TheManaDrain.com
February 20, 2019, 12:57:56 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
  Print  
Author Topic: MTGO Holiday Special Vintage Tournament  (Read 9395 times)
Coopes
Basic User
**
Posts: 123


View Profile Email
« Reply #60 on: December 20, 2014, 11:46:50 pm »

If Ethan is around, thanks to WoTC for putting this on it was good times. Ended up 5-3, lets do it again  Smile
I'm glad you had fun! I'll pass it along to the MTGO folks.

I'm hoping that this will create enough critical mass that we'll fire more DEs. I believe that Vintage can succeed on MTGO.

Was awesome seeing so many people come out for this Smile

These big events definitely add the extra incentive to get people out of the woodwork's and into daily events. I hope it keeps up!
Logged
healo
Basic User
**
Posts: 77


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: December 21, 2014, 03:48:28 am »

I went 3-3 with Oath, then dropped. It seems like nothing is really going to stop the consistency of delver. I lost to Rich Shay with multiple maindeck cages, then I lost 1 match where they had it all and I had nothing at all.. Also lost 1 match to white hate deck which seemed to be playing 20 lands and 40 anti-Oath cards. I tried red for Pyroblasts in sb for jaces and control matchups, but it ended up costing me 1 game where I lost with no black source and Deluge, 2 Decay in hand and I also lost to delver where my Pyroblasts were there only to fuel up their cruises. Probably Oath will be hated out again very soon.

Good event overall, good job, congrats to winners. Hopefull wotc can keep this up.
Logged
The Atog Lord
Administrator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 3451


The+Atog+Lord
View Profile
« Reply #62 on: December 21, 2014, 03:59:46 am »

I went 4-2 drop with Delver. As indicated above, I maindecked three Cages. I lost to Oath (despite beating it the other 2 or 3 times I faced it) and lost a very close mirror match.

This was a lot of fun. I hope Wizards will continue to support Vintage in this way.
Logged

The Academy: If I'm not dead, I have a Dragonlord Dromoka coming in 4 turns
Commandant
Basic User
**
Posts: 611



View Profile
« Reply #63 on: December 21, 2014, 07:29:30 am »

It seems like nothing is really going to stop the consistency of delver.

There's plenty of consistent decks out there, Oath isn't one of them.

Glad to see this fire, if there are more events like this at a higher frequency I may have to jump on board.
Logged

Quote from: David Ochoa
Shuffles, much like commas, are useful for altering tempo to add feeling.
Montolio
Basic User
**
Posts: 96



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: December 21, 2014, 07:31:36 am »

If Ethan is around, thanks to WoTC for putting this on it was good times. Ended up 5-3, lets do it again  Smile
I'm glad you had fun! I'll pass it along to the MTGO folks.

I'm hoping that this will create enough critical mass that we'll fire more DEs. I believe that Vintage can succeed on MTGO.

Ethan, it would be awesome to try increasing the amount of DE's during the week again as well as have these type of larger events quarterly.
I just don't feel sated with Vintage during the weekends only.
The weekday time slot for the Winter Festival events was perfect at 8:30 EST.
Winter Festival was awesome with a massive turnout. Lets do this again soon!!!
« Last Edit: December 21, 2014, 09:09:28 am by Montolio » Logged

I've sparred with Demon's from the Nine Hells I say. I shall barely break a sweat here today!
Twitter handle @TheALPHA7
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #65 on: December 21, 2014, 04:10:55 pm »

It seems like nothing is really going to stop the consistency of delver.

There's plenty of consistent decks out there, Oath isn't one of them.


Yeah, a deck with 60 basic Forests is consistent. The problem with UR Delver is that it is consistent AND powerful. As for whether or not you think that Electrickery in the main deck of the decklist that just won a 117 person tournament is a sign of a healthy metagame ... well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion.
Logged

"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"

"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"

"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"

Random conversations...
Commandant
Basic User
**
Posts: 611



View Profile
« Reply #66 on: December 21, 2014, 04:23:45 pm »

It seems like nothing is really going to stop the consistency of delver.

