Key/Vault is so broken it now has its own thread

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

It had to be done. Discussions on Key/Vault are seeping in to every other thread to the point where topics get derailed. I am doing this to help 3 groups of people. First, the moderators so that they don't have to make the tough call of marking relevant and important discussion as off-topic or spam. Second, to the creators of threads like Smmenen who have their threads derailed. Third, to the people who find this discussion relevant and would like to have all the arguments presented in a neater format. It was a long time coming and to be fair since it probably gets more discussion than any other topic on TMD (I might have accidentally started some of this ) it deserves its own thread. In a way this is a single card discussion of Time Vault, and how much it impacts the metagame. Ideally this thread will gauge the impact of Vault on the metagame rather than the actual discussion of banning it, though ban talk is largely unavoidable. There are obviously two main schools of thought on Vault.

#1. It is too stupid for everything else but Vintage can take it like a man.
#2. It is too stupid even for Vintage.

Each side is further divided in to a set of good arguments and a set of really bad arguments. First let us clear both side's bad arguments out.

#1. We don't ban cards in Vintage.
Most of what people talk about isn't going to happen anyways. On top of that WotC can do whatever it wants to its own game and we either deal with it or quit, Vintage isn't a big cash cow for them anyways. On top of that even if all this mattered and it still wouldn't happen so what? It is very interesting and relevant discussion as it is impossible to deny the effect of Vault on the format. As I hope to show it should also be relevant for an important part of what people are talking about right now to help vintage. However, as a necessary note I must add that this is not meant to criticize Smmenen directly or indirectly on using this argument. It would be ridiculous to expect him to devote a significant piece of one of his premium articles to something that likely won't happen. I would like to thank him for providing well-thought out ideas and inspiring me to put down a chunk of my time into this pseudo-article.

#2. Time Vault is unfun.
Unfun is a bad enough reason to restrict things, let alone ban them. I would be sorely disappointed if WotC broke their ban policy on a reason as flimsy as this. Format health is more important than individual fun because overall a healthy metagame will be more fun even if it has stupid things like this roaming around.

#1. Vault isn't a big part of Drains anyways.
Smmenen recently raised this point in an article. The point is that anything with broken stuff+drains will dominate and the win condition isn't that important. Key/Vault being the most efficient just doesn't account for enough to justify banning. First of all -10% from drains and +10% to hate/other/fish/whatever you want to call it (in my opinion 5-8% was a conservative estimate for reasons I will state later) is good even if that is the only effect. However, it has a second effect that is more subtle that Smmenen touched upon. It breaks apart 50% Tezz/50% other in Drains to 100% diversified between CS/DT/Painter/Remora/Bomberman/Oath/etc. So even if Drains only tank 10% it is still a significantly more healthy format in that it will be much more diverse.

#2. Shahrazad.
No. Bad. Shahrazad being banned should have nothing to do with Vault's impact on the metagame. Shahrazad is only a reason for opening up banning but it has nothing to do with Vault. Bad.

#1. a) Painter/Stone is good enough.
No. Bad. Painter/Stone is infinitely worse than Key/Vault. Key/Vault is Ancestral Recall and Painter/Stone is TfK. Yes they're both good and viable, but Ancestral is clearly much better. Don't believe me? Guess which is restricted. It is certainly obvious that one costs more mana, but once again there is a second tier of relevance that just shatters any reasonable comparisson. That is how easy it is to hate out P/S. K/V requires you to draw the hate, P/S has Blessing to stop it. Say Null Rod or Pithing Needle is on the table. P/S needs to draw the combo+answer to Rod/Needle+answer to Blessing. K/V just needs combo+answer to Rod/Needle. K/V's low mana cost makes bounce and mana denial largely irrelevant. The same is not true of P/S. P/S gets hit by everything that Vault does+everything that hits Tinker+almost everything that hits Oath+almost everything that hits aggro strategies. Creature kill is nowhere near irrelevant and I would be pissing myself with joy as a Fish player to be able to switch from Ancient Grudges to Diabolic Edicts (just an example don't go saying "omg i noe ran gruj") and strengthen not only my Drain matchup but also every other matchup. The best thing you can run in a deck is a flexible card that improves as many matchups as possible at once. That is why cards like Meddling Mage and Duress are bombs. Oh and P/S targets+targets a player so target changing/shroud work also.

b) But Painter/Stone is still winning tournaments.
It is winning tournaments because it is rogue compared to Tezz. Much the same way you can take a tournament win with Ichorid. Does that mean Ichorid is as good as Tezz? Absolutely not, it just means that Ichorid is viable and nobody was prepared. P/S is more than vulnerable enough to be kept in check by hate decks if it takes up the spot as "deck to beat".

