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

[Yare]

Mind's Desire can't be unrestricted. It would just be unbelievable. I remember when the card was first spoiled but we didn't know that it was going to be preemptively restricted. In all testing that took place during that time, people universally affirmed that unrestricted Mind's Desire was just too broken.

They're not going to unrestrict Mind's Desire, nor should they unrestrict Mind's Desire.

[Nehptis]

This thread was doing very well when we were focused on reasonable topics.  Can we please get back onto those?  Talking about Unrestriction of Mind's Desire and theoretical decklists is not one of those.  I'd like to see more discussion around:

- Do you feel FOW decks that utilize Mana Drain dominating the format?  (I'm using the Archetype model of FOW as defined by WOTC/DCI.  I think it's best that we all speak the same language when debating.)

- If you believe that those decks are dominating (the evidence is piled up against you if you do not), then what are the factors that are enabling this domination?
        - Is it player preference to certain cards.  (I think this is reasonable.  But, so low on the impact list that it's not worth dicussing further.)
        - Is it the finisher combo of Vault-Key?  (You know I think this is a major part of the problem and think it needs to be dealt with.)
       - Is it the lack of other viable strategies due to Restrictions?  If so, what REASONABLE unRestrictions can mitigate this Drain dominance?  (I think unRestrictions are a solution to the problem, as do others.)

[Explosion]

  Oh that's right, Wotc considers it an archtype deck, I'm sorry I never built a deck based around FoW ever, just decks that are supported by FoW.

You absolutely have built decks around FoW, you just didn't think about it that way. Without the ability to counter turn-one combos, or threaten this ability, many blue decks just couldn't get anything done in Vintage. Tap nearly all your mana every turn to pay for Mystic Remora? Stop Grim Long and Charbelcher strategies?

Force of Will is the enabler of the deck archetype, and you're unlikely to ever find a deck with only 2 Forces, or a Forceless blue deck that couldn't be improved by 4 Forces. Much like how the fast mana of Workshop and Rituals enable their respective strategies, FoW enables its archetype. What you do within that archetype to win is another story, but I feel confident that if FoW was restricted or banned, the archetype would collapse under the overwhelming pressure of turn one combo decks.

[Smmenen]

This is just the beginning:



That is the Metagame by Engine from June 20-2007 through June 20, 2008.

A couple of notes:

1) Workshop decks spiked in Nov/Dec and stayed high, competitive with Gush decks.   The reason was the printing of Thorn of Amethyst in Lorwyn in the Fall.

2) "Mana Drain" and "Dark Ritual" decks mean NON-Gush versions of those decks, FYI.   

3) Mana Drain decks are pretty steady throughout this entire time period, as do Dark Ritual decks.

4) Flash spiked in March and April due to the printing/discovery of Reveillark, which allows you to speed up the combo and win more aggressively with Pact.

5) When Flash and Oath spiked, Workshop decks fell in March and April.  However, the printing/use of Painter, brought shops back up.

For three of the six data sets, and for 2 of the 3 data sets after the printing of Thorn of Amethyst, Workshop decks either performed on par or out performed Gush decks.   




I intend to use graphics such as these in my metagame reports from here on out.  I think it will create a much more robust approach, perhaps even pushing the boundaries of Magic data collection/presentation.

[AmbivalentDuck]

Actually, we need to go *much* further.  I wrote a script to parse out all of the PT: Kyoto qualifier data to prove a point to Tom LaPille.  You can see me cited in his article here.  Point is, someone (possibly me) needs to write a parser for Morphling.de and all of the other major tourney report sites.

We need a process similar to what I used:
1.  Implement a parser in a language with good string support.  PHP, Perl, or Python.  For obvious reasons, it must be open source.
  a.  Stick everything into a database. MySQL or PostgreSQL.  Put a web front-end out for public inspection (and modification?).
2.  Implement a Python, R,  Matlab, or SPSS script to do descriptive stats.
  a. Most prevalent cards.
  b. Archetype recognition (ie. Tezz -> Tezz, Welder + Thirst - Tez -> Slaver, etc)
  c. Winningness correlations with deviations from the protolist (as determined by principal component analysis).  Matlab or...what else can do this?
  d. Multi-variate correlations with winningness by archetype, generic distance from nearest protolist, and region.
  e. Make pretty graphs.  I like Python and Matlab for this.
3.  Maintain a community effort to keep archetype recognition complete and up-to-date.  Maintain a community effort to determine parser algorithms.