There's plenty of consistent decks out there, Oath isn't one of them.


Yeah, a deck with 60 basic Forests is consistent. The problem with UR Delver is that it is consistent AND powerful. As for whether or not you think that Electrickery in the main deck of the decklist that just won a 117 person tournament is a sign of a healthy metagame ... well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

MTGO infested with Delver even before Treasure Cruise. Unhealthy or just smart considering expected meta?

You're complaining about a meta that was dominated by Workshops because Hurkyl's Recall was too expensive for players to field and Dredge unplayable because of a broken client.

Format seems fine to me in proxy meta games where people can you know actually afford to play decks besides UR Delver. Delver is a top choice based on power level and cost which leads to an obvious artifactual difference in top eight representation and meta saturation.

Also with three VSL players in the top eight seems like more of a #skillformat rather than a derp durdle format that Vintage has unfortunately always been, it's really too bad people can't seem to cope with meta shifts and fundamental format changes.

I mean someone could have literally taken powered 12 Post to this event and absolutely crushed.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2014, 04:32:00 pm by Commandant » Logged

Quote from: David Ochoa
Shuffles, much like commas, are useful for altering tempo to add feeling.
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #67 on: December 21, 2014, 04:30:22 pm »

MTGO infested with Delver even before Treasure Cruise. Unhealthy or just smart considering expected meta?

The MTGO Vintage Championships had 1 URg Delver list in the top 8, I believe, and that deck got knocked out in the quarterfinals by Sensei, Sensei. Two shops decks met in the finals.

URx Delver was a deck on MTGO before Treasure Cruise. It wasn't THE deck, like it is now.
Logged

"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"

"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"

"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"

Random conversations...
enderfall
Basic User
**
Posts: 271


View Profile Email
« Reply #68 on: December 21, 2014, 09:29:48 pm »

U/R/g Delver is not a budget Deck on MTGO. Anyone playing it is not doing so simply because it is cheap. Regardless, what difference does the cost make? I don;t know the final tally of Delver/Cruise in the Top 8, but it just spiked a 134 person tournament and one of the best players in the history of the game felt it was the best deck for the tournament. Does anyone really think LSV chose the deck because he was trying to be cheap???

Delver is about $60 cheaper than Workshop and about $70 less than Storm.: http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/vintage#online

you can save about $100 by not buying Misdirection, but your deck certainly won't be as "good".

Logged
youhavenogame
Basic User
**
Posts: 113


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: December 22, 2014, 06:08:09 am »

I think Owen put it perfectly in his today's article - sure he is talking about Modern and Legacy, but the same deck is the same deck...

Quote
Itís very difficult to brew up a strategy against someone who has extremely good and cheap removal, card draw, and countermagic. You can never "hate out" the deck. They can still burn you out or win with a quickly flipped Delver of Secrets or bury you in card advantage. Not only does the deck have incredible raw power but itís also so versatile and flexible, it can mimic any strategy very well, seamlessly changing gears from beatdown to control.
Logged
rickster
Basic User
**
Posts: 50


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: December 22, 2014, 10:17:46 am »

Delver is cheap in the fact that buying it lets you play a ton of other blue decks. Where as buying wastelands doesn't let you play as many different decks. And then there's that looming feeling that Mike Turian will finally pull his head out from the darkness and have wasteland be a MOCS promo (with hopefully tempest drafts). People with limited budgets will see that they can buy most of the blue decks for X amount, or they can buy shop decks for X-Y amount and have a smaller range of decks to play.

Do you want to have a huge % of your collection tied in wastelands, or do you want to diversify your investment so you can play multiple decks in multiple formats, and you won't feel as bad when cards get reprinted.

