best deck had less than 13% of the environment.  The “Rest of the Meta” was at a staggering 49%.  Which means that practically every other opponent will be playing a deck that is unexpected or rogue-ish in nature.  By far, this would be the most diverse metagame as far as deck variety goes.

Right afer the restrictions, this was the meta breakdown:

July-August Post-Restrictions

Slaver (12%)
Stax/MUD (11%)
TPS (11%)
Fish (11%)
Ichorid (8%)
Painter (7.5%)
Oath (5%)
Bomberman (5%)
Rest of the Metagame: 29.5%

There were four archetypes above 10%.  That’s pretty amazing, really.  “Rest of the Meta” was nearly 30%.

I did manage to find your March through April 2008 account.  This was during the height of Flash’s power where everyone from you Stephen to Patrick Chapman to the guy who won the Vintage portion of the previous Magic Invitational was calling Hulk-Flash the best deck ever:

March-April (Height of Flash’s Power)

Hulk Flash (13% )
Tyrant Oath (12%)
Ichorid  (9%)
Storm Combo (8%)
MUD (7%)
Fish (7%)
Deez Naughts (6%)
Drain Tendrils (5%)
Rest of the Metagame (33%)

Flash composed just above 1/8 of the environment. For being “The Best Deck Ever!” it lost an awful lot of finals to Tyrant Oath during that time.  In fact, Tyrant Oath won the most tournaments during this span according to the March-April report.   Despite having those two powerful decks on the scene, the “Rest of the Meta” was still a third of the field and there were 8 archetypes in total that managed to make up 5% or more.  This was probably the most diverse time in Vintage as far as major archetypes go.

So to answer my own question, yes 20% is the smallest amount of the meta the “Rest of the Field” has ever been according to the metagame reports that I could find.  23% is by far the best of any individual archetype I could find, and Mana Drain (roughly 38% of the current meta) scored much, much higher as a deck engine than Gush (25% at its peak) ever did according to the data I found.

But like you say, there’s no need to panic yet.  That’s only 2 months of data.  We’ll see what the Jan-Feb data looks like.  What it says to me, though, is that there are probably some things on the B/R list that we should take a serious look at.

Peace,

-Troy

[Nehptis]

Big picture thinking, yes Drains are a problem.  But, so are Rituals and Shops.  However, all 3 DEFINE Vintage.  It's been said many times in various ways; "almost all Vintage decks are made up of mini-combos and fast mana".  Drains, Rituals, and Shops are fast mana.  There's always going to be a card or cards that push one of those fast mana pillars further up the dominate chain.  That is until a restriction occurs, or a new counter strategy is found or a new card is printed.

One only needs to look at the past to validate the present and predict the future.  The Storm effect put Ritual Decks at the forefront for a long while.  Trinisphere gave Shops a good run.  Gifts lifted Drain decks.  Today, we have Tezz / Vault.  The harshest part of this reality is that of the 3 Pillars Drains are the most powerful.  They are control, tempo and fast mana in a single spell.  Not to mention they are in Vintage's most easily abused color, Blue.

So, my point is that we either dredge thru another period of Drain domination, waiting for another strategy or newly printed card to surface that will keep it in check; or we take an easier and sometimes unpopular route of restricting / errata-ing cards.  Cards that aren't Drain, Shop or Rituals.  In this scenario the obvious targets are Vault and Tezz.  IMO, a singleton Tezz won't change things.  Instead Vault is the problem.  Here's why.

How many games have been won on the heels of a Tezz animate artifact victory that did not occur within a "Vault turn".  My guess is very few games.  Instead with or without Tezz a lot of Drain decks are winning on Vault.  It was a noble effort to bring Vault back from the depths.  But, not all noble efforts have positive effects.  In this case, just as with the Gush UNRESTRICTION, it's painfully obvious that a mistake has been made.

Re-errata Time Vault.  Vault needs to be changed so that effects like Tezz's and Key's don't allow infinite turns.  Simple, effective and clearly the right thing to do.  Vault lovers, please put your egos and price guides aside and do what's right for the format at large.

[Lemnear]

What the??? Again the topic of Re-errata Time Vault? I'm pretty sure Tez was printed for the resurrection of Time Vault only. WotC gave us that two card combo intentionally. People complained that Drains were too slow for vintage so damn long and now again such a discussion. It's not Drain that is dominant, it's Drain/T4K as nearly only playable engine.

Like back in the 2nd gush-era, anyone dismissing the engine is almost not compeditive. Imagine the Gush-era without Flash/Painter being in the same meta ... Gush would have been much worse than Drain ever could be. The problem is that there's no competing engine available atm. I'm afraid of thinking bout the day people become aware of Thoughtcast (Drain-mana investment) being absolutely playable in Tez/Painter...

