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

[AmbivalentDuck]

The welder situation worked itself out naturally.  Also think about cards like Crucible of Worlds.  I remeber that when it was spoiled people speculated that every deck would need to run it because it was an answer to itself (crucible was the best answer to an opponent locking you with crucible strip).  But obviously that situation never arose. 

It's probably not unfair to classify some Stax variants as crucible decks (see Vroman comments on wanting to see it resolve over almost any other card in UbaStax).  That said, everyone runs at least 10 maindeck answers to it and most run many many more.  Fetch -> basic land, bounce, counterspells, grave removal, and your own crucible are all strong answers.  Welder is different because there were generic answers for graveyards and small creatures, even if Welder happened to be a particularly strong answer to itself.  Drains are in an entirely different category because the only strong categorical responses to 'spells' are Drains, FoW, spheres, and winning before your opponent can play anything.

I honestly wouldn't mind seeing Drain restricted, but I'd rather see Gush and Ponder unrestricted first.  Drains just happen to be in the best position to abuse Vault-Key/Tez right now.  The solution should be making more archetypes viable, not nerfing whatever engine best abuses vault every 6 months.

[Sean Ryan]

The problem with Null Rod is that it only shuts off Key/Vault.  All these decks play Tinker-DSC (or occasionally Titan), and you'll die to 11 damage per turn with your useless Null Rod.  The strength of these decks is Mana Drain backed up by most of the restricted list, not Vault/Key by itself.

Winner Winner Chicken Dinner!!!

The Drain shell adds consistency to the most broken cards in the game now with a new sleek combo finish.  TPS may have more raw power and a higher ratio of restricted cards but it comes at the cost of a high learning curve to smooth out the inconsistency.  Drains also let you maximize on your opponents mistakes leveraging play skill, where with TPS your results are more indicative of how far you can push the deck than the mistakes your opponent makes.  Nevertheless, Drains and Rituals abuse the restricted list better than anything out there.  Should we really be surprised by this or even desire things to be any different?   

Someone made a comment about the "Johnnie" effect that draws people toward the restricted cards and away from decks like Fish even if they are the best choice for a Drain based metagame.  I have had great success with Fish decks in the past, but haven't played one in awhile because I was tired of losing to tier 2 decks in the first round and then miss a top8 full of good matchups.  The recent UBg versions of Fish are especially susceptible to this problem.  And with Tinker-Colossus as the default Fish plan you really need access to white.

I would be interested to see Steve and other players as well run Tezz through a gauntlet of decks designed to beat it and then share the results.  Imagine if we even started a thread revolving around the issue here on the Manadrain instead of just whinning about what we don't like.  The gauntlet could begin with something like TPS, UW/x Fish list, and the recent Stax list TK placed with.  Anyone interested?  A topic for your next article Steve?   

[Negator13]

Ritual decks are in no way more difficult to play than Drain decks. It may take a certain amount of goldfishing and understanding of the deck's engines to figure out the mechanics of going off, but that in no way compares to the challenges of interactivity with opponents that Drain decks inherently come with. Mana Drain lends itself to the most skill-intensive and interactive types of gameplay. It is a skill-testing card whose power is a function of its controller's ability to leverage it vs. the opponent's knowledge of how to minimize its impact. For these reasons alone I think it should not be a candidate for restriction.

Also, I must say I really don't understand the mentality of the highest-played cards in a given metagame being automatic targets for restriction. There is always going to be a most-played card, a most-popular strategy. If you always want to restrict the most played card, you're going to want to restrict the next ones and the next ones and ad infinitum. I 100% agree with many peoples' calls to unrestrict as many cards as possible, increasing the number of broken strategies so that they play to one anothers' weaknesses and balance each other out. In a metagame where Trinisphere, Gush, and Mana Drain are all unrestricted, for example, the Gush decks beat the Drain decks while the 3 sphere decks hold the Gush decks in place, opening room for Ritual decks and Null Rod decks etc etc.

If we keep restricting cards left and right every time a new best deck emerges, which is always going to happen no matter what, very soon we're going to be playing Highlander. We pretty much are as it is given last Summer's massive and uncalled-for restrictions. Brainstorm and Scroll should definitely have been axed but restricting a cantrip, a card that is dependent on BS/Scroll to work, and a fragile combo card which is also very dependent on BS/Scroll was a heavy-handed act of knee-jerk blanket-policy that has set precedent towards turning this format into Highlander or Legacy + P9. That is not the way to go to make Vintage a serious and respectable format.

[Sean Ryan]

Ritual decks are in no way more difficult to play than Drain decks. It may take a certain amount of goldfishing and understanding of the deck's engines to figure out the mechanics of going off, but that in no way compares to the challenges of interactivity with opponents that Drain decks inherently come with. Mana Drain lends itself to the most skill-intensive and interactive types of gameplay. It is a skill-testing card whose power is a function of its controller's ability to leverage it vs. the opponent's knowledge of how to minimize its impact. For these reasons alone I think it should not be a candidate for restriction.