Coding this up isn't a big deal.  Figuring out all of the rules is.


If 3+ other people volunteer to take parts of this and maintain them, we could do something really cool.  This project is easily much larger than my free time.  Oh, and no programming experience required.  Just figuring out all of the logic for what defines an archetype would be a huge contribution to the project.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

I would gladly be willing to contribute to that project. I'm not much of a programmer but I could help define what basis constitutes certain archetypes. I think it is not the cards that define an archetype it is the general strategy. This is why tezz and CS lists can differ by as little as 5/75 cards (2xwelder/3xrobot) and be considered completely different decks while general Fish lists can have 50+different cards and still be considered the same archetype. This is because archetypes are defined by their most powerful cards, but not in a general sense. By power it is meant what card is most powerful to the goal of the deck. The goal of a deck should not be mistaken as simply being "win the game" as all decks strive to do that, but winning the game is a byproduct of the main goal. However, I think it is also necessary to keep track of specific cards that track their way across multiple archetypes like Drain/Shop/Bazaar/Ritual. This is why I am not so much worried about the 45% T-8 Drain dominance as I am about the 40% T-8 Key/Vault dominance because cards like Mana Drain are not the actual power "goal" cards of the deck they aren't even an engine to achieve the goal.

To illustrate my point storm tendrils would almost die if Dark Ritual was restricted but if Mana Drain were restricted it would be filled easily and Key/Vault would continue to put up high numbers. This is probably why WotC recognised (incorrectly) that Force of Will was an engine rather than Mana Drain because Force of Will is clearly a more powerful piece of protection to goals. They didn't understand that when a specific goal becomes too easy to achieve something must be done about it. The problem is that specific and simple goals are a lot harder to deal with than general or complicated goals. Key/Vault is a specific combo so short of neutering one "goal" card it won't be stopped. However, it is also simple as it requires only two deck slots. This means that it can easily substitute dozens of engines if one engine is attacked. Going back to my Tendrils example since it is a general goal it clearly has a simplest path success. Thus you can restrict some of the most powerful cards and deal with the problem handily. It is a simple goal in that it can support many engines like TPS/Grim Long/etc. The opposite end of the spectrum is Ichorid which has a specific goal but it is complicated. This means that it uses certain engines as crutches. Since it is specific you can restrict the best cards in the deck but as long as they are not specifically a part of the engine it won't do serious damage. However, once the engine is attacked the deck crumbles.

I think your idea is excellent in that WotC clearly needs a better source of information as many players seem to be dissapointed in the way Vintage has been getting treated. Through a combination of well-articulated ideas, clear definitions, two-sided arguments, and effectively presented data we might be able to finally shatter the barrier that has kept us generally ignored for so long. I would be glad to contribute more and I hope my explanation of archetypes and goals is a good example of what I could bring to the table if you will let me.

[Smmenen]

Time Vault is actually not the problem.   Mana Drains were already at the same level of performance before Time Vault was re-errated.   Look at the Sept-Oct metagame breakdown.   FYI: Thirst For Knowledge would be a more obvious target than Drain if the question was which card should be restricted.   

[Caron]

thirst for knowledge are a very good target, in a full artifact deck like Tezz they are almost like ancestral...
i also think they are worse than drain as a problem..

CARONDIMONIO

[Purple Hat]

thirst for knowledge are a very good target, in a full artifact deck like Tezz they are almost like ancestral...
i also think they are worse than drain as a problem..

CARONDIMONIO

won't people just switch to the next best draw spell?  AK or Night's Whisper or Counsel of the Soratami, etc, etc, etc.  Restricting draw spells til we're all playing concentrate engines or ancestral knowledge engines or whatever doesn't solve the fundimental problem, and long before we reach that point we'll probably be in a situation where a "draw engine" stops being 4 of x and becomes 1 each of a,b,c,d

[Yare]

I've always thought raising the minimum deck size would be an interesting idea to combat the critical mass idea, but nobody has ever really seemed to consider it.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Time Vault is actually not the problem.   Mana Drains were already at the same level of performance before Time Vault was re-errated.   Look at the Sept-Oct metagame breakdown.   FYI: Thirst For Knowledge would be a more obvious target than Drain if the question was which card should be restricted.   