PS: At the moment, unrestricting FoF would be fatal, but back with 4 Gush available, FoF would have become a rival-engine (even without Brainstorm/Ponder/Scroll). It's never to late to sleeve-up my FOIL Gushes again 

[Troy_Costisick]

Re-errata Time Vault.  Vault needs to be changed so that effects like Tezz's and Key's don't allow infinite turns.  Simple, effective and clearly the right thing to do.  Vault lovers, please put your egos and price guides aside and do what's right for the format at large.

Oh get real.  Tez decks win on the back of Tinker->DSC just as often if not more than Time Vault going Infinite and using Tez's Ultimate.  If you read the play reports, having a second win condition is what makes the deck really viable. 

Like back in the 2nd gush-era, anyone dismissing the engine is almost not compeditive. Imagine the Gush-era without Flash/Painter being in the same meta ... Gush would have been much worse than Drain ever could be.

Well, Flash and Painter were there, so that's a hypothetical.  Such environment never existed and therefore cannot be compared to the current one in any way, shape, or form.  There's no way to know what that meta may have lookec like and no data at all to draw upon.  And if you look back in the 2nd Gush era, non-Gush decks were competitive.  Shop decks won several tournaments and MUD decks were an equal rival to Gush-bond by the time Gush was restricted.  Mana Drains aren't the problem with the current meta (and at this point, there really isn't a problem yet because this is just a 2 month sample), the problem IMHO is a B/R list that's overextended. 

[Nehptis]

Oh get real.  Tez decks win on the back of Tinker->DSC just as often if not more than Time Vault going Infinite and using Tez's Ultimate.  If you read the play reports, having a second win condition is what makes the deck really viable.

OK, I went out and tried to "Get Real" but they were all out at the 1980s sit-com "bad expressions" store.  Now if you'd like to have a genuine discussion, let's proceed.

I do read play reports and the sense I get is that there are more Vault victories than DSC victories.  But, let's examine your point about having a second win condition making the deck viable.  So, what's the first win condition Vault or DSC?  Either way, Tezz-->animate arts--->swing is a far or non-exisistent 3rd condition.  Which validates my point.  Tezz is not the issue and Drains are always a problem just as much as Shops and Rituals are.  But, they are sacred, not to be touched.  So, if Tezz is out and Drain is untouchable, then I say Vault is still a strong consideration for being too powerful.

I'm not 100% dismissing Tinker/DSC or TFK.  But, have we ever been in this situation before with Drain dominance before Vault/Key was re-errated?  Yes, we were....(You thought I was going to say...NO!)  But, the problem wasn't Tinker-->DSC it was Drain-->Gifts.  Again, Drain can't be touched, so Gifts went and the Flood waters subsided and balance was restored..for a bit.

Mana Drains aren't the problem with the current meta (and at this point, there really isn't a problem yet because this is just a 2 month sample), the problem IMHO is a B/R list that's overextended.

Most people including myself aren't or won't blame Mana Drain (it's a pillar!).  But, what do you mean by a B/R list that's "overextended"?

[Lemnear]

Like back in the 2nd gush-era, anyone dismissing the engine is almost not compeditive. Imagine the Gush-era without Flash/Painter being in the same meta ... Gush would have been much worse than Drain ever could be.

Well, Flash and Painter were there, so that's a hypothetical.  Such environment never existed and therefore cannot be compared to the current one in any way, shape, or form.  There's no way to know what that meta may have lookec like and no data at all to draw upon.  And if you look back in the 2nd Gush era, non-Gush decks were competitive.  Shop decks won several tournaments and MUD decks were an equal rival to Gush-bond by the time Gush was restricted.  Mana Drains aren't the problem with the current meta (and at this point, there really isn't a problem yet because this is just a 2 month sample), the problem IMHO is a B/R list that's overextended. 

No doubt bout the last. I'm well aware that there where other decks, but I'm still talking bout gush as the dominating engine. May you want to mention Metalworker as engine, too, but that's it. Flash/Hulk, Painter/Grindstone, etc. are no engines in my view ... they are kill-conditions. Bomberman, Painter, etc. won several tournaments in my area back then but on the back of gush. With the exception of decks like Fish, Shop and Flash, Gush was the way to go

[Troy_Costisick]

Most people including myself aren't or won't blame Mana Drain (it's a pillar!).  But, what do you mean by a B/R list that's "overextended"?

IMO, there are too many cards on the current B/R list and thus the DCI created environment capable of producing a lopsided metagame- at least temporarily.  If a more measured approach had been taken back in June or a far more agressive approach taken in Spetember, I doubt we'd have a single archetype taking over to the degree Tez (and by extension Mana Drain decks) have in the past 2 months.  I always believe that the answer to metagame "problems" lies in the cards not in expanding the B/R list.

