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

[Qube]

But we don't have to say something is better than the other... The more proxys you can use, the "better", meaned of the brokeness-factor, deck you run.

For me there is just the question, isn't it a little boring after a few time to play 1-3 mirrormatches per tournament? I like it very to change decks, as every deck is played a bit different. that is for me more interessting than to play the same deck over a long time.

[Troy_Costisick]

In Prague we've typically had 10 proxy events and you had to pay ~ $1 for each proxy. I'm proud to say though that there is a real movement to ban proxies, starting 2009 we are holding no proxy tournaments in Czech (Brno+Prague), although anything still goes on normal Friday night tourneys.

You can't deny that this is a huge factor in the meta even with 10 proxies. Take Goblins for example, someone here tried to make the claim that Goblins being played in Europe is merely a sign of a warped anti-Tez meta. Of course Goblins have been around a lot longer then Tez, but why play Goblins in the US when you can proxy up the latest Meandeck anyway?

Don't mean to derail the discussion, but I do find this relevant to the issue at hand.

Then don't derail it.  It's a simple thing to start a new thread on this topic by quoting from this one.  In fact, it would probably be a decent discussion to have.  If the US and Euro metagames is an issue that really interests you, then I would encourage you to start a new discussion about it.  I'm sure there are many who would like to express themselves on it.

Peace,

-Troy

[God_Campbell]

Quote from: God_Campbell on Yesterday at 08:15:34 AM
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.

As someone who's been playing Drains off and on for the last 6 years, I find your argument laughable, especially since I split my last tournament maybe a month ago with Drains.

While you may have had much success with Mana Drain in the past, can you not argue that while yes the card is powerful, what isn't in the winning vintage decks? I understand you feel Mana Drain is a contender for Restriction based on the "tournament dominance" but I truly feel that this metagame can adapt, and that no restriction is needed right now, especially that of Mana Drain.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Well I think I've exhausted all explanations I can think of for banning vault and the only answers have been either "we don't ban cards" and "its not THAT good." Both are obviously valid points but I think everyone is getting a bit tired of that so I may as well discuss a different card: Mana Drain.

People are talking about the dominance of drains over the years, and that isn't the issue. Every archetype has had some level of success at some point where it was considered dominant but the problem is that drain decks seem to be able to yell the loudest to shut down other decks via B/R. The Gush eras are perfect examples of this. Gush decks were never a problem like drains are right now and there was a large amount of diversity in the format since Gush isn't a card that can just get slapped into one shell but you also can't just arbitrarily toss 4x into your deck. There were plenty of combo, control, aggro, and artifact decks that could run around and beat each other either using Gush or not and never needing to run anti-gush cards. There was noticably a lack of decks supporting 4xMana Drains and obviously when the restrictions came around people picked up drains after a year of having them sit in trade binders or boxes. Naturally the best players enjoy a mirror match metagame because that is where play skill and a bit of luck makes a huge difference. This is the exact opposite of a diverse metagame where a person needs to not only metagame and build a deck accordingly, but there are also random losses to facing a deck that just shreds yours. No surprise that good players don't want to 0-2 because some scrubs managed to sleeve up the perfect anti-you.deck.

Thus the combination of drains being absent and drains being abundant has managed to push good players to sleeve up drains to take advantage of their playskill. This (in my opinion) was heavily aggravated by the fact that drains are an amazing shell for the best win condition in Vintage right now (most likely ever) key/vault. The problem with playing a hate.deck is that you are forced into the same problem of a diverse metagame. You run the risk of getting paired up rounds 1/2 with some random fail ass standard deck that just happens to run cards that ignore your hate cards making a majority of your deck useless. Thus people run drains because if paired with scrubs you can easily get into the 2-0 bracket.

In all honesty people have just gotten comfortable with drains. I'm willing to bet that if these highly skilled players brought something like Shop Aggro (a deck equally capable of stomping random crap while being 60 cards of pain for tezz decks) they'd place just as well. Restricting drains isn't the answer it just brings us back to the Gush era where drains stay on the sidelines until they get unrestricted then mass run again. Restricting TfK is just retarded because the only reason other draw spells are absent isn't a lack of power but the comfort factor just like drains. Other draw engines like remora/meditate and intuition/ak have proven themselves time and time again. Unrestricting cards is months away and may not solve the problem. We need some big vintage players to start bringing other decks and lead by example that drains are just another engine for putting through 20 damage. I seriously doubt mana drain itself is the problem it falls on us the players to come up with general decks that work like back in the gush era.

Point and case ritual/vault/key.deck maybe? 

[Nehptis]

Don't mean to derail the discussion, but I do find this relevant to the issue at hand. Ban proxies in the US and see how fast everyone without power will be rocking 4x chalice + 4x Null Rod. Afterwhich i'd bet my money that Tez wouldn't dominate top 8's like now.

I don't think you are derailing at all.  In fact, I think you are helping to support the notion of Drain (I'll add Vault/Key) dominance in the GLOBAL metagame.  You are saying that given the choice (via proxies) US players are playing Drain decks.  Take that Proxy option away from them and although they'd like to play the superior deck (Drain), they are unable to and will resort to COTV / Rod decks, thereby diminishing Drain's dominance.

But, that still does not change the FACT that Drain decks (again I'll insert Vault/Key) are overlypowerful and with all things being equal (meaning everyone having access to the entire Vintage card set via proxies) Drain decks would dominate.

[zeus-online]

Don't mean to derail the discussion, but I do find this relevant to the issue at hand. Ban proxies in the US and see how fast everyone without power will be rocking 4x chalice + 4x Null Rod. Afterwhich i'd bet my money that Tez wouldn't dominate top 8's like now.