#2. Take out Will+Tinker+Vault they're all dumb and overpowered.
No, go play Legacy. Banning is an emergency button that should only be used in extreme circumstance.

Now on to the good arguments for both sides. Unfortunately my bias will be more clear here but bear with me and feel free to post your own opinions.

#1. Will and Tinker are better cards what makes Vault so special?
Well the obviously bad counter argument is that Will and Tinker were here first in terms of recent Vintage gameplay. We don't have the same love for Vault. No. Bad. The problem with Vault is that it is way harder to hate. "But r so meny kard tat kel artifect." Yes you enjoy running your Oxidizes/Shatters and then getting destoyed by Storm+Ichorid+Oath+Tinker+Fish+Random aggro+etc. because you have all those dead cards. "Wait, but there are plenty of permanents that hit K/V and aren't useless generally." YES, but they're permanents. Permanents suffer from the unfortunate problem of being bounced. With robust tutor packages and ample draw spell options (that restriction can't control anymore) it isn't hard to dig up that Hurkyl's or Chain of Vapor. (which are super flexible for Drains btw) Tinker can be answered by both spells and permanents. In addition to that the stuff that kills Tinker also kills other common Vintage win conditions. Will suffers from the same problems. There are a dozen different ways to attack Tinker and Will but only 1 way to attack Vault, and it is the worst possible way. Will and Tinker won't ever be as bad as K/V for the same reason that Dragon+Animate never will be.

Subtle bonus point: Tezz runs 4 win conditions. K/V+Tezz+Tinker+Will. Ban Vault and Drains lose 50% of their win conditions initially and overall 25% if P/S takes K/V's place. The card Tezzeret the Seeker is more or less bad without Vault so you do more direct damage by taking Vault than any other 1 win condition in Tezz.

#2. Key/Vault warps the metagame.
Undeniable. Almost all Drains run it, most Combo is starting to run it, every hate deck deals with it, those with niether the combo nor hate lose. Speed is barely even an option against K/V which is pushing combo out of the metagame. This is the most powerful reason, and doesn't really require much explanation. Either you see it or you don't. (To be fair to the other side, either it is there or it isn't.) Metagames warped around one strategy or deck are unhealthy. The combo itself promotes more uniform deck building and kills diversity. It also takes down other previously viable options. It is just flat out THE win condition.

#1. Fine then let's unrestrict cards that don't seem to work well with Key/Vault.
Bingo we have a reasonable middle ground between the two sides. Primo target numero uno (I don't speak Spanish sorry for probably butchering your language ) for unrestriction is Gush. Gush boosts both combo and aggro-control strategies to reasonable power levels. Danger? Potential K/V/Gush decks that just demolish everything in their way. Do we have a way of gauging the likelyhood of such a deck? No. It takes months for metagames to stabilize (if they even do) and predicting all that is impossible. Smmenen also proposes Burning Wish. Less danger because Burning Wish by its very nature would not support a K/V shell in addition to strengthening the anti-Drain archetype of combo. Is it strong enough to make the dent we need? Maybe. Do I think it will? Not by itself. Paired with Gush? Maybe. However, there are also many threads with plenty of information on unrestrictions and I would prefer this thread didn't become simply about the B/R list.

So there we have it. As best as I can understand these are the arguments being presented though I may have missed some. Is one side right and the other wrong? It is too early to tell. As it stands it looks like the metagame is shifting towards K/V v. anti-K/V. There is a danger, but nobody can predict the future. I stated earlier that I would like this thread to centralize around discussion of K/V and more specifically Time Vault itself. Given the vast amount of discussion in other threads about this I doubt this thread will fall soon. Hopefully we can keep this civil as it already borders on something that might not be allowed and I think this is an important topic. Thanks for reading.

[Hero]

A very good post which presents both sides of the debate, bravo.

Personally I think Vault needs to be re-errata'd.  Even if the original intention of this card's design was so that something like Twiddle would untap this card and allow a second turn, Magic has come such a long way in the 15+ years that there's no way that anyone can convince me that this card is healthy for Vintage or any other format.  Maybe back in the day when untap effects were somewhat harder to achieve but there are so many options today that it's just too effective.  The fact that Tezzeret both tutors for Vault and can untap it on your first extra turn screams abuse.

How much longer will it be until every deck that can support the two-card combo will run it?  With the exception of the DCI printing some new cards that can punish this combo, it shouldn't be hard to see that this will only be worse for the format. 