Good reasons not to restrict Mana Drain, but I disagree with your analysis of TPS compared to Drain decks.  Don't get me wrong, you can certainly be successful with Storm combo with moderate skill, but there is another level of skill employed by a very few skilled masters that is on another level and I would argue is needed to win against top players.  Heres the best way I can say it, TPS plays itself in the hands of the average pilot, but the master can push the deck to win with precision in very narrow situations.  Similar to in MMA or boxing, it's much easier to be a reactive fighter and capitalize off your opponents mistakes than to open up and extend yourself skillfully without getting caught. 

I'm not saying Drains aren't skill intensive, the Drain match is one of the most skill intensive matches you will ever play, but there is a reason TPS doesn't see as much play as Drains yet manages to win many of the highest profile tourneys by the best players.

I am in just about full agreement with the rest of your post, people need to quit their whining and start focusing on developing winning strategies.  If anything bring back Gush and Ponder to see if things balance out. 
   

[reaperbong]

The strength of these decks is Mana Drain backed up by most of the restricted list, not Vault/Key by itself.

Can you honestly say though that - 3x Mana Drain, + 3x Counterspell/Mana Leak/Negate would nerf the Tezz deck? I find this highly doubtful.

Mana Drain gives you mana.  It is mana acceleration.  Counterspell/Mana Leak/Negate are not.

I asked if you thought -3x Mana Drain would nerf this deck, I'm guessing you don't have much experience with Tez then or you wouldn't come with such a half-assed answer that doesn't even address the real question. Like i don't know what mana acceleration is wtf? Vault-Key combo costs a total of 4 colorless mana, if you really think colorless off a Mana Drain is so crucial for this deck to go off then you're wrong. Restricting Mana Drain would put only a minor dent in this deck's shell.

[Troy_Costisick]

The problem with Null Rod is that it only shuts off Key/Vault.  All these decks play Tinker-DSC (or occasionally Titan), and you'll die to 11 damage per turn with your useless Null Rod.

Well, it does shut down a sizeable portion of their mana base too as well as random junk like Top and EE.  You're right that it doesn't protect you against Tinker-DSC, but every deck out there now should be packing some answer to that play.  IMHO, it's the strongest single play in Vintage right now.  Decks that fail to prepare for that combo do so at their own peril.

  The strength of these decks is Mana Drain backed up by most of the restricted list, not Vault/Key by itself.

I agree with you 100%.  Without Key, the deck could still untap Time Vault with Tez.  Without Vault and Key, they'd just need to untap with Tez in play and have 5 or so artifacts on their side to win (super easy when you think about it).  Key/Vault is strong.  There's absolutely no denying that, but it's hardly the only reason Tez Control decks are winning.

Peace,

-Troy

[M.Solymossy]

I asked if you thought -3x Mana Drain would nerf this deck, I'm guessing you don't have much experience with Tez then or you wouldn't come with such a half-assed answer that doesn't even address the real question. Like i don't know what mana acceleration is wtf? Vault-Key combo costs a total of 4 colorless mana, if you really think colorless off a Mana Drain is so crucial for this deck to go off then you're wrong. Restricting Mana Drain would put only a minor dent in this deck's shell.

Mana Acceleration means cards that give you more mana than they cost, hense accelerating your mana.  Restricting Mana Drain will seriously be dumb, and I'll just play rituals until the end of time.  That is all.

[dicemanx]

The strength of these decks is Mana Drain backed up by most of the restricted list, not Vault/Key by itself.

Can you honestly say though that - 3x Mana Drain, + 3x Counterspell/Mana Leak/Negate would nerf the Tezz deck? I find this highly doubtful.

Mana Drain gives you mana.  It is mana acceleration.  Counterspell/Mana Leak/Negate are not.

I asked if you thought -3x Mana Drain would nerf this deck, I'm guessing you don't have much experience with Tez then or you wouldn't come with such a half-assed answer that doesn't even address the real question. Like i don't know what mana acceleration is wtf? Vault-Key combo costs a total of 4 colorless mana, if you really think colorless off a Mana Drain is so crucial for this deck to go off then you're wrong. Restricting Mana Drain would put only a minor dent in this deck's shell.

He didn't argue that Mana Drain is crucial "to go off". Restricting Mana Drain would in fact put a significant dent in the deck's shell. Here's a tip: you don't have to insult someone in your arguments to make your point.

The problem with Null Rod is that it only shuts off Key/Vault.  All these decks play Tinker-DSC (or occasionally Titan), and you'll die to 11 damage per turn with your useless Null Rod.

The hitting of Vault/Key is incidental - Null Rod should be there to attack the mana base primarily. In fact I would think that Null Rod strategies would be even more powerful against Drain archetypes because the lack of Brainstorm makes it more difficult to dig out of clamps on the mana, and TfK is a little too mana intensive to efficiently dig for answers or for lands. I wonder perhaps whether Kirdape's UW Fish Deck that ran both Null Rod and Chalice of the Void might be even more effective in this meta.