I don't think you are derailing at all.  In fact, I think you are helping to support the notion of Drain (I'll add Vault/Key) dominance in the GLOBAL metagame.  You are saying that given the choice (via proxies) US players are playing Drain decks.  Take that Proxy option away from them and although they'd like to play the superior deck (Drain), they are unable to and will resort to COTV / Rod decks, thereby diminishing Drain's dominance.

I'm pretty sure that's not what he meant...What he is trying to say is that Null rod+Chalice decks beats Tez but that people don't want to play them since they can play anything...not that null rod+chalice is worse then tez.

Thus if you remove proxies, the rod and chalice decks will beat tezzeret right out of dominance (If you believe that tez is dominating).

/Zeus

[hitman]

I don't think you are derailing at all.  In fact, I think you are helping to support the notion of Drain (I'll add Vault/Key) dominance in the GLOBAL metagame.  You are saying that given the choice (via proxies) US players are playing Drain decks.  Take that Proxy option away from them and although they'd like to play the superior deck (Drain), they are unable to and will resort to COTV / Rod decks, thereby diminishing Drain's dominance.

But, that still does not change the FACT that Drain decks (again I'll insert Vault/Key) are overlypowerful and with all things being equal (meaning everyone having access to the entire Vintage card set via proxies) Drain decks would dominate.

I may be wrong but I think you're mistaken.  I think he's saying that they don't have the option of just playing the popular deck whenever the winds change so they're forced to make do with what they have.  If everyone was playing an inferior deck, then Tezzeret would always be winning.  His case is that Tezzeret is not always winning.  In spite of playing, what you would call, inferior decks, they continue to see success.  Because they don't have the option of just playing the popular deck, it's easier for them to see that Tezzeret isn't all there is to Vintage magic and find ways to beat it.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

I'd rather not play in a proxyless environment where 1/2 the meta is jank $5 aggro.deck.

[Nehptis]

So, let's break down exactly what you said:

Null rod+Chalice decks beats Tez

I agree.

but that people don't want to play them since they can play anything

OK, so then why will people play anything?  I suggest it's because they want to win and therefore will choose the "best deck".  Which leads to Drain (I will continue to insert Vault/Key) dominance.

...not that null rod+chalice is worse then tez.

I don't think that rod+COTV decks are inferior when compared ONLY AGAINST Drain decks.  But, when each deck is compared against the metagame, then Yes, Drain decks > Rod decks.

Thus if you remove proxies, the rod and chalice decks will beat tezzeret right out of dominance (If you believe that tez is dominating).

Thank you for supporting the notion of Drain dominace.  And the suggestion of removing proxies is a possible means of reducing that dominance.  Not a very plausible option, but still an option just like Restrictions, Unrestrictions and Bannings are also an option to reduce dominance.

[bluemage55]

In other words, your rebuttal is "there are exceptions". I'm well aware that the aggressive decks don't always adopt the beatdown role, nor will they always play the beatdown role ideally because they fail to produce the "right threats" or "right disruption". But the point still stands that Brainstorm is more essential to the decks that adopt or are forced to adopt a control role. It goes back to the old adage that there are "no wrong threats, just wrong answers"; it is obviously more complicated than that in vintage, but there is still much truth to that statement.

The point you're ignoring is that even if Brainstorm is mroe valuable to control decks, they can be more easily replaced in a control deck.  Let me give you an example using arbitrary numbers:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +7 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +5.  By contrast, the Fish has to make do with no real engine at all.  Whereas the Fish deck was previously behind by 3 in that particular area, it is now down 5.  Thus, the restriction of Brainstorm knocked down Fish by 2, hurting it more overall. 

Likewise, you could extend a similar example to decks that ran Brainstorm + TfK.  They would replace with TfK + some other secondary engine (say Strat Plans, Night's Whisper, etc.), but Fish still has no other options.

Etc. for other deck types.

[Purple Hat]

In other words, your rebuttal is "there are exceptions". I'm well aware that the aggressive decks don't always adopt the beatdown role, nor will they always play the beatdown role ideally because they fail to produce the "right threats" or "right disruption". But the point still stands that Brainstorm is more essential to the decks that adopt or are forced to adopt a control role. It goes back to the old adage that there are "no wrong threats, just wrong answers"; it is obviously more complicated than that in vintage, but there is still much truth to that statement.

The point you're ignoring is that even if Brainstorm is mroe valuable to control decks, they can be more easily replaced in a control deck.  Let me give you an example using arbitrary numbers:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +7 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +5.  By contrast, the Fish has to make do with no real engine at all.  Whereas the Fish deck was previously behind by 3 in that particular area, it is now down 5.  Thus, the restriction of Brainstorm knocked down Fish by 2, hurting it more overall. 

Likewise, you could extend a similar example to decks that ran Brainstorm + TfK.  They would replace with TfK + some other secondary engine (say Strat Plans, Night's Whisper, etc.), but Fish still has no other options.

Etc. for other deck types.

well...yeah, it's easy enough to get data to say anything you want when you're not just making it up how are you adding anything by just making stuff up?

lets say, hypothetically, dragon and workshop decks don't play brainstorm anyway....how does that effect the random stuff you made up?

[Sean Ryan]

In other words, your rebuttal is "there are exceptions". I'm well aware that the aggressive decks don't always adopt the beatdown role, nor will they always play the beatdown role ideally because they fail to produce the "right threats" or "right disruption". But the point still stands that Brainstorm is more essential to the decks that adopt or are forced to adopt a control role. It goes back to the old adage that there are "no wrong threats, just wrong answers"; it is obviously more complicated than that in vintage, but there is still much truth to that statement.

The point you're ignoring is that even if Brainstorm is mroe valuable to control decks, they can be more easily replaced in a control deck.  Let me give you an example using arbitrary numbers:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +7 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +5.  By contrast, the Fish has to make do with no real engine at all.  Whereas the Fish deck was previously behind by 3 in that particular area, it is now down 5.  Thus, the restriction of Brainstorm knocked down Fish by 2, hurting it more overall. 