My point was restrictions won't be able to solve the Key/Vault archetypes. I don't think Thirst for Knowledge or Drain deserve to be on the restricted list. You can restrict every draw engine and counterspell in Vintage and Key/Vault decks will just be Highlander and still take 40%+T-8s assuming that people aren't just playing those decks because they "like Mana Drain". The thing is at this point there is such a slight difference between the power level in draw engines it doesn't even matter. It isn't like we're talking about FoF+Gifts here it is TfK for God's sakes. 3 mana for 2 cards? What's next are we going to restrict all of Meditate/Intuition/AK/Esper Charm/Deep Anal/Meditate/Arcane Denial/Night's Whisper/Dark Confidant?

[Smmenen]

No.  It's not a slippery slope.   Restricting Thirst does not mean that you will be restricting Deep Analysis or Night's Whisper or Dark Confidant.

Restriction is not intended to "solve" Key/Vault.   The problem is not if there is a best deck or even a degenerate deck.  The problem is the lack of diversity in the format and the complete and overwhelming dominance of Mana Drains vis-a-vis their competitive rivals, contrary to Tom LaPille's argument.    There will always be a 'best deck.'  That's not hte problem.   The problem is the degree of dominance, not the fact of a best deck. 

Just wait 'til Monday to read my devastating demolition of the DCI using a bunch of graphs and charts taken from top 8 data.

The graph i just posted a few posts up will be used as a comparative data point. 

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

No.  It's not a slippery slope.   Restricting Thirst does not mean that you will be restricting Deep Analysis or Night's Whisper or Dark Confidant.

Restriction is not intended to "solve" Key/Vault.   The problem is not if there is a best deck or even a degenerate deck.  The problem is the lack of diversity in the format and the complete and overwhelming dominance of Mana Drains vis-a-vis their competitive rivals, contrary to Tom LaPille's argument.    There will always be a 'best deck.'  That's not hte problem.   The problem is the degree of dominance, not the fact of a best deck. 

Just wait 'til Monday to read my devastating demolition of the DCI using a bunch of graphs and charts taken from top 8 data.

The graph i just posted a few posts up will be used as a comparative data point. 

I don't believe it is a slippery slope and I definitely don't think the slippery slope argument is ever a strong one. My point was that there isn't really a huge difference in power between most of those cards and restricting Thirst for Knowledge would accomplish very little. I also agree that there is nothing wrong with having a "best deck" because it is almost impossible to create a 100% balanced format and eventually through months of tweaking one strategy will pull ahead. I think the second Gush era is as close as we'll ever get with 5 completely different goals getting 10%+ T-8 standing at some point and 2 of them leveling at around 25%. Oh how far we've come.

[Sextiger]

Restrict Thirst for Knowledge?   
I can't even find an adequate response to such an idea. 

[Tha Gunslinga]

Restrict Thirst for Knowledge?

Because it's a dominant blue draw engine, just like Gush, Fact or Fiction, Merchant Scroll (for Recall), and Brainstorm?  It makes plenty of sense to me.

[Purple Hat]

Restrict Thirst for Knowledge?

Because it's a dominant blue draw engine, just like Gush, Fact or Fiction, Merchant Scroll (for Recall), and Brainstorm?  It makes plenty of sense to me.

Wait....it's NOT a slippery slope?  Look at this list.  We keep restricting the best draw engine, then something else gets used, then we talk about whether we should restrict that.  I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's certainly what we've been doing.

[Smmenen]

Restrict Thirst for Knowledge?

Because it's a dominant blue draw engine, just like Gush, Fact or Fiction, Merchant Scroll (for Recall), and Brainstorm?  It makes plenty of sense to me.

Wait....it's NOT a slippery slope?  Look at this list.  We keep restricting the best draw engine,

No we don't.   We restrict A FEW of the best draw engines, but we don't simply restrict the best draw engine.   Intuition + AK was the best draw engine in 2003 for blue control, and won the Vintage Champs.   It wasn't restricted.   Thirst has been around for 6 years, and it's not restricted.  It wasn't putting up numbers that were problematic until now.   

In any case, the point made was that it's a slippery slope because restricting Thirst would lead to more restrictions, which is not true.   There is no reason to think that NIght's Whisper, Bob, Intuition, etc would be restricted if Thirst was. 

then something else gets used, then we talk about whether we should restrict that.  I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's certainly what we've been doing.