The problem is that WGD takes 3 cards, is dependant on the graveyard, must have a full deck solely dedicated to the combo(transformational sides aside), is vulnerable to much more hate, takes more deck slots, and is a narrow path to victory. Key/vault is 2 cards, dependant on nothing more than mana, can be splashed into almost any deck reasonably, is vulnerable to only limited/narrow/easy to handle hate, takes 2 deck slots, and still leaves you open to other win conditions like tinker+man/Will+Tendrils/any creature. I know you told me not to discuss it but...

You're exactly making my point by continuing this argument. I warned you that if you attempted to do this you would be missing the point of my post.

[Nehptis]

I'm going to continue to beat this point to death because I think everything else serves as a distraction.  Vault/Key is the problem.   Remove that combo from Vintage, let things settle for 3 months and then let's look at Drain dominance and unrestrictions.

I know the old saying...Stats don't lie.  But, liars can use stats.   Still, check this out:

5 out of the 8 used Vault.  The #8 deck could have used it, too!:
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=992&highlight=Time_Vault

4 out of the 8 used Vault.  The #4 and 8 decks could have used it, too!:
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=981&highlight=Time_Vault

This one is my favorite of them all.  It supports my point that we are in a "Vault" vs "Vault hate" meta game.  3 Null Rod / Fish Decks.  2 Vault Decks.  And the #8 deck is a non-Rod Fish deck with Vault!  If that doesn't sum up the abomination of Vault, then I don't know what does:
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=995&highlight=Time_Vault

DCI, please act!

[Purple Hat]

I'm going to continue to beat this point to death because I think everything else serves as a distraction.  Vault/Key is the problem.   Remove that combo from Vintage, let things settle for 3 months and then let's look at Drain dominance and unrestrictions.

I know the old saying...Stats don't lie.  But, liars can use stats.   Still, check this out:

5 out of the 8 used Vault.  The #8 deck could have used it, too!:
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=992&highlight=Time_Vault

4 out of the 8 used Vault.  The #4 and 8 decks could have used it, too!:
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=981&highlight=Time_Vault

This one is my favorite of them all.  It supports my point that we are in a "Vault" vs "Vault hate" meta game.  3 Null Rod / Fish Decks.  2 Vault Decks.  And the #8 deck is a non-Rod Fish deck with Vault!  If that doesn't sum up the abomination of Vault, then I don't know what does:
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=995&highlight=Time_Vault

DCI, please act!

I'm just gonna refer you to all of the Ban x card disuccions we've had here in the past.

bottom line: WE DON'T BAN CARDS FOR POWER REASONS IN VINTAGE.

You want to ban things cus they're too broken go play legacy.

[reaperbong]

The strength of these decks is Mana Drain backed up by most of the restricted list, not Vault/Key by itself.

Can you honestly say though that - 3x Mana Drain, + 3x Counterspell/Mana Leak/Negate would nerf the Tezz deck? I find this highly doubtful.

Mana Drain gives you mana.  It is mana acceleration.  Counterspell/Mana Leak/Negate are not.

I asked if you thought -3x Mana Drain would nerf this deck, I'm guessing you don't have much experience with Tez then or you wouldn't come with such a half-assed answer that doesn't even address the real question. Like i don't know what mana acceleration is wtf? Vault-Key combo costs a total of 4 colorless mana, if you really think colorless off a Mana Drain is so crucial for this deck to go off then you're wrong. Restricting Mana Drain would put only a minor dent in this deck's shell.

He didn't argue that Mana Drain is crucial "to go off". Restricting Mana Drain would in fact put a significant dent in the deck's shell. Here's a tip: you don't have to insult someone in your arguments to make your point.

A significant dent? The reason to restrict something is to nerf the archetype not to put a dent in it. How significant or not is highly debatable and so I think it's funny how this debate is ignored by a person who appears supportive of Mana Drain's restriction. This is the sole reasoning behind the restriction, so if it's not going to knock down the Tez archetype then why is it even being discussed?

Also here's a tip: people are more civil if you don't patronize them.

[dicemanx]

A significant dent? The reason to restrict something is to nerf the archetype not to put a dent in it. How significant or not is highly debatable and so I think it's funny how this debate is ignored by a person who appears supportive of Mana Drain's restriction. This is the sole reasoning behind the restriction, so if it's not going to knock down the Tez archetype then why is it even being discussed?

Restrictions don't have to nerf the archetype; it is OK to bring it down a notch instead so that it is more "fair".

Also here's a tip: people are more civil if you don't patronize them.

Try being civil anyways.

[Tha Gunslinga]

I asked if you thought -3x Mana Drain would nerf this deck, I'm guessing you don't have much experience with Tez then or you wouldn't come with such a half-assed answer that doesn't even address the real question.

First of all, I find your insults laughable, especially coming from someone with "bong" in their username.

Second, you cannot "nerf" that deck.  Why?  Because that "deck" is just Drains plus restricted cards plus a win condition.  You could run Morphling over Vault/Key and it would still be decent.  Why?  Because you have 4 Drains, 30 restricted cards, and Yawgmoth's Will to replay them.