Arbitrary is right.

What's your rational and evidence for those numbers?  What we actually see now that Brainstorm is restricted, is a higher density of restricted cards in Drain decks leading to more broken plays.  This is a much more reality based conclusion to why Tezz is doing so well.  It has the highest decnsity of restricted cards paired with the consistency of a Drain shell with a 2 card combo finish.

The whole Brainstorm analysis is way off topic but I will throw this in as someone who has won many pieces of power off the back of Null Rod.  Brainstorms have rarely ever been good in Fish decks.  One could also make a solid argument that Standstill/Ninja/dorks is a very powerful draw engine in its own way.  I'll say it again, Fish is ready to make a big splash if people are willing to start innovating and take advantage of this current enviornment. 

[zeus-online]

Thus if you remove proxies, the rod and chalice decks will beat tezzeret right out of dominance (If you believe that tez is dominating).

Thank you for supporting the notion of Drain dominace.  

I don't support it. You must have misunderstood, or i could have been unclear.

I'll say it again, Fish is ready to make a big splash if people are willing to start innovating and take advantage of this current enviornment. 

I agree, our test UWB fish deck has been pretty good so far. Although i believe that right now fish in almost any color combinations could be really good. And due to the vast difference between the various builds it should be hard to hate it out.

/Zeus

[nineisnoone]

In other words, your rebuttal is "there are exceptions". I'm well aware that the aggressive decks don't always adopt the beatdown role, nor will they always play the beatdown role ideally because they fail to produce the "right threats" or "right disruption". But the point still stands that Brainstorm is more essential to the decks that adopt or are forced to adopt a control role. It goes back to the old adage that there are "no wrong threats, just wrong answers"; it is obviously more complicated than that in vintage, but there is still much truth to that statement.

The point you're ignoring is that even if Brainstorm is mroe valuable to control decks, they can be more easily replaced in a control deck.  Let me give you an example using arbitrary numbers:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +7 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +5.  By contrast, the Fish has to make do with no real engine at all.  Whereas the Fish deck was previously behind by 3 in that particular area, it is now down 5.  Thus, the restriction of Brainstorm knocked down Fish by 2, hurting it more overall. 

Arbitrary is right.

What's your rational and evidence for those numbers?  What we actually see now that Brainstorm is restricted, is a higher density of restricted cards in Drain decks leading to more broken plays.  This is a much more reality based conclusion to why Tezz is doing so well.  It has the highest decnsity of restricted cards paired with the consistency of a Drain shell with a 2 card combo finish.

The whole Brainstorm analysis is way off topic but I will throw this in as someone who has won many pieces of power off the back of Null Rod.  Brainstorms have rarely ever been good in Fish decks.  One could also make a solid argument that Standstill/Ninja/dorks is a very powerful draw engine in its own way.  I'll say it again, Fish is ready to make a big splash if people are willing to start innovating and take advantage of this current enviornment. 

Very true.  What makes Brainstorm broken is not just fetch-lands, but either card advantage or speed.  Brainstorm became fully broke when fast combo-control decks emerged that took advantage of both of these qualities. 

Brainstorm = Ancestral Recall only when it reaches the point where:
(A) you have so many cards in your hand that the fact that even though it is technically just a cantrip, it feels like a draw 3 because given the volume of cards you have you probably wouldn't play the worst two cards out of your hand and the top of your deck anyways.
or (B) you win so quickly and efficiently that the lack of those 2 additional cards never come into play because you'll never get to the point where you would need them.

Gush and Flash both pushed those two qualities to the point where Brainstorm virtually became Ancestral Recall.  Gush moreso A, but also a bit of B.  Flash soley, but very heavily B.

Fish, however, does none of those things.  Fish needs volume, so you will in fact play the worst two cards in your hand and top two cards of your deck.  You also don't ever (at least literally) win immediately so those two cards will always used.

Combo-Control and Pure-Combo makes Brainstorm into Ancestral Recall.
For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

[bluemage55]

well...yeah, it's easy enough to get data to say anything you want when you're not just making it up how are you adding anything by just making stuff up?

I didn't make any pretense that those numbers have any basis in fact.  I'm merely pointing out something that was overlooked: even though Brainstorm was more valuable to Control decks, its restriction ends up hurting non-Control decks more.

Combo-Control and Pure-Combo makes Brainstorm into Ancestral Recall.
For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

Again, I did not suggest that Brianstorm was more broken in Fish.  However, the fact that Brainstorm's effect is much more easily replaced in a Drain shell than in a non-Drain deck.

And regardless, my point still stands for other Combo-Control and Combo decks: Brainstorm's restriction hurt them more than Drains, which is why we now see the resulting Drain dominance.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

In other words, your rebuttal is "there are exceptions". I'm well aware that the aggressive decks don't always adopt the beatdown role, nor will they always play the beatdown role ideally because they fail to produce the "right threats" or "right disruption". But the point still stands that Brainstorm is more essential to the decks that adopt or are forced to adopt a control role. It goes back to the old adage that there are "no wrong threats, just wrong answers"; it is obviously more complicated than that in vintage, but there is still much truth to that statement.

The point you're ignoring is that even if Brainstorm is mroe valuable to control decks, they can be more easily replaced in a control deck.  Let me give you an example using arbitrary numbers:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +7 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +5.  By contrast, the Fish has to make do with no real engine at all.  Whereas the Fish deck was previously behind by 3 in that particular area, it is now down 5.  Thus, the restriction of Brainstorm knocked down Fish by 2, hurting it more overall. 

Arbitrary is right.

What's your rational and evidence for those numbers?  What we actually see now that Brainstorm is restricted, is a higher density of restricted cards in Drain decks leading to more broken plays.  This is a much more reality based conclusion to why Tezz is doing so well.  It has the highest decnsity of restricted cards paired with the consistency of a Drain shell with a 2 card combo finish.