Talking about format diversity, Mana Drain decks have seemingly account for an unprecedented high number of top 8's but what I have not see anyone address besides Fry here is that Mana Drain decks run V+K/Tezz/Tinker/Will.  Why wouldn't someone want to run a deck that has such a high amount of win conditions?  Taking out a big piece of the win condition will at least force those Drain decks to run something else.  Also, while percentages of top 8's are one side of the story, how much attendance is there for Vintage tournaments in 2008/2009 compared to say, Gush era?  I think that is something that is worth looking at for consideration.

[JACO]

Your opening post is very well constructed. Even based on your explanation however, you don't really need another thread for this.

Voltaic Key + Time Vault is the best two card combo in Vintage right now, just as Painter's Servant + Grindstone was the best before it, just as Merchant Scroll + Gush was before it, just as Animate Dead + Worldgorger Dragon was the best before that. Yawgmoth's Will, Tendrils of Agony, or Tinker are the best one card combos. This is one of the main factors in what determines what deck is usually the best; not what draw engine they use.

Vintage revolves around exploiting the most efficient strategies in Magic's history, and the decks and deck shells will most often be tailored around these. So why does this merit a new thread that doesn't discuss a specific deck (hint: it doesn't)?

[Hero]

Vintage revolves around exploiting the most efficient strategies in Magic's history, and the decks and deck shells will most often be tailored around these. So why does this merit a new thread that doesn't discuss a specific deck (hint: it doesn't)?

I think the point is that when there are multiple, different decks that are capable of including the two-card combo, there is a problem with the format. 

[Necrologia]

Re-re-re-errataing Time Vault at this point would essentially be creating power level errata. Wizards hasn't created power level errata in many years, and adding it now to the posterchild for "get your power level errata out of my Type 1" probably isn't going to be real popular. On the other hand, it'd give Grotlieb the chance to say I told you so to everyone who's been pushing for the current errata for years.

I personally don't like the idea of bannings in Vintage, so unrestricting something seems to be the only way to go. It's either that, or pray Zandikar has a huge collection of Vintage playables that are enough to completely shake up the metagame all by itself.

The problem with Vault+Key compared to other 2 card combos in magic is that it's cheap, easily tutorable, completely colorless, and neither card is totally worthless on it's own. Vault + Fusillade was amazing when it first came out, and that cost 2 more mana, required red, and each card was completely worthless without the other. It's so efficient as to put every other combo that's ever existed to shame. Even Flash + Hulk can't stand up. The argument seems to boil down to, is it too efficient, or just highly efficient like every other playable effect in Vintage is?

[meadbert]

In my opinion Tinker/Robot is still the best win condition in type 1.
Vault/Key costs 4 to win now and 3 to win a turn later.

Tinker/Mox is a two cards combo that costs 2 to win in 2 turns.

Moxen are also much better on their own than Key is and Tinker combos with 10 or more cards in a deck rather than comboing with 1 or 2 Keys and 1 or 2 Tez the way Vault does.

Also, I am pretty sure that Tinker/Robot is far more common in vintage top 8s than even Vault/Key are.

Vault/Key are easier to hate out with Null Rod or Ancient Grudge or other such removal.  Tinker can dodge Duress if it is Mystical/Vamped for and many Robots have various forms of evasion making them difficult to remove.  This leaves countering Tinker as the best bet which gives an edge to blue decks right there since not only is Tinker blue, but the best answer (countering) tends also to be blue.  The next best answers (bounce) is also usually blue so you end up with the best win condition and the best two answers to the best win condition all being blue.

If there were a problem I would say Tinker/Robot is the problem.  That said I do not think there is a problem.

[Purple Hat]

I still don't get the point of the "ban vault" argument.  People keep bringing it up so you created a thread for it, but that doesn't mean the discussion goes anywhere.  If the DCI changes their policy then it'll happen, but they've shown no signs of doing that in the past so I just don't really see the point of discussing it.

 

[voltron00x]

Isn't it possible that the Vintage metagame just hasn't fully reacted yet to Vault/Key and is still in the middle of a course correction?  The fact that so many players have continued to cling to old-school Fish as their "budget" deck or their anti-Tezz deck, rather than the Red & Green options out there that clearly perform better, is a perfect example.

See also the continued success of Ichorid as a foil to Tezz.  The more space Tezz devotes against Ichorid, the less space it has for budget Aggro, Oath, Storm, and Shop, and the more attention those decks pay to Tezz, the better they'll perform.

I'll give another one.  I had to battle through this card recently:

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=29849

It was obviously there to RFG Time Vault in the quasi-mirror with the extra benefit of being very good against Oath and most Storm builds.

Changing a policy regarding Banning or Errata should be an absolute last resort.  It would be wise for the DCI to at least try to unrestrict a few other cards before taking that step - Gush, Burning Wish, Balance, etc, preferably only 1-2 at a time so their impact can be measured correctly.