Finally, Vault/Key cannot go away.  Wizards refuses to ban cards, and they are not going to re-errata Vault.  So please don't bring up that argument, because it's pointless and simply WILL NOT happen.

[Nehptis]

Finally, Vault/Key cannot go away.  Wizards refuses to ban cards, and they are not going to re-errata Vault.  So please don't bring up that argument, because it's pointless and simply WILL NOT happen. 

I try to stay away from absolutes when discussing the DCI's actions.  The main reason I do this is because until they disclose a very transparent methodology to their decision making process, it will always be a black box to us players.  And a black box process is always open to speculation, interpretation, inconsistencies and exceptions.

For example, they do Ban cards: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/af186.  My favorite line in this article is this one:  "Consider the list of cards banned in Vintage to now include ante cards, dexterity cards, and subgame cards. Simple."  What prevents them from adding one more item to that list....not much IMO!

And to suggest that they won't re-errata Vault is presumptuous, too.  They've already errata-ed Vault a few times already.  What's 1 more change?  Nothing is sacred to them and nothing is sacred to us either.  I mean we are currently debating Restricting Drain, a Vintage Pillar.

My suggestion, we need a huge reset, more than what we just experienced with Brainstorm.  Minor tweaks to the format aren't cutting it anymore.

Here's what should be done.  Get rid of Yawgwill.  It will always pose a problem once other strategies like Drain and Shop become weakened.  And YWill will always magnify the brokenness potential of other cards.  Next errata or ban Vault so that the infinite turn combo is killed.  Once those two major deterants to the metagame are resolved the Restricted list can start from scratch, and IMO be a very short list.

[Smmenen]

A significant dent? The reason to restrict something is to nerf the archetype not to put a dent in it. How significant or not is highly debatable and so I think it's funny how this debate is ignored by a person who appears supportive of Mana Drain's restriction. This is the sole reasoning behind the restriction, so if it's not going to knock down the Tez archetype then why is it even being discussed?

Restrictions don't have to nerf the archetype; it is OK to bring it down a notch instead so that it is more "fair".

Exactly.  See Trinisphere. 

[Purple Hat]

Finally, Vault/Key cannot go away.  Wizards refuses to ban cards, and they are not going to re-errata Vault.  So please don't bring up that argument, because it's pointless and simply WILL NOT happen. 

I try to stay away from absolutes when discussing the DCI's actions.  The main reason I do this is because until they disclose a very transparent methodology to their decision making process, it will always be a black box to us players.  And a black box process is always open to speculation, interpretation, inconsistencies and exceptions.

For example, they do Ban cards: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/af186.  My favorite line in this article is this one:  "Consider the list of cards banned in Vintage to now include ante cards, dexterity cards, and subgame cards. Simple."  What prevents them from adding one more item to that list....not much IMO!

And to suggest that they won't re-errata Vault is presumptuous, too.  They've already errata-ed Vault a few times already.  What's 1 more change?  Nothing is sacred to them and nothing is sacred to us either.  I mean we are currently debating Restricting Drain, a Vintage Pillar.

My suggestion, we need a huge reset, more than what we just experienced with Brainstorm.  Minor tweaks to the format aren't cutting it anymore.

Here's what should be done.  Get rid of Yawgwill.  It will always pose a problem once other strategies like Drain and Shop become weakened.  And YWill will always magnify the brokenness potential of other cards.  Next errata or ban Vault so that the infinite turn combo is killed.  Once those two major deterants to the metagame are resolved the Restricted list can start from scratch, and IMO be a very short list.

And worldgorger dragon, cus the rules shouldn't work like that.  And Lotus, moxes and ancestral cus they were all mistakes to begin with.  And timewalk, way too cheap for that effect.  Do you know how many times I've lost because my opponent got to go twice in a row?  And for only 2 mana?  While we're at it Academy is way too good, that thing taps for like 10 blue in stax, and that just shouldn't be allowed.  And what about Necro and Bargain.  Life for cards?  No thank you, that's just so over powered.  And strip mine, that card is just unfair.

I think you're on the wrong forums.
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

The problem is that WGD takes 3 cards, is dependant on the graveyard, must have a full deck solely dedicated to the combo(transformational sides aside), is vulnerable to much more hate, takes more deck slots, and is a narrow path to victory. Key/vault is 2 cards, dependant on nothing more than mana, can be splashed into almost any deck reasonably, is vulnerable to only limited/narrow/easy to handle hate, takes 2 deck slots, and still leaves you open to other win conditions like tinker+man/Will+Tendrils/any creature. I know you told me not to discuss it but...

You're exactly making my point by continuing this argument. I warned you that if you attempted to do this you would be missing the point of my post.