The whole Brainstorm analysis is way off topic but I will throw this in as someone who has won many pieces of power off the back of Null Rod.  Brainstorms have rarely ever been good in Fish decks.  One could also make a solid argument that Standstill/Ninja/dorks is a very powerful draw engine in its own way.  I'll say it again, Fish is ready to make a big splash if people are willing to start innovating and take advantage of this current enviornment. 

Very true.  What makes Brainstorm broken is not just fetch-lands, but either card advantage or speed.  Brainstorm became fully broke when fast combo-control decks emerged that took advantage of both of these qualities. 

Brainstorm = Ancestral Recall only when it reaches the point where:
(A) you have so many cards in your hand that the fact that even though it is technically just a cantrip, it feels like a draw 3 because given the volume of cards you have you probably wouldn't play the worst two cards out of your hand and the top of your deck anyways.
or (B) you win so quickly and efficiently that the lack of those 2 additional cards never come into play because you'll never get to the point where you would need them.

Gush and Flash both pushed those two qualities to the point where Brainstorm virtually became Ancestral Recall.  Gush moreso A, but also a bit of B.  Flash soley, but very heavily B.

Fish, however, does none of those things.  Fish needs volume, so you will in fact play the worst two cards in your hand and top two cards of your deck.  You also don't ever (at least literally) win immediately so those two cards will always used.

Combo-Control and Pure-Combo makes Brainstorm into Ancestral Recall.
For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

Thats kind of oversimplifying it fish runs fetches and lots of cards that are good only in certain matchups. I'd say fish really loved brainstorm because it:

A) let you run more narrow but powerful meta hate
B) let you toss back 4-ofs in null rod/chalice/etc.

Theres a reason all blue fish decks ran 4xbrainstorm.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Theres a reason all blue fish decks ran 4xbrainstorm.

Whoa now, that one's patently false.  The inclusion of brainstorm was hotly debated, especially pre-confidant. 

[Sean Ryan]

Thats kind of oversimplifying it fish runs fetches and lots of cards that are good only in certain matchups. I'd say fish really loved brainstorm because it:

A) let you run more narrow but powerful meta hate
B) let you toss back 4-ofs in null rod/chalice/etc.

Theres a reason all blue fish decks ran 4xbrainstorm.

That last statement is simply false (looks like ambivalent Duck beat me to it). 

The issue of whether Brainstorm is optimal in Fish has always been contentious.  I have run builds that used 4xBrainstorms and those that did not. The version I liked the most with 4 Brainstorms ran both Chalice and Rod.  In this case shuffling back the redundant copies was excellent.  My old UWB version with Negators and extra moxen also loved Brainstorm.  However, if you go back to the the original Ur versions designed by Phantom Tapewurm, he used Standstill, as have many successful uw lists over the years. 

Here is the bottom line: Brainstorm is as powerful as the rest of the cards in your deck.  This is why 4x Brainstorm was so powerful with Drains and Rituals, and why it is so absurd to say that Fish lost more by the restriction of Brainstorm than Combo-control.  What has occurred, is that Drains/Forces/Thirsts provide the most consistent way of abusing broken cards now that Brainstorm is restricted.  The trick is going to be to design a Fish deck that hoses Tezz while still being competitive against the rest of the field. 

Fish plays a bunch of redundant, effective, but low powered cards and Brainstorm served more to provide consistency than anything else.  It's really an issue of quality vs quantity.  I would rather have straight card advantage in most of my Fish decks than fixing.  Of course that being said, I certainly have a single Brainstorm in the current Fish & Faeries deck I'm working on  
   

[dicemanx]

In other words, your rebuttal is "there are exceptions". I'm well aware that the aggressive decks don't always adopt the beatdown role, nor will they always play the beatdown role ideally because they fail to produce the "right threats" or "right disruption". But the point still stands that Brainstorm is more essential to the decks that adopt or are forced to adopt a control role. It goes back to the old adage that there are "no wrong threats, just wrong answers"; it is obviously more complicated than that in vintage, but there is still much truth to that statement.

The point you're ignoring is that even if Brainstorm is mroe valuable to control decks, they can be more easily replaced in a control deck.  Let me give you an example using arbitrary numbers:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +7 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +5.  By contrast, the Fish has to make do with no real engine at all.  Whereas the Fish deck was previously behind by 3 in that particular area, it is now down 5.  Thus, the restriction of Brainstorm knocked down Fish by 2, hurting it more overall. 

Likewise, you could extend a similar example to decks that ran Brainstorm + TfK.  They would replace with TfK + some other secondary engine (say Strat Plans, Night's Whisper, etc.), but Fish still has no other options.

Etc. for other deck types.

I didn't ignore this point, because TfK isn't replacing Brainstorm. In fact TfK was often used in *conjunction* with Brainstorm in some decks prior to restriction. The Drain deck experienced a significant loss after the Brainstorm restriction, while Fish barely lost anything. Heck, some Fish-like archetypes are not even blue-centric.

As far as your analysis, here's something that I believe is closer to reality based on playing for many years in Fish-infested metas:

The value of Brainstorm x4 is +10 for a Drain deck, and +1 for a Fish deck.  However, if a Drain deck cannot run Brainstorm x4, they can make do with TfK to get +2.

Ever dug for lands under a Null Rod of CotV=0 with TfK? You have to actually reach three mana first, and evade Daze/Daze effects. Without Brainstorm, control archetypes are more prone to attacks on the mana base without easy ways of developing under the mana locks. Since Null Rod/CotV is typically accompanied by pressure, there's a significant difference between digging with Brainstorm and having to resort to expensive draw spells to get out of jams.

Again, all of this is even without considering the boost that decks like WGD or Landstill got, but then again, the US players don't seem to consider these decks on the radar (they NEVER did, even when the decks were doing very well in events in the past). There are still Shop archetypes though - they certainly got a big boost from the Brainstorm restriction.
 