Vault / Key is obnoxiously good.  No argument.  What about Yawgmoth's Will?  

If you start banning things based on power level alone, how does that card continue to exist in the format?  The DCI is who would draw that line - do you want them to do so, based on the clear restraint they've shown with restrictions? [/sarcasm]  Do we really want to start looking at cards and banning them based on power level alone?  

So Vault/Key is in the format.  It exists.  It's in most base-Blue decks.  It's "the best combo". 

Something has to be the best combo. The best cards see the most play, right?  See also: Recall, Lotus, Yawg Will, even Tinker...

[Guli]

I have absolutely no problem with the key/vault combo

Right now I play fish because it is the archetype that gives the designer the opportunity to innovate a lot.

I also think that fish could use more boost, they need to print serious cards to achieve this. When fish gets stronger the meta get more diverse again because the more null rod the harder it gets for vault/key to win games. Null Rod is the answer but it needs more support. I can think of some cards but it is not my job nor am I qualified.

To make my post more concrete, fish needs more ways to disrupt the powerful engines of the vault builds. Vault can be dealt with but the engines are very hard to slow down, let alone stop.

This is not an easy task. I just wanted to post my thoughts, and the essence of my message is, don't ban or restrict stuff, let people play their pet drain decks but give the rest the tools to put up a fair fight and more important, to make the games more interesting for the drain players as well. We all enjoy tight games.

[Vegeta2711]

In my opinion Tinker/Robot is still the best win condition in type 1.

Tinker Robot was NEVER the best win con in Vintage. Like not even close.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

As I stated in the opening post I think the main problem with Key/Vault is that it opens up too many broken win conditions and is hard enough to stop on its own. I don't buy the Tinker argument because all robots die to Hurkyl's/Rebuild/Diabolic Edict/etc. all of which are good cards to do a dozen other things each, maybe even in the same deck liks Slaver/Painter. Something like Ancient Grudge hits Vault and Shops then what? You have a dead maindeck against most of the field. I don't have a problem with the best combo. Give me Painter/Stone or Vault/Fusillade or Dragon matchups all day long. It is ridiculous that after over half a year people are still clinging to "well maybe the meta will fix itself." You can't make ANY hate deck with 75 cards that can take down all 4 win conditions of Tezz while still being able to beat Storm+Oath+Ichorid+other random Drain decks with any reasonable percentage. Hate decks aren't supposed to beat everything but they shouldn't just flat out lose to everything either or you won't win a big tournament. The meta has had more than enough time to correct itself. Either we need Vault fixed or Gush unrestricted again. Either way the DCI is going to have to suck it up and admit they made a mistake somewhere or Vintage will die. That is my point. Niether option seems very likely considering how the people at the DCI either don't care about Vintage or see themselves as the almighty never-wrongers. I was hoping another option would emerge through discussion and having it more concentrated than scattered posts intruding on other threads is more effective.

I specifically stated multiple times that a card shouldn't be banned on power level it should be banned on how badly it damages the format. As it stands Vintage is only getting worse and Vault seems to be the primary cause. Vintage has been and will continue to be healthy despite the presence of Will/Tinker/Ancestral/Lotus once this problem is fixed on way or another. If it isn't fixed, it won't fix itself. We've had plenty of time to fix it ourselves. I thought for sure I adequately covered why Tinker and Will are significantly less offenders than Vault but I guess not.

In my opinion Tinker/Robot is still the best win condition in type 1.

Tinker Robot was NEVER the best win con in Vintage. Like not even close.

Well put summary of my possibly winding and boring reply. XD

[Sean Ryan]

Please stop this banning nonsense.  Vault has been and could be errataed again, but we will have to wait and see.

Isn't it possible that the Vintage metagame just hasn't fully reacted yet to Vault/Key and is still in the middle of a course correction?  The fact that so many players have continued to cling to old-school Fish as their "budget" deck or their anti-Tezz deck, rather than the Red & Green options out there that clearly perform better, is a perfect example.

Yes.
We have a 'best deck' metagame which many do not like.  You can complain about it all you want and eventually the DCI might do something but, until then I think we all need to focus on finding ways to compete in the metagame we have even if it's not ideal. 

This is not an easy task. I just wanted to post my thoughts, and the essence of my message is, don't ban or restrict stuff, let people play their pet drain decks but give the rest the tools to put up a fair fight and more important, to make the games more interesting for the drain players as well. We all enjoy tight games.

I agree, but will say there are more options out there than many acknowledge.