I didn't miss the point of your post you seem to have missed the point of mine. You can't just make an arbitrary comparison and assume it nullifies my reasonable one. Key/vault is more powerful than bargain while WGD combo isn't even close. You're well aware of the many flaws in the WGD combo and that's why it is rarely run. Yet here we have month after month of key/vault dominance on a scale that is calling people to restrict the vintage staple mana drain which is nothing more than the current substitute for dark ritual in a key/vault deck. Go ahead and restrict mana drain Solly is right, people will just move to rituals. Most likely to power out key/vault. Once again every other archetype out there has gained more card quantity as of late while drains have just been losing them. Yet vault gets a re-errata and they print voltaic key+2CC Trinket Mage in the same card and presto you have 50% drain dominance.

Ya sure the planeswalker is good by himself, that is why he is being run. The bottom line is though that most of the time he is just used to fetch vault and supplement voltaic key. People seem to be forgeting that not only does it take 4 artifacts and no blockers to swing for the win but even a Tarpan can attack for 1 damage each turn and completely stop you from making 5/5 artifact creatures. Heaven forbid they run more than just Tarpan and 1-hit KO the planeswalker with a goyf or multiple creatures.

Second, you cannot "nerf" that deck.  Why?  Because that "deck" is just Drains plus restricted cards plus a win condition.  You could run Morphling over Vault/Key and it would still be decent.  Why?  Because you have 4 Drains, 30 restricted cards, and Yawgmoth's Will to replay them.

Last I checked drains weren't 50% dominance without key/vault and even if they were and I missed out on something gifts at the peak of its game wasn't as dominant as tezz right now and Gifts had 4xscroll, 4xbrainstorm, and 4xgifts. Yes drain deck will still be powerful that is the point of vintage but key/vault pulls wins out of your ass with almost no effort. You're already going to be running draw spells/tutors/counters oh look thats all you need to just slap this combo in there and win. I agree that you can't nerf the deck by restricting drains or a draw engine.

Finally, Vault/Key cannot go away.  Wizards refuses to ban cards, and they are not going to re-errata Vault.  So please don't bring up that argument, because it's pointless and simply WILL NOT happen.

Unban Shahrazad and ban time vault if theres only 1 slot allotted to non-dexterous cards. Make it a MTG Vintage Rule that just cuts out the minigame and makes your opponent lose 1/2 his life automatically it still will never be played and nobody will ever give a shit about it other than it being a random casual card.

Finally, Vault/Key cannot go away.  Wizards refuses to ban cards, and they are not going to re-errata Vault.  So please don't bring up that argument, because it's pointless and simply WILL NOT happen. 

I try to stay away from absolutes when discussing the DCI's actions.  The main reason I do this is because until they disclose a very transparent methodology to their decision making process, it will always be a black box to us players.  And a black box process is always open to speculation, interpretation, inconsistencies and exceptions.

For example, they do Ban cards: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/af186.  My favorite line in this article is this one:  "Consider the list of cards banned in Vintage to now include ante cards, dexterity cards, and subgame cards. Simple."  What prevents them from adding one more item to that list....not much IMO!

And to suggest that they won't re-errata Vault is presumptuous, too.  They've already errata-ed Vault a few times already.  What's 1 more change?  Nothing is sacred to them and nothing is sacred to us either.  I mean we are currently debating Restricting Drain, a Vintage Pillar.

My suggestion, we need a huge reset, more than what we just experienced with Brainstorm.  Minor tweaks to the format aren't cutting it anymore.

Here's what should be done.  Get rid of Yawgwill.  It will always pose a problem once other strategies like Drain and Shop become weakened.  And YWill will always magnify the brokenness potential of other cards.  Next errata or ban Vault so that the infinite turn combo is killed.  Once those two major deterants to the metagame are resolved the Restricted list can start from scratch, and IMO be a very short list.

Yawgmoth's Will is weaker than key/vault and banning it just leaves Legacy. I've always firmly thought that the difference between Vintage and Legacy isn't P9 or restrictions, its Yawgmoth's Will. I don't think the format goes to will vs anti-will decks as should be evident by the fact that Ichorid has been playable since it was first designed. Assuming Will was as warping as people like you think it was then the amount of maindeck graveyard hate for Will should have destroyed Ichorid without a second glance. Not to mention if replaying cards is bad, ban regrowth. It is the absoloot bawlz when you have a broken card in your graveyard just like Will.

[M.Solymossy]

You guys are ALL missing the point.  I'm unsure why we don't have a forum for only Full Users to state their opinions.   Things like Banning Yawgmoth's Will, or anything other than cards that create a sub-game, use dexterity, or require ante.  This is simple.   


I hope the moderators lock this thread too, because It's very much so like the other train wreck.

[LordHomerCat]

I would like to add my agreement to everything PurpleHat said.  Seriously, if you want to ban cards, there's a whole format where you can't do anything powerful called Legacy.  "Getting rid" of Vault is not a realistic option because we don't ban or errata cards for power level reasons in Vintage.  That's the way it is.  Please move on to something else.

Also, I mean really, Will is weaker than Vault?  Come on, I can't take anything you say seriously when you say things like that =/

[mike_bergeron]

For example, they do Ban cards: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/af186.  My favorite line in this article is this one:  "Consider the list of cards banned in Vintage to now include ante cards, dexterity cards, and subgame cards. Simple."  What prevents them from adding one more item to that list....not much IMO!