[nineisnoone]

Combo-Control and Pure-Combo makes Brainstorm into Ancestral Recall.
For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

Again, I did not suggest that Brianstorm was more broken in Fish.  However, the fact that Brainstorm's effect is much more easily replaced in a Drain shell than in a non-Drain deck.

And regardless, my point still stands for other Combo-Control and Combo decks: Brainstorm's restriction hurt them more than Drains, which is why we now see the resulting Drain dominance.

You didn't argue with my assertion that for Combo-Control and Pure-Combo, Brainstorm became Ancestral Recall, whereas for Fish it is merely (though an exceptionally good) cantrip.  So I don't see how you can claim that your point still stands.  Brainstorm is an irreplaceable Ancestral Recall in certain decks.  The loss of 3x Brainstorm is the loss of a solid, but ultimately very replaceable cantrip. 

You are mistaking the power of the card with the needs of the deck.  Control decks need card draw so they sought a replacement to Brainstorm.  Fish decks do not need card draw so they don't need to seek a replacement.  To say that one in the first case, Brainstorm is "replaceable" and thus it's loss has had a lower impact than in the second case is ignoring the basic foundations of the deck. 

[nineisnoone]

I didn't ignore this point, because TfK isn't replacing Brainstorm. In fact TfK was often used in *conjunction* with Brainstorm in some decks prior to restriction. The Drain deck experienced a significant loss after the Brainstorm restriction, while Fish barely lost anything. Heck, some Fish-like archetypes are not even blue-centric.

But Drain decks weren't nearly played as much played prior to the restrictions.

It's not Brainstorm that is the issue with Drain.  It is Merchant Scroll.  Merchant Scroll is sorcery speed which inhibits the ability to effectively Scroll and Drain at the same time.  Decks typically ran either Scroll (Gifts) or Thirst (Slaver), which works better with Drain because it is instant speed.

Now, there used to be the choice between these two cards prior to Gush and Flash.  There were pluses and cons to both sides.  Scroll was faster and more aggressive but after lacked the ability to create card advantage on it's own and operate at instant speed, whereas Thirst was slower but allowed for better usage of Drains and generate long term card advantage. 

Drain existed in both of these decks, but more naturally in Thirst. It still worked with Scroll because (as Smmenen has pointed out) Gifts wasn't thatgood, so it could afford to fit in a card that didn't work fantastically well with the deck because it just had too much raw power to deny.

However, once Flash and Gush came into play, that changed.  Now with the ability to Scroll into WIN, Mana Drain just didn't fit in anymore.  Why Drain into anything when you can just win the game?  Drain was a clunky card that required you to pass the turn with mana open when you'd rather be Scrolling. 

And as those decks rose, Drain decks fell.  People didn't run Drain in GAT, MSPaint, Tyrant Oath, or Flash.  There was no need to.  There were now an ubiquitous number of Scroll targets to choose from that meant when choosing between the two (Drain and Scroll), you would always choose Scroll.  Duress became preferable, because the aggressive nature of the decks meant you tapped out more often then leaving mana open.  No matter how good Mana Drain is, it can't compare with winning the game.

However, when these decks got restricted out of existence things changed.  Thirst came back into favor.  Slaver came into favor and people assumed it to be just the same as before.  Then people discovered how good +1 Vault +1 Key +1 Tezzeret was, and they stripped away from the clunky parts of Slaver, and it became the streamlined Tezzeret decks of today.


To sort of leave the immediate subject, and get to the topic as a whole, that's why I don't favor restricting Mana Drain.  While it is preforming, at least in predominant part, due to it's power, it's not a power that is really unheard of.  It was in fact, second string until everything else that competed with it fell out of place.

That's why I feel that unrestrictions (rather than more restrictions) would be a better adaption to the current situation.  TPS alone (and generically Ritual variants) is not enough to push back Mana Drain + Time Vault.  Tezzeret doesn't run as many cards for their win condition as Slaver did and is generically much, much, faster.  Due to the efficiency of it as a control strategy, there is plenty of room to adapt to the strategies that it faces.  And it is not especially weak to anything, so rather than being defensive it can look to solve problems proactively.

However, putting more combo strategies (i.e. Scroll-Flash/Gush) would force them to have to dedicate more cards to dealing with faster combo decks.  With them having to split their defenses the efficiency of their deck decreases, and the deck becomes a weaker option.  My hope is that leaving Brainstorm restricted would keep the decks a step slower than before, allowing the pre-restriction meta and the post-restriction meta to meet at a more mutual level with one not forcing out the other.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Theres a reason all blue fish decks ran 4xbrainstorm.

Whoa now, that one's patently false.  The inclusion of brainstorm was hotly debated, especially pre-confidant. 

The last point was made purely to prove the point that the oversimplifying of a card like brainstorm's versatility in a variaty of decks is dangerous. Me saying that is no more false than stating that:

Very true.  What makes Brainstorm broken is not just fetch-lands, but either card advantage or speed.

Fish, however, does none of those things.  Fish needs volume, so you will in fact play the worst two cards in your hand and top two cards of your deck.  You also don't ever (at least literally) win immediately so those two cards will always used.

For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

In my opinion drains lost significantly more than fish decks when it comes to the loss of brainstorm precisely for the reasons diceman said. Plenty of dish decks didn't run blue in the first place and those that did weren't as dependant on brainstorm as drain decks to smooth out. However, those that opted to run brainstorm were often dependant on it. I know I've designed a few Wub fish decks that would never work now that brainstorm is gone to help pitch back spare jank in some matchups. Granted in addition to fetches I ran the DT/MT/IS/VT suite and more singleton bombs that completely flip around certain situations to give me wins where I had no business winning. I wouldn't even think about running a pure toolbox fish list again without brainstorm so no its not just "the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk."