The recent BOM event with nearly 200 players attests to this:
http://www.deckcheck.net/event.php?event=Bazaar+of+Moxen+3+-+Vintage+Champs

An aggro MUD list wins it all with Painter in 2nd. Half the top 8 is made of Drains which speaks to the fact that the other archetypes need some help.  However, the biggest Vintage event of the year was not dominated by Vault/Key, but by Drains.  Fish and Ichorid round out the Top 8 showing they still have life in them. 

The health of Vintage does not hinge upon Vault/Key, but upon tournament support, new additions to the format, and player innovation.       

[meadbert]

In my opinion Tinker/Robot is still the best win condition in type 1.

Tinker Robot was NEVER the best win con in Vintage. Like not even close.

Well put summary of my possibly winding and boring reply. XD

Three of the last 4 vintage championship finals have been Tinker/Robot vs Tinker/Robot.

2005 saw Roland Chang (5c Stax) defeating Andy Probasco (Gifts Control)
2006 saw Travis Spero (Meandeck Gifts) defeating Tommy Kolowith (Pitch Long with DSC in board)
2008 saw Paul Mastriano (TPS) defeating Jimmy McCarthy (Control Slaver)

I concede that in 2007 Tinker/Robot was not the best win condition because Moxen do not play well with Gush, however I will point out that the GAT deck that Stephen Menendian recently top 8ed with did run Tinker/Robot despite only having a few Moxen.

Most recently 2008 saw a total of 5 Tinker/Robot decks in the top 8 of the championship while the next best win condition (Tendrils of Agony) only showed up three times.

In 2006 and 2008 a combined 3 of the 4 finals games were won by Tinker/DSC.

In 2006 which was Tendril's heyday,  there were still 5 decks with Tinker/DSC and 5 decks with Tendrils in the top 8 and the eventual winning deck was a Meandeck Gifts list that was built around the Tinker/DSC win condition.


If Tinker/Robot has never been best win condition then what are/were the best win conditions?


EDIT:
In the BOM tournament mentioned above note that there are 4 decks running Tinker/Robot and only 1 run Vault/Key.  Tinker/Robot is pretty clearly the better win condition right now.

[Vegeta2711]

If Tinker/Robot has never been best win condition then what are/were the best win conditions?

OLDEN OLDEN days, really we could say Y. Will and it'd probably be more accurate than anything else. Otherwise we have to pick some crappy win like Psychatog or something, which was awful.
which lead to:
Tendrils.
which lead to:
Vault-Key

In the BOM tournament mentioned above note that there are 4 decks running Tinker/Robot and only 1 run Vault/Key.  Tinker/Robot is pretty clearly the better win condition right now.

...

That's part of your argument in the bolded? Really? Like I'm not even going to bother here, there's no way you would miss how flawed that argument is and clearly just want to troll. Does anyone want to explain why the best win condition / mode of a deck isn't necessarily the one that does better at a tournament? Because I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

[The Wolf]

#1. We don't ban cards in Vintage.

I understand this is not the policy right now, but at some point cards in vintage will be banned.  One of three things will happen:

1) Releasing cards into vintage as the years go on has pushed decks to a more and more singleton base.  As sets keep coming out, more cards get put on the list and at some point there going to start axing stuff to avoid a land + highlander format.  Ive been playing vintage for 7 years and this point is getting closer and closer. 

2) A threshold of two card combo's will be reached and decks will just be tutors, combo pieces and protection.  This is also very close to happening.  This is similar to 1, except its combo based, not draw spell based.

3) Something that is just too good gets printed and it warps the format too much.  Is time vault this card? Maybe yes, maybe no, but there will be something that does this eventually. 

[meadbert]

Iserlohn:  4 Tinker/Robot 0 Vault/Key
Annecy:  4 Tinker/Robot 1 Vault/Key
Philadelphia: 5 Tinker/Robot 4 Vault/Key
Seattle:  2 Tinker/Robot 2 Vault/Key
Pittsburg: 5 Tinker/Robot 3 Vault/Key
Zurish:  4 Tinker/Robot 2 Vault/Key

It is fair enough to say that a deck that runs Vault/Key will want to run TInker/Robot anyway since Tinker can find Vault or Key, but this question remains:
If Vault/Key is the best win condition in magic, then why is it that half of the decks running Tinker (almost all of which also run Demonic and Vamp and Thirsts) are not running Vault/Key?

[OwenTheEnchanter]

Iserlohn:  4 Tinker/Robot 0 Vault/Key
Annecy:  4 Tinker/Robot 1 Vault/Key
Philadelphia: 5 Tinker/Robot 4 Vault/Key
Seattle:  2 Tinker/Robot 2 Vault/Key
Pittsburg: 5 Tinker/Robot 3 Vault/Key
Zurish:  4 Tinker/Robot 2 Vault/Key

It is fair enough to say that a deck that runs Vault/Key will want to run TInker/Robot anyway since Tinker can find Vault or Key, but this question remains:
If Vault/Key is the best win condition in magic, then why is it that half of the decks running Tinker (almost all of which also run Demonic and Vamp and Thirsts) are not running Vault/Key?