I do not think that continuing to expand on these items would be a good idea.  In fact, I think it would hurt the format more- if you were in a continual state of flux with power cards, and were always afraid that if one deck becomes too popular it will become banned, it would not be a fun format to play in. 

Plus, once you ban Yawg Will, now cards like Welder, Workshop and Mind's Desire are even more powerful than they were before? (strange concept i guess, but in my mind it works)  In my mind, the more you ban, the more poweful the rest of the pool becomes in terms of deckbuilding. 

I love 2 drop aggro creatures, but I am not in the camp that we should ban everything until we are seeing standstill versus r/g beats every month.  Banning things is bad.  It shouldn't happen, unless there is a mistake.  I enjoy playing against control players, and people who like to abuse the cards that are printed, but I think the format would take a huge step back if the DCI/Wizards said "Ok we need to get rid of Yawg. Will because it has become too powerful".  Of course, 6 months later they would be saying "OK, now Goblin Welder is bad too, so that is gone now." 

I love playing tarmogoyf, goddock teeg, etc.  I don't want you to HAVE to play them because there is nothing else leftover!  I feel like if we go down this road of banning, that will be the case.

[dicemanx]

I didn't miss the point of your post you seem to have missed the point of mine. You can't just make an arbitrary comparison and assume it nullifies my reasonable one. Key/vault is more powerful than bargain while WGD combo isn't even close.

I suppose the irony of these three consecutive statements is completely lost on you.

Let me reiterate my point: it is unconvincing to argue for restriction by making comparisons of power levels of cards outside of the context of the decks they are played in. I merely demonstrated how arbitrary the arguments can become by using the WGD combo example; just because you accuse my argument as being arbitrary and your argument as the "reasonable one" doesn't automatically make it so. In essence, your rebuttal is "but..but..it IS too powerful!". See? I get your point, you didn't have to repeat it again, and your attack on the strength of the WGD combo was rather pointless as I warned you it would be.

I suggest you allow for the possibility that Tezzeret is dominating because of preference or what I've termed previously as the fulfillment of a prophecy, and appreciate that it takes a little time to verify whether the deck is truly too busted for the format. It is simply paradoxical that you can remove one of the most critical tools of Drain archetypes (Brainstorm) while hardly weakening other archetypes, and all of a sudden the Drain decks become even more busted.

[mike_bergeron]

You guys are ALL missing the point.  I'm unsure why we don't have a forum for only Full Users to state their opinions.   Things like Banning Yawgmoth's Will, or anything other than cards that create a sub-game, use dexterity, or require ante.  This is simple.   


I hope the moderators lock this thread too, because It's very much so like the other train wreck.

I agree with your points Soly, as I said in my reply, but don't kill all basic users because of 2-3 posts recently. 

[Troy_Costisick]

Yet here we have month after month of key/vault dominance on a scale that is calling people to restrict the vintage staple mana drain which is nothing more than the current substitute for dark ritual in a key/vault deck. Go ahead and restrict mana drain Solly is right, people will just move to rituals.

I know you're new here, so I just want to try to help you understand where people are coming from.  I want you go through this entire thread and find everyone who said that Mana Drain should be restricted.  Then, in a post, list their username and quote their exact words where they say that.  I think if you do, it will be very enlightening for you.

Peace,

-Troy

[God_Campbell]

Yes, I think the actual amounts of players lobbying for the restriction of Mana Drain is centered on a few individuals and they have more of a hate for Drain rather then it will help the metagame.

Mana Drain is one of the "Vintage Pillars", and as such it helps create that framework of the format,  right now people are partying in the Drain wing, doesn't mean the other wings of the awesome mansion can't have their weekends as well just means the decks need to be tweaked to focus on the Tezz match( ie Landstill, U/W Fish, Long, TK Stacks.

This metagame is deserve, and if more people actually packed null Rods in their decks, Vault/Key would not be that large of a problem, heck around our area people know that Tezz is weak to rod so everyone and their moms brings a set to the table.

[M.Solymossy]

I believe it was Peter who said it best....

maybe now people will play the right number of null rods in their deck:  4

Heres a list I've been playing on MWS lately, and it completely ROLLS the tezzeret player.

// Lands
    3 Mishra's Factory
    3 Mountain
    4 Wasteland
    1 Strip Mine
    1 Tolarian Academy
    4 Mishra's Workshop

// Creatures
    4 Solemn Simulacrum
    4 Goblin Welder

// Spells
    1 Sol Ring
    1 Mox Sapphire
    1 Mox Pearl
    1 Mox Ruby
    1 Mox Jet
    1 Black Lotus
    1 Mox Emerald
    1 Mana Vault
    1 Mana Crypt
    3 Thorn of Amethyst
    4 Chalice of the Void
    4 Sphere of Resistance
    4 Tangle Wire
    1 Trinisphere
    4 Smokestack
    3 Crucible of Worlds
    4 Null Rod

// Sideboard
SB: 3 Ensnaring Bridge
SB: 3 Shattering Spree
SB: 3 Pyroblast
SB: 4 Leyline of the Void
SB: 2 Razormane Masticore

[Nehptis]

So, if one half of the players pack Vault and the other half "and their moms" bring Null Rods then doesn't that leave us in a 2 sided meta?  It does and is not a place where I like Vintage to remain for too long.