If you're not tied to any deck it makes more sense to buy into delver.
Logged
youhavenogame
Basic User
**
Posts: 113


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: December 22, 2014, 10:40:48 am »

I don't think that budged really limits deck choice. Shop players are very special anyway, usually sticking to their deck forever. People with limited budged probably tend to grind Modern anyway, and if they would have the choice between upgrading to Legacy or upgrading to Vintage, they would probably prefer Legacy because there are more events to play in. Also, whether you spend 400 on Wastelands or 300 or so on 2 Mox, Lotus, Walk, Recall doesn't seem like a big difference.

The best deck being comparatively cheap and easy to port from other formats makes it appear like it might not be the best deck, but is just played in so strong numbers that it has succes anyway. It may sound logical, but it's not the case here - deck is just good, deal with it.
Logged
enderfall
Basic User
**
Posts: 271


View Profile Email
« Reply #72 on: December 22, 2014, 01:49:16 pm »

Redacted... I misinterpreted the discussion above, sorry...
« Last Edit: December 22, 2014, 01:54:22 pm by enderfall » Logged
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #73 on: December 22, 2014, 04:54:42 pm »

Not sure when you edited your post but lets go through this...

You're complaining about a meta that was dominated by Workshops because Hurkyl's Recall was too expensive for players to field and Dredge unplayable because of a broken client.

And you're dismissing a meta based on past issues while conveniently ignoring the results of Vintage Champs.

Format seems fine to me in proxy meta games where people can you know actually afford to play decks besides UR Delver. Delver is a top choice based on power level and cost which leads to an obvious artifactual difference in top eight representation and meta saturation.

Do you think that LSV or EFro cannot afford to play a deck besides UR Delver online?  What about Steve and Rich Shay? All four played Delver because they thought it was the best deck. I know you don't respect MTGO, but there were some of the best players in the world playing on Saturday. Proxy metagames tend to have a lesser quality of players and people playing their pet decks - you don't think that has an obvious "artifactual" difference in top 8 representation?

Also with three VSL players in the top eight seems like more of a #skillformat rather than a derp durdle format that Vintage has unfortunately always been, it's really too bad people can't seem to cope with meta shifts and fundamental format changes.

Again, 2 of those 3 players played nearly identical Delver lists while the third played a non-interactive, broken blue deck that circumvents much of what Delver does well. I'm sorry so many of us Vintage players are maladjusted simpletons that can't cope with metagame shifts...Out of respect to Rich, Nick and the other moderators, I'm not going to actually post the rest of what I typed. Lets just say I was trying to make a point that people play Vintage and Magic for different reasons and you don't have to be condescending to the many players who disagree with you.

I mean someone could have literally taken powered 12 Post to this event and absolutely crushed.

I have literally no idea what you are trying to say with this...
Logged

"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"

"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"

"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"

Random conversations...
thecrav
Basic User
**
Posts: 219


Seems good.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #74 on: December 22, 2014, 07:06:51 pm »

I went 4-3, then had my internet connection drop out in the middle of round 8, putting me at 4-4 and out of the money Sad

I played UR Delver. I decided last week to weaken my matchups against Shops and Dredge and strengthen my matchup against Blue, especially delver since it's so prevalent online. Ended up only seeing Delver twice. 2 of my 3 real losses were to Shops decks.

I streamed the whole event but unfortunately ran into a few technical difficulties. I'll likely be posting the first few rounds but I don't know how much of the last few made it as MTGO was crashing about once per round and taking my stream software with it.

Full report to come.
Logged

Instead of tearing things down we should calmly explain our opinions.
MisterFoote
Basic User
**
Posts: 158


View Profile
« Reply #75 on: December 23, 2014, 09:08:42 am »

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mtgo-standings/vintage-champs-2014-12-22-0#decklists

Decklists.  Stuff relevant to the thread. 
Logged
MisterFoote
Basic User
**
Posts: 158


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: December 23, 2014, 09:25:36 am »

MTGO infested with Delver even before Treasure Cruise. Unhealthy or just smart considering expected meta?