Thats kind of oversimplifying it fish runs fetches and lots of cards that are good only in certain matchups. I'd say fish really loved brainstorm because it:

A) let you run more narrow but powerful meta hate
B) let you toss back 4-ofs in null rod/chalice/etc.

Theres a reason all blue fish decks ran 4xbrainstorm.

That last statement is simply false (looks like ambivalent Duck beat me to it). 

The issue of whether Brainstorm is optimal in Fish has always been contentious.  I have run builds that used 4xBrainstorms and those that did not. The version I liked the most with 4 Brainstorms ran both Chalice and Rod.  In this case shuffling back the redundant copies was excellent.  My old UWB version with Negators and extra moxen also loved Brainstorm.  However, if you go back to the the original Ur versions designed by Phantom Tapewurm, he used Standstill, as have many successful uw lists over the years. 

Here is the bottom line: Brainstorm is as powerful as the rest of the cards in your deck.  This is why 4x Brainstorm was so powerful with Drains and Rituals, and why it is so absurd to say that Fish lost more by the restriction of Brainstorm than Combo-control.  What has occurred, is that Drains/Forces/Thirsts provide the most consistent way of abusing broken cards now that Brainstorm is restricted.  The trick is going to be to design a Fish deck that hoses Tezz while still being competitive against the rest of the field. 

Fish plays a bunch of redundant, effective, but low powered cards and Brainstorm served more to provide consistency than anything else.  It's really an issue of quality vs quantity.  I would rather have straight card advantage in most of my Fish decks than fixing.  Of course that being said, I certainly have a single Brainstorm in the current Fish & Faeries deck I'm working on  
   

I know there are fish lists that don't run brainstorm but as I said before that doesn't mean the card is a random cantrip or Serum Visions would have been run instead so that you don't need a shuffle effect. I'm surprised 2 people jumped on my statement and nobody found it odd that brainstorm was called a random cantrip. There are plenty of significantly better ways to cantrip and a card I'd more closely consider to time walk is remand. Sure if your fish deck is 15x4 then you probably don't need brainstorm. Then again I haven't seen a list that wouldn't mind fixing itself to turn a hand of 7 into a hand of 10 to better decide how to play out the first few turns, which is where fish either gets their advantage or loses.

[bluemage55]

I didn't ignore this point, because TfK isn't replacing Brainstorm. In fact TfK was often used in *conjunction* with Brainstorm in some decks prior to restriction. The Drain deck experienced a significant loss after the Brainstorm restriction, while Fish barely lost anything. Heck, some Fish-like archetypes are not even blue-centric.

Drain decks have adapted without being hurt all that much.  Using Strat Plans, Impulse, SDT, Courier's Capsule, Night's Whisper, etc. is certianly not as good as Brainstorm, but they work, at least for a Drain deck.

It isn't like the loss of Brainstorm cost most Drain decks an irretrievable function.  It's cantripping effect was simply replaced by less efficient cantrips in most decks.  As for decks that needed to get rid of dead cards, they simply went with TfK to pitch them if possible (or got hurt badly if they couldn't e.g. Oath).  By contrast, you can't just replace the Brainstorms' cantripping effect or virtual card advantage effect in other archetypes as easily.

Ever dug for lands under a Null Rod of CotV=0 with TfK? You have to actually reach three mana first, and evade Daze/Daze effects. Without Brainstorm, control archetypes are more prone to attacks on the mana base without easy ways of developing under the mana locks. Since Null Rod/CotV is typically accompanied by pressure, there's a significant difference between digging with Brainstorm and having to resort to expensive draw spells to get out of jams.

That would be the use of Brainstorm for a different purpose, that of cantripping.  To replace that, Drain decks have simply used other cards.  The point of TfK would be to ditch dead cards, not to cantrip

I'd also disagree that control archetypes are more prone to attacks on the mana base.  The removal of Brainstorms has led to an increase in the amount of lands played to compensate.  The net effect is not an increased vulnerability to mana disruption; it's that Blue has simply become a little slower.  And what better way to play slower than by running things like Mana Drain, TfK, and Tez?

There are still Shop archetypes though - they certainly got a big boost from the Brainstorm restriction.

And what archetype beats Shops again?  Oh right, Drains.   

[nineisnoone]

Very true.  What makes Brainstorm broken is not just fetch-lands, but either card advantage or speed.

Fish, however, does none of those things.  Fish needs volume, so you will in fact play the worst two cards in your hand and top two cards of your deck.  You also don't ever (at least literally) win immediately so those two cards will always used.

For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

In my opinion drains lost significantly more than fish decks when it comes to the loss of brainstorm precisely for the reasons diceman said. Plenty of dish decks didn't run blue in the first place and those that did weren't as dependant on brainstorm as drain decks to smooth out. However, those that opted to run brainstorm were often dependant on it. I know I've designed a few Wub fish decks that would never work now that brainstorm is gone to help pitch back spare jank in some matchups. Granted in addition to fetches I ran the DT/MT/IS/VT suite and more singleton bombs that completely flip around certain situations to give me wins where I had no business winning. I wouldn't even think about running a pure toolbox fish list again without brainstorm so no its not just "the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk."

You act as if a card that is inferior to Time Walk is strictly bad, average, or otherwise incapable of swinging a game in your favor.  There are tons of cards that can randomly win you games that "you have no business winning."  Simian Spirit Guide for a turn 0 Red Elemental Blast.  Land, Mox, Gaddock Teeg.  And such on.  Certainly a card not quite as good as Time Walk would have that potential if Simian Spirit Guide does.

But you are missing the point.  Ancestral Recall does not randomly win you games.  It consistently wins you games.  It has been noted (at least at one point I recall) as having the percentage that once cast of winning you the game, greater than anything else, even Yawgmoth's Will.  Ancestral Recall does not give you wins you have no business winning.  Ancestral Recall gives you wins that you have no business losing.  That you are talking about winning at a natural disadvantage is exactly the point I am trying to make.  