I think its safe to say if you are playing a deck with the usual Tinker, Demonic Tutor, Vampiric Tutor, and Thirst for Knowledge and you aren't playing Time Vault and Voltiac Key then you built your deck wrong.

[Sean Ryan]

#1. We don't ban cards in Vintage.

I understand this is not the policy right now, but at some point cards in vintage will be banned.  One of three things will happen:

1) Releasing cards into vintage as the years go on has pushed decks to a more and more singleton base.  As sets keep coming out, more cards get put on the list and at some point there going to start axing stuff to avoid a land + highlander format.  Ive been playing vintage for 7 years and this point is getting closer and closer. 

2) A threshold of two card combo's will be reached and decks will just be tutors, combo pieces and protection.  This is also very close to happening.  This is similar to 1, except its combo based, not draw spell based.

3) Something that is just too good gets printed and it warps the format too much.  Is time vault this card? Maybe yes, maybe no, but there will be something that does this eventually. 

And whats your point?  Broken cards and the restricted list define Vintage.

In regards to your 2nd point - I would argue that we are already there.  Effectivley packing the most broken cards in the game into one deck is a beatiful thing.  Storm combo more closley resembles highlander but was less successful.  Drain-Vault is enjoying so much success because it adds consistency and speed in a sleek package.             

Time Vaults re-errata may just have been the straw that broke the camels back, but it's that cumulative effect you speak of which is contributing to Drains levels of dominance.  Even without Vault/Key Drain-combo is by far the best strategic approach.  You could make an argument that you prefered the diversity of finishers in Slaver, Painter, Drain-Tendrils.  IMO, thats an illusion of diversity.

Part of the problem lies in the desire to play something unique with a casual approach.  If we were all spikes this problem would either solve itself or it would be glaringly clear to the DCI that they need to take some kind of action.

For example, most of the few Workshop decks I see in top 8s are not optimized.  If Workshop players were more serious about beating Drains you would see more MUD versions like the one that won BOM.               

[meadbert]

I think its safe to say if you are playing a deck with the usual Tinker, Demonic Tutor, Vampiric Tutor, and Thirst for Knowledge and you aren't playing Time Vault and Voltiac Key then you built your deck wrong.

So half of the decks top 8ing with Tinker are built wrong?  This is certainly possible.  I cannot argue with Vault/Key being a powerful win condition that has synergy with Tinker, Demonic, Vamp and Thirst, but I am also hesitant to declare such a high percentage of decks to be built incorrectly.

Should every Slaver list run Vault/Key?  What about Drain Tendrils?  What about Desolutionists Thirst Long list?  What about Painter?
What about this Tendril's combo list: http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=26097
What about this Remora combo list:  http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=26098

Maybe these lists are all suboptimal without Vault/Key or maybe Vault/Key is not as good as folks are making it out to be.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

I think its safe to say if you are playing a deck with the usual Tinker, Demonic Tutor, Vampiric Tutor, and Thirst for Knowledge and you aren't playing Time Vault and Voltiac Key then you built your deck wrong.

So half of the decks top 8ing with Tinker are built wrong?  This is certainly possible.  I cannot argue with Vault/Key being a powerful win condition that has synergy with Tinker, Demonic, Vamp and Thirst, but I am also hesitant to declare such a high percentage of decks to be built incorrectly.

Should every Slaver list run Vault/Key?  What about Drain Tendrils?  What about Desolutionists Thirst Long list?  What about Painter?
What about this Tendril's combo list: http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=26097
What about this Remora combo list:  http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=26098

Maybe these lists are all suboptimal without Vault/Key or maybe Vault/Key is not as good as folks are making it out to be.

Simply put, yes. If you're running the basic black tutors (let alone also ISeal or Grim Tutors) you should be able to make 2 deck slots for infinite turns. Unless, of course, your meta is full of oxidize effects in which case let your opponents waste 10+ deck slots and just beat their unprepared asses with the other broken stuff. Its not like you need any set up for the combo or anything.

[benthetenor]

I have to agree with Meadbert here, and I'm shocked at you, Vegeta, for your post. You're usually very cool-headed, or at the very least, constructive. Your post was neither.