The MTGO Vintage Championships had 1 URg Delver list in the top 8, I believe, and that deck got knocked out in the quarterfinals by Sensei, Sensei. Two shops decks met in the finals.

URx Delver was a deck on MTGO before Treasure Cruise. It wasn't THE deck, like it is now.

I have to disagree with this whole heartedly.  I have been playing UR delver in all variants since MTGO has been released.  I have been smashing face with the deck prior to treasure cruise.  Treasure cruise makes the deck playable by people who can just windmill slam cards amd draw three more.  I believe that is the point you are missing.  So cruise made it better.  But even with a restriction(which is the most we will see) running one of each cruise and dig will be fine. 

We have a saying at our local group that basically comes from anything rich shay plays.  Because the guy is literally show up to an event with a ham sandwich and watch you fold to the extra lettuce.  The saying is ham sandwich.


Jokes aside, playing only online is a risk.  Its christmasland magic where you never miss triggers and have an extemely low chance for error.  So if you have not proxied up some decks you should.  And get your friends playing.
Logged
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #77 on: December 23, 2014, 10:13:55 am »

MTGO infested with Delver even before Treasure Cruise. Unhealthy or just smart considering expected meta?

The MTGO Vintage Championships had 1 URg Delver list in the top 8, I believe, and that deck got knocked out in the quarterfinals by Sensei, Sensei. Two shops decks met in the finals.

URx Delver was a deck on MTGO before Treasure Cruise. It wasn't THE deck, like it is now.

I have to disagree with this whole heartedly.  I have been playing UR delver in all variants since MTGO has been released.  I have been smashing face with the deck prior to treasure cruise.  Treasure cruise makes the deck playable by people who can just windmill slam cards amd draw three more.  I believe that is the point you are missing.  So cruise made it better.  But even with a restriction(which is the most we will see) running one of each cruise and dig will be fine. 

We have a saying at our local group that basically comes from anything rich shay plays.  Because the guy is literally show up to an event with a ham sandwich and watch you fold to the extra lettuce.  The saying is ham sandwich.


Jokes aside, playing only online is a risk.  Its christmasland magic where you never miss triggers and have an extemely low chance for error.  So if you have not proxied up some decks you should.  And get your friends playing.

Disagree with...what exactly? That there was one URx Delver list in the top 8 of the MTGO Vintage Championship? That's not really something you can disagree with. As for whether or not the deck is dominant, look at the top 32 of the holiday special. Delver took first and third place and the remaining decks specifically targeted Delver with Chains, Notion Thief, Pyroclasm, Slice and Dice, etc. You very well could have been having success with Delver before Cruise - as I said the deck was a viable Tier 1 option - that frankly is irrelevant. Affinity in standard was a deck before Skullclamp, Ravager, and Cranial Plating - it just happened to play Broodstar. The fact that a deck was successful before the printing of a card doesn't mean that it can't become a problem after that card is printed.

And I'm not sure what you are saying with "Treasure cruise makes the deck playable by people who can just windmill slam cards and draw three more". Are you saying that Cruise has made the deck less skill intensive? That seems bad... Most times it's not even three cards but 6-9. I've cast 5 Treasure Cruises (Snapcaster Mage) and an Ancestral in games with Delver. Also, are you saying the deck is not overpowered or format warping because Rich Shay is playing? Rich is an excellent player - I know, I helped test the UR deck with him on MODO before that round of the VSL. But how does the fact that Dr. Atog Lord plays the deck reflect positively or negatively on the need for a restriction?