Well, if your point is that people TALK about restricting certain cards, you can find instances of people talking about restricting virtually every relevant card in Vintage.    Oscar Tan has an article that talks seriously about restricting Back to Basics. 

[Guli]

Well, I don't know, are the people who think TFK should be restricted absolutely sure that TFK is causing the high number of drain decks? Gush is free, recall and brainstorm are cheap. TFK is still 3 mana which is relatively high.

So it is not mana drain that is causing the dominance of blue but the draw engine? Is that the statement?

[Nehptis]

I suggest you all pay close attention to that new thread "Vault Storm".  Of the two lists presented thus far both of them run Vault / Key in a TPS - Ritual based deck.  One of them runs 3 x TFK.  Neither of them run Drains, obviously.

My point is that if those decks take starting putting up good Top 8 numbers, then I think it becomes much clearer that the problem with this metagame is Vault/Key and possibly TFK.  My money is still on Vault/Key being the main reason why we are in this poor excuse for a metagame.

If they don't do well, I still think that Vault/Key is a problem.  But, it becomes more difficult to separate Vault/key from Drain or TFK as being the reason that Tezz/Drain decks are dominating right now.

[Greistal]

Or, you may want to consider this list, who took third place at Annecy (351 people) and who is considered in Italy the most up-to-date control-combo version.

It plays Time Vault and Key but not Tezzeret; moreover, it uses Intuition/AK and only 2 Thirsts... Restricting Thirst would not damage this deck at all! 

(By the way, another strong Italian player made top8 in that tournament with a nearly identical list; I think that one used 1 Tezzeret, however.)

// Player: Tebaldo
// Name: Slow Knowledge Gift
// Tournament: Bazaar of Moxen 3 (351 players)
// Date: 03-May-2009
// Place: 3rd

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain
1 Misdirection
4 Accumulated Knowledge
2 Intuition
2 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Regrowth
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Transmute Artifact
1 Voltaic Key
1 Time Vault
1 Tinker
1 Inkwell Leviathan
2 Repeal
1 Rebuild
1 Tendrils of Agony

4 Underground Sea
2 Tropical Island
2 Island
2 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Sol Ring

// Sideboard
SB: 3 Duress
SB: 3 Tarmogoyf
SB: 3 Yixlid Jailer
SB: 2 Trygon Predator
SB: 2 Pithing Needle
SB: 1 Sundering Titan
SB: 1 Hurkyl's Recall

Yesterday, I went to a 39 people tournament with a more traditional approach to Tezzeret (2 Tezzs, Thirsts, Colossus, red and no Tendrils).
I met two players with this version and I must say that it's very strong; I did 3 control mirrors in 6 turns (the 3rd one being Oath) and I had lots of fun, even if I made only 3-3.

I love control mirrors!
Greistal

[Smmenen]

There is no doubt that Intuition + AK is powerful in control mirrors.   That's precisely what it's for.   When your opponent gives you multiple turns to develop, Intuition + AK eventually overwhelms the opponent. 

However, Intuition + AK has proven, over time, that it is simply not efficient enough in other matchups.   For example, it's markedly inferior to Thirst against Stax and Fish, and far too slow against Combo. 

[Greistal]

So it's a meta that balances itself out somehow...

Thirst beats non-control decks, but Intuition/AK (and Remora) beat Thirst... And Intuition/AK balances itself in the mirror (not to mention that, according to you, other decks beat Intuition/AK).

I don't see a problem here...

Of course I would prefer a meta where several draw engines are available and every deck plays what fits better its playstyle and win condition.
Something like:
Thirst --> Slaver, Tezzeret, Bomberman
Intuition/AK --> Oath, "metagame anti-control control"
Gifts --> Gifts ("Storm control")
Gush --> Grow
Fact or Fiction --> monoblue
...

They are all control and control-combo decks but with many differences between them!
Maybe unrestrictions could better serve that purpose?

Greistal

[Caron]

...intuition/AK is slower than thirst, it suffers GY hate, it needs 6 cards slot in a deck... it is definetly worse than thirst engine in tezz based controll..

so if you sum: Thirst engine + Drains + Timevault combo you definetly have a deck (tezzeret and similars) which actually I agree can dominate the format... causing a lack of different archetypes development...

whether Restricting something, or unrestricting something... i agree that some changings are needed... and i don't think that  rewording again the combo will be the best solution...

so if you don't touch the combo.. and you don0t touch the drains... maybe thirst wuold be a good choice...