When Brainstorm transforms into Ancestral Recall 2-5 (which no one has so far disclaimed), it becomes so much more than it is in a Fish deck, something that is irreplaceable.  In a Fish deck Brainstorm is a great, but fair, card that certainly can win you games.  But in a deck that better capitalizes on it's strengths, it becomes a completely broken card.  And there is no replacement for that, no replacement for the loss of Recall 2-5.  I'm sure we'll try, but it won't come close.  However, the loss of Brainstorm 2-4 is much easier to accommodate.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

There are still Shop archetypes though - they certainly got a big boost from the Brainstorm restriction.

And what archetype beats Shops again?  Oh right, Drains.   

In my experience drains beat stax, but shop aggro rolls drains over. Especially now that shop aggro has blue/artifacts they can run FoW of their own I'm shocked that shop aggro isn't putting up the numbers that drain decks are. Then again drains can use key/vault so...

Very true.  What makes Brainstorm broken is not just fetch-lands, but either card advantage or speed.

Fish, however, does none of those things.  Fish needs volume, so you will in fact play the worst two cards in your hand and top two cards of your deck.  You also don't ever (at least literally) win immediately so those two cards will always used.

For Fish decks, Brainstorm is merely the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk.

In my opinion drains lost significantly more than fish decks when it comes to the loss of brainstorm precisely for the reasons diceman said. Plenty of dish decks didn't run blue in the first place and those that did weren't as dependant on brainstorm as drain decks to smooth out. However, those that opted to run brainstorm were often dependant on it. I know I've designed a few Wub fish decks that would never work now that brainstorm is gone to help pitch back spare jank in some matchups. Granted in addition to fetches I ran the DT/MT/IS/VT suite and more singleton bombs that completely flip around certain situations to give me wins where I had no business winning. I wouldn't even think about running a pure toolbox fish list again without brainstorm so no its not just "the 2nd best cantrip behind Time Walk."

You act as if a card that is inferior to Time Walk is strictly bad, average, or otherwise incapable of swinging a game in your favor.  There are tons of cards that can randomly win you games that "you have no business winning."  Simian Spirit Guide for a turn 0 Red Elemental Blast.  Land, Mox, Gaddock Teeg.  And such on.  Certainly a card not quite as good as Time Walk would have that potential if Simian Spirit Guide does.

But you are missing the point.  Ancestral Recall does not randomly win you games.  It consistently wins you games.  It has been noted (at least at one point I recall) as having the percentage that once cast of winning you the game, greater than anything else, even Yawgmoth's Will.  Ancestral Recall does not give you wins you have no business winning.  Ancestral Recall gives you wins that you have no business losing.  That you are talking about winning at a natural disadvantage is exactly the point I am trying to make.  

When Brainstorm transforms into Ancestral Recall 2-5 (which no one has so far disclaimed), it becomes so much more than it is in a Fish deck, something that is irreplaceable.  In a Fish deck Brainstorm is a great, but fair, card that certainly can win you games.  But in a deck that better capitalizes on it's strengths, it becomes a completely broken card.  And there is no replacement for that, no replacement for the loss of Recall 2-5.  I'm sure we'll try, but it won't come close.  However, the loss of Brainstorm 2-4 is much easier to accommodate.

Fish is a kind of deck that needs to drop at least one threat every turn or risk falling behind due to the average overall lack of power in cards. The lack of general raw power is made up by the high synergy in most of the cards, but not all of them. Brainstorm allowed fish players to fix their plays and ensure at least a threat every turn or at least a higher chance of getting the right threat at the right time. You could argue that this is why many fish decks are having problems right now. They need a null rod and an answer to DSC in their first 10-12 cards or risk losing the game to bomb plays. Brainstorm dramatically increased the chance of having both those things. The reason brainstorm is more powerful in drain decks is because not only does it dig for those bombs but it also digs for protection and answers where as in fish decks it only digs for protection. I think we can all agree that the most successful decks are those that can take down the largest portion of the metagame consistantly. Without brainstorm fish decks now need to run more copies of narrow cards rather than more diversity and the digging necessary to keep only what they need when they need it. I'm not going to disclaim that brainstorm is almost like Ancestral 2-5 but I strongly disagree with the assumption that fish decks did not also utilize it as Ancestral 2-5. In my opinion it is just that Ancestral is more powerful in drain decks than in fish decks because of the higher overall power of individual cards.

[Purple Hat]

There are still Shop archetypes though - they certainly got a big boost from the Brainstorm restriction.

And what archetype beats Shops again?  Oh right, Drains.   

This blanket statement is exactly the type of thing I'm talking about.  Rather than playing metagamed shop decks that beat drains (yes, there is such a thing), which is what many of us are suggesting people should try, people are just saying "shops lose to drains and drains are pretty good so I'm not gonna play shops."  And then when no one plays shops and they don't make top 8 you turn it around and say "SEE?  shops are bad in a drain meta."  Well....Yeah, shops don't magically put up insane numbers when no one plays them.  funny thing about that.  You can't just take the shop decks that beat Gat and expect to beat drains with them, you might have to actually test some different lock parts and see which ones are better vs drains or test some different creature/disruption mixes and see which ones let you apply enough pressure.  That's how it works though.  The metagame shifts and then other decks are forced to respond.  People aren't responding though, instead they're playing chicken little about drains.

Personally I'd love to see them unrestrict everything going back to fact or fiction (well...unrestricted LED is probably a really bad idea...madness is fun, but Long is broken) and maybe even farther and see what we end up with.  But not because drains are overwhelmingly broken.  I want to see that because it'd be fun to have a metagame where we got to see what powerful things balanced eachother out.