The counter-point to the above which I find interesting is that I am not bothered by the fact that in most decks that I play, I need to allocate a large portion of my SB to the Ich matchup.  For some reason the idea that I need to prepare heavily for Vault/Key bugs me a lot more.

I think the amount of posts in this thread and the other shows that there is a very large and lively debate raging within at least the TMD arena of Vintage.  That's good!  To suggest that this thread should be locked simply because of disagreements with other's opinions is not correct.  Why was that other thread locked? (see for yourself: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=37360.210).

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

I didn't miss the point of your post you seem to have missed the point of mine. You can't just make an arbitrary comparison and assume it nullifies my reasonable one. Key/vault is more powerful than bargain while WGD combo isn't even close.

I suppose the irony of these three consecutive statements is completely lost on you.

Let me reiterate my point: it is unconvincing to argue for restriction by making comparisons of power levels of cards outside of the context of the decks they are played in. I merely demonstrated how arbitrary the arguments can become by using the WGD combo example; just because you accuse my argument as being arbitrary and your argument as the "reasonable one" doesn't automatically make it so. In essence, your rebuttal is "but..but..it IS too powerful!". See? I get your point, you didn't have to repeat it again, and your attack on the strength of the WGD combo was rather pointless as I warned you it would be.

I suggest you allow for the possibility that Tezzeret is dominating because of preference or what I've termed previously as the fulfillment of a prophecy, and appreciate that it takes a little time to verify whether the deck is truly too busted for the format. It is simply paradoxical that you can remove one of the most critical tools of Drain archetypes (Brainstorm) while hardly weakening other archetypes, and all of a sudden the Drain decks become even more busted.

As I said I agree that we should wait until June before we do something I'm not advocating emergency ban or errata. However, your last sentence proves my point in spades. The only answer to that statement I can think of is Time Vault. You'd think that with drains and rituals losing brainstorm shops would be at the 50% T-8s. Not only did shops lose nothing but they also gained another sphere for control builds, got some nice creatures for aggro builds, can now run FoW, and got somewhat of a metalworker+defence grid creature.

Yet here we have month after month of key/vault dominance on a scale that is calling people to restrict the vintage staple mana drain which is nothing more than the current substitute for dark ritual in a key/vault deck. Go ahead and restrict mana drain Solly is right, people will just move to rituals.

I know you're new here, so I just want to try to help you understand where people are coming from.  I want you go through this entire thread and find everyone who said that Mana Drain should be restricted.  Then, in a post, list their username and quote their exact words where they say that.  I think if you do, it will be very enlightening for you.

Peace,

-Troy

There are probably few people throughout the 2 ban/restricted threads advocating the restricting of mana drain but that hasn't stopped people from presenting data or opinions that would support this restriction. I don't have the time to sift through 10+pages of opinions but that doesn't mean that wizards doesn't have sufficient evidence to justify the restriction if it were to happen. The majority or people, myself included, think that mana drain itself should be unrestricted but something needs to happen to the archetype if it keeps up this dominance.

So, if one half of the players pack Vault and the other half "and their moms" bring Null Rods then doesn't that leave us in a 2 sided meta?  It does and is not a place where I like Vintage to remain for too long.

The counter-point to the above which I find interesting is that I am not bothered by the fact that in most decks that I play, I need to allocate a large portion of my SB to the Ich matchup.  For some reason the idea that I need to prepare heavily for Vault/Key bugs me a lot more.

I think the amount of posts in this thread and the other shows that there is a very large and lively debate raging within at least the TMD arena of Vintage.  That's good!  To suggest that this thread should be locked simply because of disagreements with other's opinions is not correct.  Why was that other thread locked? (see for yourself: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=37360.210).

Exactly my point. You can't restrict the combo pieces they're already only run as 1-ofs and the metagame is still becoming vault/key vs anti-vault/key. Sure you can try to bring a different deck but either the vault/key decks will roll you or the anti-vault/key decks will roll you since they're completely different decks and you can't possibly prepare for both. This is putting aside extremely skilled players and total lucksacks niether of which should be deciding factors considering most vintage players are niether.

[zeus-online]

I don't get this at all...
Tez isn't really that much faster then older drain decks, or that much more disruptive...so why the rod vs. vault debate?

Long, TPS and Ad nauseam still seems like they'd be able to easily race the combination...It's merely the old control vs. combo match-up again, nothing new, and the way it's played out is the same since the vault/key combination isn't fast enough to race ritual based combo.

Then we have fish, fish is ALWAYS about null rod, so nothing new about that.