Your list Greistal is very nice... but 4 thirsts UBG tezzeret version is slightly stronger...

CARONDIMONIO

[Sextiger]

Thirst costs 3 mana, has a drawback that is sometimes beneficial to Welder decks and is garbage off a Yawg's Will.  Thirst is the mouse in the room that everyone is pointing at while Timevault and Key are the elephant in the corner. 

[Nehptis]

I agree 100%, Vault/Key is the elephant in the room.  But, I love to speculate about a Vintage metagame where the DCI banned Vault, Tinker and Yawgwill.  (Hey aren't alternative universe scenarios the "in thing" right now?)

In this scenario a lot of cards could probably come off the unrestricted list.  Not to mention 3 of the most ridiculous "oops I win" scenarios of Vintage would be dead and buried.

Unfortunately, the DCI dislikes bannings.  So, Vintage is left to hobble along as it reaches critical mass, which it feels very close to achieving right now.

[Odd mutation]

Thirst costs 3 mana, has a drawback that is sometimes beneficial to Welder decks and is garbage off a Yawg's Will.  Thirst is the mouse in the room that everyone is pointing at while Timevault and Key are the elephant in the corner. 

Agreed! Before restricting anything else, ban Time Vault first and see what happens. It's what makes the kill all too easy. You can cast all the Mana Drains you want, storming out with Tendrils of Agony for example, is a lot harder then casting two artifacts for the win. Especially at  mana...

Robrecht

[Smmenen]

Banning Time Vault makes little sense.   Tinker and Yawgmoth's Will are both much stronger.   

The only reason to ban Time Vault instead of one of those cards is on account of some sensibility as to what the Vintage metagame 'should look like' based upon what it 'has looked like.' 

[thecman]

@Smmenen: Can you post the breakdown of both the top 8s and the tournament wins for one of the more recent data points on metagame graph.  I would like to try something based on Harlequin's rock-paper-scissors analogy.  If I can get the numbers I'll post my results shortly.  Thanks.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Banning Time Vault makes little sense.   Tinker and Yawgmoth's Will are both much stronger.   

The only reason to ban Time Vault instead of one of those cards is on account of some sensibility as to what the Vintage metagame 'should look like' based upon what it 'has looked like.' 

Tinker and Yawgmoth's Will are also both much more vulnerable (cards that answer Tinker and Will actually ANSWER Tinker and Will rather than just delaying it) and useful for your opponent (in the sense that they make generally dead cards like creature/graveyard hate useful). I mean Key/Vault costs 2/1/1 mana whats to stop a Gush deck from running the combo also if we unrestrict Gush? (which I think is a good idea anyways since Gush didn't deserve restriction in the first place) Tinker and Will are just stronger on paper but in real settings Vault is the much better card.

I've never thought that Tinker or Will (restricted) were serious problems in the metagame so its not like I'm just jumping from one ban bandwagon to another. I still don't think Tinker or Will should ever be banned. In fact I hope Vault is the only card (non-ante/dexterity) ever banned in Vintage. I played in the Gifts era and never thought that Gifts deserved restriction. (now more than ever with Brainstorm and Merchant Scroll gone) I could even deal with the Vault/Fusillade combo without batting an eyelash. Why? Because there were and are solid answers (not just delayers but ANSWERS) around for all these problem cards. Key/Vault is just stupid good and the printing of Tezzeret didn't exactly help things.

I would love for you to be right Smmenen. I honestly hope that whatever the DCI does at the next announcement it proves Key/Vault isn't as bad as I think. I'll be the first person in line to shake your hand and admit I was wrong. However, as it currently stands my prediction is unfolding. Key/Vault is no longer just a Drain thing and now it is infecting its way in to every deck that can support black tutors and just putting up more and more T-8 numbers. Should I be correct it is only a matter of time until the metagame finishes the shift to 100% Key/Vault vs. anti-Key/Vault decks. It already isn't far off not counting those not running the combo just for the sake of not running it.

[Guli]

Should I be correct it is only a matter of time until the metagame finishes the shift to 100% Key/Vault vs. anti-Key/Vault decks. It already isn't far off not counting those not running the combo just for the sake of not running it.

Sounds like Null Rod is the card that is in the way of this 'shift'.