The brainstorm in fish argument is irrelevant and we should stop taking so much time up with it.  There are many other good decks that everyone will agree didn't and shouldn't run brainstorm x4.  Many of those decks haven't been played much since the restriction of brainstorm and there is no clear reason why that is the case.  Many of those decks have reasonable, if not strong, drain matchups while maintaining a reasonable % against the field (Dragon, shop aggro, goblins, CA, etc.).  If players begin picking up those decks, this whole "drain domination" that people are talking about will go away the same way that "welder domination" did in 2005.

EDIT:

Quote from: bluemage55 on Today at 06:14:35 AM
Quote from: dicemanx on Yesterday at 02:44:08 PM
There are still Shop archetypes though - they certainly got a big boost from the Brainstorm restriction.

And what archetype beats Shops again?  Oh right, Drains.   


In my experience drains beat stax, but shop aggro rolls drains over. Especially now that shop aggro has blue/artifacts they can run FoW of their own I'm shocked that shop aggro isn't putting up the numbers that drain decks are. Then again drains can use key/vault so...

cus for some reason shop aggro decks can't play this combo?  Mud/transmuter decks are the only decks that can realistically use key effectively outside of the combo, so it's probably actually quite a bit better in a workshop deck than in a drain deck. (something with Sharum and that new creature that takes artifacts from deck to hand perhaps?)

[Mantis]

If Drain beats Shop Aggro it can be three things: Most likely; the Drain player resolves Tinker and counters the Welder may there be one. Or the Drain player gets Drain online in which case Shop just crapped out, or Drain opened with Saph+Island or Lotus. Another huge factor is Ancestral Recall, but I that goes for all Vintage matchups. If Shop Aggro wins its either by manascrewing the Drain player or because it lands a Welder and the Drain player loses its winconditions.

I came to the conclusion that the Drain vs Shop matchup is quite balanced. If your testing proved Shop Aggro to be the heavy favorite than the Drain player is probably incompetent with his deck, this goes for a huge percentage of Drain players though. Drain decks are just powerful, I see people underestimating how hard it is to beat Drain decks, all the time. Just about any thread on this boards starts with 'this deck is designed to beat Drain decks' while in fact Drain just plows right through 90% of those decks. Don't get me wrong, my intention is not to get Mana Drain restricted because it adds a lot of skill to the game for both sides of the table, I love the psychological aspect attached to playing around and through Drains. But just don't think for a second that beating a competent Tezzeret player is easy with any deck, your deck might have an advantage but it's never more than roughly 5-10 precent points on a match basis.

EDIT: I am mostly talking about the Tezzeret Drain deck here, not about Drain Oath or Shaymora or anything.

[Purple Hat]

But just don't think for a second that beating a competent Tezzeret player is easy with any deck, your deck might have an advantage but it's never more than roughly 5-10 precent points on a match basis.

any player who tells you that any vintage match up (with a few notable exceptions like ichorid games) is more than 60-40 or so in favor of one deck is probably bsing you.  the cardpool is too broken for anything else.  You're always going to be combining the probabilities of "oops I win" hands with all the other stuff that goes on in other formats, and there are ways to answer even the most disadvantagous game state with some broken play.  Put it all together and a "Bad" matchup for a deck is unlikely to be worse than 35-40% odds.

[LordHomerCat]

But just don't think for a second that beating a competent Tezzeret player is easy with any deck, your deck might have an advantage but it's never more than roughly 5-10 precent points on a match basis.

any player who tells you that any vintage match up (with a few notable exceptions like ichorid games) is more than 60-40 or so in favor of one deck is probably bsing you.  the cardpool is too broken for anything else.  You're always going to be combining the probabilities of "oops I win" hands with all the other stuff that goes on in other formats, and there are ways to answer even the most disadvantagous game state with some broken play.  Put it all together and a "Bad" matchup for a deck is unlikely to be worse than 35-40% odds.

In general this is the case;  however, Ichorid is a special case here and can definitely be more than 60/40./

[wiley]

Many of those decks have reasonable, if not strong, drain matchups while maintaining a reasonable % against the field (Dragon, shop aggro, goblins, CA, etc.).

I have to question your proposed decks here.
1) Dragon has a roughly 50/50 against tez (not necessarily drains on the whole, but tez) even according to some of the best dragon players out there.
2) Shop Aggro can easily lose to an early key/vault with little it can do to stop it.  Shop Aggro often doesn't run null rod and so, at times, can' even race the key/vault when it is on a good draw.
3) Goblins might be able to win against tez thanks to the copious artifact destruction/mana denial and the ability to run 4 rods (though many lists that I have seen do not).
4) What exactly does an updated list of CA look like?  It was my understanding that CA hasn't even placed in a tournament since October last year.  Testing lists from back then you often get no better (and often much worse) chances than dragon versus tez.

I agree that drains (meaning the control shell that utilizes mana drains) are beatable, but many decks that were good against drains in the past can simply lose to vault/key.  With tez being the highest showing of all drain decks, at least in America, this cannot be discounted.

That said I have had great testing results with old school UbaStax.  In the last tournament I entered I only lost to RG Beats with 4 main deck ancient grudges (and me not finding a chalice after turn 1).  I beat 1 tez deck into the ground and forced 2 TPS decks into hard locks.  Stax with a draw engine (in this case Bazaar) is one of the most potent decks around right now.

As far as ichorid goes, well I wouldn't play it currently.  The fact is that the deck has no defense against vault/key except for a lucky piece of turn 1 disruption like unmask or therapy.  The deck has no game 1 answer for infinite combos either.  That in addition to the fact that painter is also hanging around, which is another combo deck that ichorid tends to have problems with, means that it is not the objectively best deck to play right now.  However, some people seem to just turn off their brains when they face someone who is piloting ichorid so you may still get a lot of those 80% game 1 wins.