Yes, the MTGO metagame is unique. Players are generally able to play competitive Vintage against players from around the world. I've jumped into several two-mans with Olle Rade and LSV. That's not something that happens frequently in paper Magic and I typically play a couple of tournaments every month. I typically do not miss triggers as Magic Online is excellent for making you aware of timing and triggers. But again, I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Is missing triggers and my opponent's playing suboptimally a reason not to restrict a card? I want to understand where you are coming from.
Logged

"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"

"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"

"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"

Random conversations...
ErtaiAdept
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 836


cmasley1218
View Profile Email
« Reply #78 on: December 23, 2014, 10:46:41 am »

MTGO infested with Delver even before Treasure Cruise. Unhealthy or just smart considering expected meta?

The MTGO Vintage Championships had 1 URg Delver list in the top 8, I believe, and that deck got knocked out in the quarterfinals by Sensei, Sensei. Two shops decks met in the finals.

URx Delver was a deck on MTGO before Treasure Cruise. It wasn't THE deck, like it is now.

I have to disagree with this whole heartedly.  I have been playing UR delver in all variants since MTGO has been released.  I have been smashing face with the deck prior to treasure cruise.  Treasure cruise makes the deck playable by people who can just windmill slam cards amd draw three more.  I believe that is the point you are missing.  So cruise made it better.  But even with a restriction(which is the most we will see) running one of each cruise and dig will be fine. 

We have a saying at our local group that basically comes from anything rich shay plays.  Because the guy is literally show up to an event with a ham sandwich and watch you fold to the extra lettuce.  The saying is ham sandwich.


Jokes aside, playing only online is a risk.  Its christmasland magic where you never miss triggers and have an extemely low chance for error.  So if you have not proxied up some decks you should.  And get your friends playing.

Disagree with...what exactly? That there was one URx Delver list in the top 8 of the MTGO Vintage Championship? That's not really something you can disagree with. As for whether or not the deck is dominant, look at the top 32 of the holiday special. Delver took first and third place and the remaining decks specifically targeted Delver with Chains, Notion Thief, Pyroclasm, Slice and Dice, etc. You very well could have been having success with Delver before Cruise - as I said the deck was a viable Tier 1 option - that frankly is irrelevant. Affinity in standard was a deck before Skullclamp, Ravager, and Cranial Plating - it just happened to play Broodstar. The fact that a deck was successful before the printing of a card doesn't mean that it can't become a problem after that card is printed.

And I'm not sure what you are saying with "Treasure cruise makes the deck playable by people who can just windmill slam cards and draw three more". Are you saying that Cruise has made the deck less skill intensive? That seems bad... Most times it's not even three cards but 6-9. I've cast 5 Treasure Cruises (Snapcaster Mage) and an Ancestral in games with Delver. Also, are you saying the deck is not overpowered or format warping because Rich Shay is playing? Rich is an excellent player - I know, I helped test the UR deck with him on MODO before that round of the VSL. But how does the fact that Dr. Atog Lord plays the deck reflect positively or negatively on the need for a restriction?

Yes, the MTGO metagame is unique. Players are generally able to play competitive Vintage against players from around the world. I've jumped into several two-mans with Olle Rade and LSV. That's not something that happens frequently in paper Magic and I typically play a couple of tournaments every month. I typically do not miss triggers as Magic Online is excellent for making you aware of timing and triggers. But again, I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Is missing triggers and my opponent's playing suboptimally a reason not to restrict a card? I want to understand where you are coming from.

Let me try and clarify what I think Foote's point was.

1. Delver was a deck long before Treasure Cruise.  However cruise has made it more popular/powerful because it is now the deck best suited to out drawing any opponent.  The fact that it not only sees more cards and out-draws almost any other deck means that you can continually jam threats/spells and recoup the loss after with an explosive turn of cruising/gushing etc.

2. I don't think anyone is arguing that delver isn't one of/if not the strongest deck in the format right now because of this fact, but that just means its the deck to beat.  This is why you see all of the top performing decks hedging towards that match.  That's just proper meta-game preparation.