No doubt bout the last. I'm well aware that there where other decks, but I'm still talking bout gush as the dominating engine. May you want to mention Metalworker as engine, too, but that's it. Flash/Hulk, Painter/Grindstone, etc. are no engines in my view ... they are kill-conditions. Bomberman, Painter, etc. won several tournaments in my area back then but on the back of gush. With the exception of decks like Fish, Shop and Flash, Gush was the way to go

Well, no one can know your individual meta but you and those you play with, however, the data from Stephen's reports show that Gush-bond was not always "the way to go" before it was restricted.  Flash and Shop decks performed just as well at various times and even Ichorid had consistent showings despite all the graveyard hate that was being packed into SBs back then.  Which is basically what you are saying in your last sentence.  I mean, if there are three or more archetypes that can compete with any other archetype, is that somehow a lopsided meta?  If "Fish, Shop, and Flash" (quoting you) are just as viable as Gush at various points, is that a problem then?  Fish, Shop and Flash made up a huge part of the meta back then, and when the Gush engine was 25% of the meta, Workshop was also 25% at the same time.  Note: I'm not advocating returning to the pre June 2008 restricted list, I'm just asking the question, "was is as lopsided as now?".  The metagame was far more diverse back then than it has been for the last 2 months, as far as the general metagame goes.  Do you interpret the data differently? 

[Smmenen]

Big picture thinking, yes Drains are a problem.  But, so are Rituals and Shops.

Rituals are rarely, if ever, more than 12% of Vintage top 8s.   That by definitions means that Rituals are not a problem.

I did manage to find your March through April 2008 account.  This was during the height of Flash’s power where everyone from you Stephen to Patrick Chapman to the guy who won the Vintage portion of the previous Magic Invitational was calling Hulk-Flash the best deck ever:

If I called Flash the best deck, I was being facetious.  My article title, saying "the best deck ever?"? 

Take a look at what I wrote at the end:

I’m skeptical of the claim that Flash is the best deck ever, let alone the best deck in Vintage the moment. It’s not because I don’t believe them to be true, but because I think it remains yet to be determined.

Here are the metagame reports you missed:

June 20-August 15, 2007
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/14605_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Figures_Don8217t_Lie_But_Liars_Figure_A_Vintage_Metagame_Report.html

You can calculate the "rest of the metagame" statistic on your own easily. 

August 15-October, 2007
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/14972_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Vintage_By_The_Numbers.html

November-December, 2007
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/15238_So_Many_Insane_Plays_Rounding_Out_The_Vintage_Year.html

Jan-Feb, 2008
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/15594_So_Many_Insane_Plays_The_JanFeb_Vintage_Metagame_Report.html

Well, no one can know your individual meta but you and those you play with, however, the data from Stephen's reports show that Gush-bond was not always "the way to go" before it was restricted.  Flash and Shop decks performed just as well at various times and even Ichorid had consistent showings despite all the graveyard hate that was being packed into SBs back then.  Which is basically what you are saying in your last sentence.  I mean, if there are three or more archetypes that can compete with any other archetype, is that somehow a lopsided meta?  If "Fish, Shop, and Flash" (quoting you) are just as viable as Gush at various points, is that a problem then?  Fish, Shop and Flash made up a huge part of the meta back then, and when the Gush engine was 25% of the meta, Workshop was also 25% at the same time.  Note: I'm not advocating returning to the pre June 2008 restricted list, I'm just asking the question, "was is as lopsided as now?".  The metagame was far more diverse back then than it has been for the last 2 months, as far as the general metagame goes.  Do you interpret the data differently? 

This is exactly it.  Troy, you are quickly becoming a Vintage expert :p

I not only aggregated the data by archetype, but also by engine, so that we could see how each of the various Gush decks were performing against the field individually, but also in the aggregate.

This meta is totally dominated by Drain decks.  If you count Slaver and Oath in that group, better than 1 in 3 opponents is likely running Drains. 

In this article, I explained this a bit better.   There were a couple of decks overlapping, since I counted Slaver and Tez decks twice since a few Slaver decks were Tez hybrids. 

That's why  I broke the decks down by engine.

Here is the far more important stat (note I individually looked at Oath decks, most did not run Drain):

3. Breakdown by Engine – November/December

43 Mana Drain Decks (45% of Top 8s)
12 Null Rod Decks (13%) (estimate)
11 Mishra’s Workshop Decks (11%)
11 Bazaar of Bagdad Decks (11%)
10 Dark Ritual Decks (10%)
9 Other decks (9%)

That to me is the far more troubling statistic than the Tez statistic.   

Gush decks, as an ENGINE, were constantly at 25% of the field.    Mana Drain decks are 45%. 