If we have differing definitions of "best", then we should define "best". Is best defined as most number of Top 8's? Is it most efficient? Is it most "powerful"? (which would, again, need to be defined) Is it easiest to fit into any deck? I think that it's hard to argue that Tinker + Robot is at a deficiency in any of these metrics. Efficient? It's one card and three mana, in the most played color in Vintage, which also feeds into it being able to be played in virtually any deck, from combo to control to Fish to Stax. Meadbert has mentioned a number of top 8's. I haven't checked myself, but unless anyone has any evidence to the contrary, then we should probably use his data.

As far as the whole banning question, I don't think it's a given that cards will have to be banned eventually. Taking the last few rounds of restrictions/un-restrictions into account, there has been a large number of cards that have moved around. For reference:

2007:

Black Vise is unrestricted
Gifts Ungiven is restricted
Gush is unrestricted
Mind Twist is unrestricted
Voltaic Key is unrestricted

Shahrazad is banned


2008:

Brainstorm is restricted
Flash is restricted
Gush is restricted
Merchant Scroll is restricted
Ponder is restricted

Chrome Mox is unrestricted
Dream Halls is unrestricted
Mox Diamond is unrestricted
Personal Tutor is unrestricted
Time Spiral is unrestricted
Time Vault is errata-ed / restricted

In the last two years, the B/R list hasn't really grown or shrunk. It's actually smaller by a card. Going back even further, the only card to be restricted since 2004 (other than those entering from the portal sets, but that's clearly a net gain of potential 4-ofs) is Trinisphere. I don't see a lot of evidence that there are more Vintage decks that are close to Highlander formats. And there is at least some evidence that the list can shrink further in the next few rounds, even if that's far from certain. With the last move being a massive amount of unrestrictions, I see evidence that bannings are not even close to necessary.

Vault/Key decks have been in existence for 2 potential restriction periods. That's nothing. Gush was around for a full year, and even then, there was evidence that the metagame was correcting itself before the DCI imploded the format. Assuming it takes at least that long, then we've still got a few months of innovation and metagaming before we should even consider going to a banning or restriction or power-errata (which is probably the worst possible way to solve the problem) to fix the problem deus-ex machina style.

[meadbert]

Simply put, yes. If you're running the basic black tutors (let alone also ISeal or Grim Tutors) you should be able to make 2 deck slots for infinite turns. Unless, of course, your meta is full of oxidize effects in which case let your opponents waste 10+ deck slots and just beat their unprepared asses with the other broken stuff. Its not like you need any set up for the combo or anything.

The logic behind what you say is fine and if I had not read any topic in the tournament report forum and never looked at morphling then I would agree with what you are saying.
Key/Vault is better than other combos like Painter/Grindstone and FlameVault were.

On the other hand we have tournament evidence.  Stax should be an ideal fit for Vault/Key.  They synergize with Demonic, Vamp and Tinker which Stax usually runs.  They have synergy with Welder.  Some Stax lists run Thirst.  Finally they can be accelerated out with Workshop.  Most Stax decks still do not run Vault and Key.

You have theorized that any deck with Grim Tutors should be running Vault/Key.  Eric Becker recently suggested a list in this forum that did not run Grim Tutor, but could have.  In theory I have no problem with that.  The logic is sound.  Vault and Key have insane synergy with Tutors.  It still remains that your assertion flies in the face of tournament evidence.  Rather than every deck top 8ing with Grim Tutors running Vault and Key we instead have the opposite.  To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a deck to top 8 with Grim tutor, Time Vault and Voltaic Key in it.  I would not be surprised at all if it were to happen this weekend (particularly if Becker is adds a Grim Tutor to his list and pilots that) but we are still left with no tournament evidence.  None of this means you are wrong.  Vault and Key have insane synergy with Grim Tutor.  Instead, the question is why is there no tournament evidence to back it up?

My thoughts on Vault and Key are this.  They are not as good as Tinker or Yawg.  Vegeta mentioned Yawg as the best win condition.  I was not thinking of it as a win condition, but defining win conditions is tough.  Yawg is better than Tinker.
Without Vault and Key, Long is a 1 card combo.  Basically you Grim for Yawg and resolve Yawg and win.  If there are Resistors or Rods messing you up then you Grim for Tinker and Tinker out a fattie and win.  Why replace a 1 card combo with a multiple card combo?  Why get stuck with a Vault, but not a Key or a Key but not a Vault?

If we get to a point where just about every Drain deck is packing Vault and Key then this thread starts to get interesting.  If Fish starts running a token Vault and Key and Oath does as well then banning and power level erratta get interesting.  When instead we are left with one or 2 Time Vaults per top 8 but far more Yawgs, Tinkers and even Tarmogoyfs then it is sort of silly to claim that Vault and Key are so overpowered that they should be banned or errattaed.  There may be fun factor arguments, but it sucks losing to turn 1 Tinker->DSC and that is far more frequent than turn 1 Vault + Key.