Shops...Well they might be "forced" to run rod, but that's not so bad since null rod is quite good in general.

Oath can race the combo...It's just a race, and oath has more disruption, but less draw...so in a long game Tez should win, but in a short game oath should have the advantage.

Drain mirrors remain the same...It's a battle over ancestral mostly, and after that win-conditions or more draw-spells. If you rush the combo, you are likely to loose as always.

Ichorid is still faster unless you take that random chance to have the vault/key combo in your first seven cards into account.
So again, no difference in how the match-up plays out. One thing is better for Tez then previous drain decks though, they can race ichorid without the yard (Avoiding leylines), although they're still pretty likely to fail before SB.

I don't see why it would or should be a null rod vs. tez environment? If i was playing combo i'd much rather play against Tez then U/W Fish for example. (Although shops as always is exactly the opposite)

I agree that vault/key is an abomination, but it's not worse then will and not really a faster kill then what gifts, gush.dec or control slaver could muster.

/Zeus

Ps. Read my signature ^^

[wiley]

Last I checked drains weren't 50% dominance without key/vault and even if they were and I missed out on something gifts at the peak of its game wasn't as dominant as tezz right now and Gifts had 4xscroll, 4xbrainstorm, and 4xgifts.

You have apparently missed out on the majority of the past ~14 years.  While drains may not have been so consolidated before (though, even now tez is only 1/2 of drain engines in the top 8s) drain has held majority in competitive vintage.  I urge you to go back through the old meta reports from Steven and Phillip Stanton.

Like I said in my last post, this really isn't anything new.  The only difference is the combo at the end of the shell.  There is absolutely nothing you can do to this combo, which is already run in singleton, and the shell is likewise impossible to destroy and is very hard to damage through any means of restriction.

Also, I do not believe it is a rod vs. vault debate, I believe it is a rod vs. format debate.  Rod shuts of moxen, which combats y will fairly effectively (though it needs to be backed by other things) in addition to having a greater effect than before on fringe decks thanks to the loss of brainstorm, shuts off vault, shuts off grindstone (until they find a red blast), shuts off slaver, and shuts off some creatures like metalworker and trike.  That means that currently null rod has an immediate and highly relevant effect against 45% (which is a rise from ~30% last data set) of the expected top 8s as well as having splash damage against everything but ichorid, burn and goblins (and it still has an effect on goblins most of the time).

[Troy_Costisick]

Yet here we have month after month of key/vault dominance on a scale that is calling people to restrict the vintage staple mana drain which is nothing more than the current substitute for dark ritual in a key/vault deck. Go ahead and restrict mana drain Solly is right, people will just move to rituals.

I know you're new here, so I just want to try to help you understand where people are coming from.  I want you go through this entire thread and find everyone who said that Mana Drain should be restricted.  Then, in a post, list their username and quote their exact words where they say that.  I think if you do, it will be very enlightening for you.

Peace,

-Troy

There are probably few people throughout the 2 ban/restricted threads advocating the restricting of mana drain but that hasn't stopped people from presenting data or opinions that would support this restriction.

It's not probably, it's definately.  And the data you're citing to "support this restriction" could be intereted to support a multitude of things.  You're interepting it to mean advocation for Mana Drain's restriction which is totally not what the participants in this thread are doing.  It often causes problems- especially in online forums- when participants try to guess or assume at the meaning of another person's post.  If you aren't reasonably sure what a person's intent was behind a statement, then there's nothing wrong to ask them point blank what they mean or what they are advocating. 

I don't have the time to sift through 10+pages of opinions but that doesn't mean that wizards doesn't have sufficient evidence to justify the restriction if it were to happen.

First, I was talking about this thread and this thread only.  I thought I was clear about that.  Saying you don't have time to go back and read what people have written is a pretty weak answer.  How can anyone take what you say seriously if you haven't gone back and studied their positions?  Is it any wonder you find people disagreeing with you?  I'm trying to be as charitable in my reading of your posts as I can, but admitting to not analyzing what's been said in the past and then asserting that it might be "sufficient evidence to justify the restriction it it were to happen" is really an outrageous statement.  It's evident that you have no clear idea what exactly is contained within those pages of posts.

The majority or people, myself included, think that mana drain itself should be unrestricted but...

You'd be hard pressed to find a time when the DCI restricted something that a majority of the community decidedly felt should remain unrestricted.  Of all the restrictions ever made, you could probably count the ones that fall under that catagory on one hand.  Stephen has well documented many of the restrictions of the past.  You ought to check out what he has written about them or search the archives at magicthegathering.com yourself for the rationale for each restriction.  With the exception of the June 20, 2008 restrictions, they have done a pretty decent job in the past of explaining why they restricted or unrestricted a card.  I do not always agree with their reasoning, but at least they do offer reasons.

...something needs to happen to the archetype if it keeps up this dominance

Well, you might be right about that.  I happen to agree with that statement.  However, isn't part of the players' jobs to find a solution in the card pool as well?  The DCI isn't the only entity involved in creating the metagame.

Peace,

-Troy