Mana Drain decks are outperforming Gush decks in the 2nd Gush era by almost 2 to 1 (1.8 to 1). 

[Troy_Costisick]

Heya,

I did manage to find your March through April 2008 account.  This was during the height of Flash’s power where everyone from you Stephen to Patrick Chapman to the guy who won the Vintage portion of the previous Magic Invitational was calling Hulk-Flash the best deck ever:

If I called Flash the best deck, I was being facetious.  My article title, saying "the best deck ever?"? 

Take a look at what I wrote at the end:

I’m skeptical of the claim that Flash is the best deck ever, let alone the best deck in Vintage the moment. It’s not because I don’t believe them to be true, but because I think it remains yet to be determined.

I must have mistunderstood then, and I appologize about that.  I was taking and inference from your year in review for Vintage on Wizard's website.  I probably misquoted you then. 

[Akuma]

I always believe that the answer to metagame "problems" lies in the cards not in expanding the B/R list.

@Troy_Costisick - I couldn't have said it better myself.

@ Meadbert and Akuma, the problem is obviously Mana Drain.   Mana Drain decks make up WAAAAAY too much of top 8s, not Thirst for Knowledge.   Mana Drain is actually worse than Merchant Scroll in terms of its percentage of Top 8s.

Steve, I am in no way suggesting that anything be restricted, especially not Thirst for Knowledge. What I was trying to illustrate was that Thirst for Knowledge is currently the best card-drawing effect in Vintage, much like Gush was. One of the arguements that many people use to justify the restriction of Gush is that it was somehow pushing other draw spells / engines out of playability, but isn't that always the case in a format like Vintage?

[Eastman]

I totally agree with you Steve on probably the two key points in the article:

1.  Tezzeret is as good a mana drain deck as there has been since at least Gifts.  Anyone who has piloted a number of these decks would agree with this, it's better at controlling because the combo is so small, and it also has an 'oops I win' ability beyond really any of the other drain variants that I've played, it's really good.

2.  Mana Drain needn't be restricted.

This is something I'd elaborate on.  I hope you don't mind my revealing one statistic that is within the article: As a percentage of the metagame, Mana Drain decks have only increased from 41% to 45% (by % of top 8s)

You'll recall my mentioning at the start of the Tezzeret thread that I considered the time vault win to be simply better than any other win out there for Drains.  I think what we've seen is a consolidation of the mana drain decks being played into almost entirely Tezzeret, as opposed to a mix of salvager, painter, tendrils, and etc.

No one thought that the 41% Drain decks last time around warranted Drain's restriction.  So the only question is whether the consolidation into a single win condition is a problem.  If it were, I think it would counsel towards banning time vault (or the re-errata route, I personally think banning is less detrimental to the 'flavor' of the format then rewriting a card in the rulebook), but I'm not sure it is a problem.

In all likelihood, this consolidation will not continue, because some of the reasons for it happening are not static.  Consider: (A) vault combo is a new win, so almost every Drain player around wanted to try it out, this allure will be reversed when vault combo becomes the least innovative deck around, (B) people haven't been playing the cards that best hate this particular win - MD tormod's crypts will soon be replaced by pithing needles and gorilla shamans - and similar choices will start to be made in every deck in the format.

In short, since the number of drains hasn't really increased, mana drain isn't the culprit.  Since this consolidation of win conditions is a new trend, we should wait and see what happens.  Like you say in the article, if it's still this way in 6 months we have a different discussion. 

[Troy_Costisick]

In short, since the number of drains hasn't really increased, mana drain isn't the culprit.

If the percentage of Mana Drain decks in both reports is above 40 and indeed is now appraoching 50%, how does that mean Mana Drain isn't culprit?  In both reports, it makes up a significant part of the metagame.  It's a powerful metagame force in both!  No one thought it was a problem because in the previous report it had only been 2 months of that.  Now it's been four.  If anything, the point you illustrait denotes that Time Vault isn't the culprit.  The consolidation to Key-Tez-Vault made a 4% change.  That's it!  4%.  And let be honest here, Mana Drain isn't the sole culprit.  Also to blame the B/R list that constricts the number of viable archetypes (okay that and Tez is hella fun to play).  The DCI or WotC B/R Committee or whoever-the-heck it is that actually makes those kinds of decisions over at Wizards is responsible for the meta shift.  The B/R list should promote the generation of archetypes, not hose them IMHO.

[Smmenen]

The B/R list should promote the generation of archetypes, not hose them IMHO.

Troy, you are eloquent. 

I would suggest that you look back at Phil Stanton's archive and look at how Mana Drain decks performed in 2004 and 2005.  He aggregates them as a percentage of the metagame.  http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/archive.php?Article=Philip%20Stanton

It might be a helpful source of insight.   

@ Eastman: Good points.