3. The comment about Rich Shay is pointing out the fact yes Delver won the tournament, but that's not because the deck is unstoppable.   The winners were three MTG Hall-of-Famers who happened to pick the deck they felt was the best in the metagame.  There is a lot more to their winning than just the deck, and to ignore that is a mistake.  For each of the 2 delver decks in the top 8, there were likely 10-20 more who scrubbed out due to play mistakes. (Myself included)
Logged

Bill Copes bought me a beer after using the power of his mind to remove all the Bazaars and Serum Powders from my deck in two consecutive games.

Team TMD
"Dice have six sides for a reason.  There is no excitement in surety my friend."
MisterFoote
Basic User
**
Posts: 158


View Profile
« Reply #79 on: December 23, 2014, 11:04:51 am »

This.
Logged
jcb193
Basic User
**
Posts: 410


View Profile
« Reply #80 on: December 23, 2014, 11:14:54 am »

Is there a listing of the top 8 players (and decks) anywhere? I can't seem to find any record of it-
Logged
ErtaiAdept
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 836


cmasley1218
View Profile Email
« Reply #81 on: December 23, 2014, 11:19:37 am »

Is there a listing of the top 8 players (and decks) anywhere? I can't seem to find any record of it-

Was posted by Mister Foote a few posts back.
Logged

Bill Copes bought me a beer after using the power of his mind to remove all the Bazaars and Serum Powders from my deck in two consecutive games.

Team TMD
"Dice have six sides for a reason.  There is no excitement in surety my friend."
enderfall
Basic User
**
Posts: 271


View Profile Email
« Reply #82 on: December 23, 2014, 11:54:42 am »

No one is saying that Delver shouldn't be a deck in Vintage... far from it. The point is, I would be willing to bet almost everyone would agree that the Vintage metagame prior to Khans was in a much better spot than we are today. If restricting both Cruise and Dig only weakens the deck to approximate what we had pre-Khans, then what exactly would be the problem? And if that still doesn't solve the problem, then maybe something else needs to be restricted.

Right now, it's nigh impossible to "hate" out Delver without doing something absolutely ridiculous like maindeck 3 Slice and Dice (which is what someone in the Top 32 this weekend did). If we have to be maindecking 3 Slice and Dice to make Delver beatable, what exactly does that say about the format? Maindeck Pyroblast is one thing, but maindeck Slices? That's not a format I think anyone really wants to play, is it?
Logged
ErtaiAdept
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 836


cmasley1218
View Profile Email
« Reply #83 on: December 23, 2014, 12:35:47 pm »

No one is saying that Delver shouldn't be a deck in Vintage... far from it. The point is, I would be willing to bet almost everyone would agree that the Vintage metagame prior to Khans was in a much better spot than we are today. If restricting both Cruise and Dig only weakens the deck to approximate what we had pre-Khans, then what exactly would be the problem? And if that still doesn't solve the problem, then maybe something else needs to be restricted.

Right now, it's nigh impossible to "hate" out Delver without doing something absolutely ridiculous like maindeck 3 Slice and Dice (which is what someone in the Top 32 this weekend did). If we have to be maindecking 3 Slice and Dice to make Delver beatable, what exactly does that say about the format? Maindeck Pyroblast is one thing, but maindeck Slices? That's not a format I think anyone really wants to play, is it?

I have no problem beating delver without main decking slice and dice.  The key thing that I think a lot of people miss is that the win condition of delver is not the problem, it's the efficiency / consistency in which it plays the game.  Any deck that sees that many cards is going to be powerful.  The way to beat them is to either (a) make sure they can't make use of their draw engines (Chalice, Notion Thief, Spirit) or, go over the top of them (Oath, Show and Tell, Tinker, Tendrils), and realize that you have to be careful not to walk into their cheap disruption.

I've additionally found that 'Going Wide' ie: developing a large mana base quickly (Trinket Mage, lotus, moxen) drastically hurts a lot of the delver disruption.  They usually only run 4 force and a few fluster/peirce/missdirection.  If you render the pierces and flusterstorm's useless by having a bunch of mana then they are spewing card advantage by pitching to FoW.