[nineisnoone]

There may be fun factor arguments, but it sucks losing to turn 1 Tinker->DSC and that is far more frequent than turn 1 Vault + Key.

I agree completely.

[oneofchaos]

There may be fun factor arguments, but it sucks losing to turn 1 Tinker->DSC and that is far more frequent than turn 1 Vault + Key.

I agree completely.

Tinker-> Robot can be raced, bounced, etc.  Once your opponent enters infinite turns, it is certainly over. 
Tinker - robot is like having a tank come up to your bunker in war.  You may be screwed at the moment, but you might wiggle out of the situation.
Time Vault-Key is like being in the same bunker, with the same tank, only your tied down.

I'd rather lose to a 11/11, a 7/10, a 4/4, or a 7/11 rather than infinite turns any day of the week.

[ix-ir]

Is Mana Drain really a worthwhile engine card to have in the format? Why not restrict it?

[nineisnoone]

There may be fun factor arguments, but it sucks losing to turn 1 Tinker->DSC and that is far more frequent than turn 1 Vault + Key.

I agree completely.

Tinker-> Robot can be raced, bounced, etc.  Once your opponent enters infinite turns, it is certainly over. 
Tinker - robot is like having a tank come up to your bunker in war.  You may be screwed at the moment, but you might wiggle out of the situation.
Time Vault-Key is like being in the same bunker, with the same tank, only your tied down.

Time Vault + Key can be bounced (you could if you wanted to), Ancient Grudged, Oxidized, Seal of Cleansing/Primordium, Null Roded, Needled, Chaliced.

No.  Time Vault-Key is just you are being tied down.  Maybe there is a tank.  Maybe there isn't.  If you don't get out, you'll eventually starve to death.  But as noted above there are ways to get out (and notably more ways to get out then to destroy the tank) and there are ways to prevent being tied down (again more so than ways to prevent the tank being brought out).

I'd rather lose to a 11/11, a 7/10, a 4/4, or a 7/11 rather than infinite turns any day of the week.

Why?

[M.Solymossy]

The word "restrict" came up 8 times, and only counting once the quotes saying "restriction/unrestriction".

The word "ban" came up 26 times, not counting quotes, multiple uses, or the list posted mentioning Shaharazad.


Guys, I'm pretty sure that the rules state that these topics belong in the Full Users Board or Adept Lounge.

[oneofchaos]

TimeKey can be disrupted of course.  In fact easier than tinker.  Tinker can't really be disrupted aside countering it, because most targets don't have abilities.  TimeKey does guarantee tank, because once you are tied down, a squire can beat you. 

Not having turns is the same thing as trinisphere.  You can't play spells.  Trinisphere was restricted not for dominance, but for an unfun factor. I'm recently getting in touch with friends that I thought still played vintage but they jumped ship with TimeKey.  I don't want the standard response of "if you don't like vintage leave".  We need all the players possible to play vintage.  Now in addition to being known to newer players as the format of turn 1 kills, it's also a format of you skip infinite turns?  Good luck getting a type 2 player to switch into this metagame.

[Lemnear]

Iserlohn:  4 Tinker/Robot 0 Vault/Key
Annecy:  4 Tinker/Robot 1 Vault/Key
Philadelphia: 5 Tinker/Robot 4 Vault/Key
Seattle:  2 Tinker/Robot 2 Vault/Key
Pittsburg: 5 Tinker/Robot 3 Vault/Key
Zurish:  4 Tinker/Robot 2 Vault/Key

It is fair enough to say that a deck that runs Vault/Key will want to run TInker/Robot anyway since Tinker can find Vault or Key, but this question remains:
If Vault/Key is the best win condition in magic, then why is it that half of the decks running Tinker (almost all of which also run Demonic and Vamp and Thirsts) are not running Vault/Key?

Would say that's 'cause half of the tounaments are non-proxy, I guess. Annecy and Iserlohn were non-proxy. Time Key is an undercosted Bargain without lifeloss playable for every deck. I'm wondering why TPS would not run it with all their tutors in the decks. Moreover Tinker is IMO not a 1 card combo ... at least you need artifacts to sac    -__-

[LotusHead]

#1. It is too stupid for everything else but Vintage can take it like a man.

Vintage can handle Shaharazad, Tinker, Yawgmoth's Will, Black Lotus and Ancestral Recall.

And Oath of Druids, and Trinisphere, and Gush and Mind Twist and Black Vise.

If Key/Vault or Vault/Twiddle Effect is game plan #1, then gameplan #2 is to hate it out.

Even Trinisphere.dec had to face the dreaded 3-4 basics.dec before getting restricted.

We're Vintage: We can handle it.  There will be many deck types viable, I promise...