So I guess the point I'm making is that the deck is very beatable, and I don't think that cruise and dig are as bad for the format as you make them sound.  It's been a long time since vintage has had a good draw spell, and now we have 2 to play around with.  Personally I don't want to see that go away.  

The metagame is in no way less diverse now than it was prior to Kahn's.  There are still blue decks, shops decks, dredge and combo.  Just because everyone has adopted the new cards doesn't mean the metagame is stagnant.  I have seen more new brews and deck ideas come out post kahns then I have seen in years.


tl;dr - Sure you could restrict cruise and/or dig, but I don't think it is necessary.  Analyze the weaknesses of the top decks and either adapt to them or take their strengths and use them.  That is competitive magic.
Logged

Bill Copes bought me a beer after using the power of his mind to remove all the Bazaars and Serum Powders from my deck in two consecutive games.

Team TMD
"Dice have six sides for a reason.  There is no excitement in surety my friend."
enderfall
Basic User
**
Posts: 271


View Profile Email
« Reply #84 on: December 23, 2014, 01:30:56 pm »

it's the efficiency / consistency in which it plays the game.

In typing that, you invalidated everything else you wrote because that is the problem. Even if you have the cards to "go over the top" or "stop their draw engine" that doesn't mean you can possibly play them. Delver almost never mulls; Any hand with 1-2 lands and some cantrips is actually a perfect hand... in fact a "bad" hand is probably one which most decks wouldn't mind (3-4 mana and 3-4 spells). By the time you can set up a play such as Tinker or Thief/Spirit, you are probably so far behind and if you blindly cast them early to get the jump on them you run the risk that they simply counter it and overwhelm you with card advantage. Heck, even if you manage to get a Thief/Spirit into play, their weak toughness is an incredible liability since you can't even block Pyro tokens with them and all of their removal hits them; even their sideboard Electrickery. I've found Thief to be about as below average of a 4-mana spell that I've ever cast in Vintage. When it's good, it's GREAT, but more often than not it's just a slow 4-mana spell that doesn't *actually* win the game on it's own.

You made a point about having a good draw engine in Vintage finally. Was Gush not enough? Last time we had such a good draw engine Thirst dominated and needed to be nerfed. We've seen what having superior draw engines does in Vintage and it's not pretty.
Logged
ErtaiAdept
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 836


cmasley1218
View Profile Email
« Reply #85 on: December 23, 2014, 02:05:59 pm »

The point about efficiency and consistency was made to highlight that it has nothing to do with cruise.   As you pointed out its all of the cheap cantrips that give them that consistency.   That said I don't think it compromises my point about cruise / dig at all.   

A card like chalice of the void can easily come down on turn 1 before they have a chance to even play a land.   And shuts off almost all of their cantrips.  Yes they can force of Will it but that's a 2 for 1 and you have the option of countering back.

Yes every card can be answered,  but that's the point of the game is making that answer cost your opponent more than it costs you.
Logged

Bill Copes bought me a beer after using the power of his mind to remove all the Bazaars and Serum Powders from my deck in two consecutive games.

Team TMD
"Dice have six sides for a reason.  There is no excitement in surety my friend."
enderfall
Basic User
**
Posts: 271


View Profile Email
« Reply #86 on: December 23, 2014, 03:22:02 pm »

Cruise is very much part of the deck's consistency in so much as it allows the deck to refill quickly for little resource cost. How is that not obvious? Cruise (in combination with Gush) is how the deck gets card advantage. There is absolutely no card advantage when they cantrip a dozen times. Yes, they get better card quality, but not card advantage (which conveniently allows them to find and cast more Forces in a game in addition to all their threats and various other counters).
Logged
ErtaiAdept
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 836


cmasley1218
View Profile Email
« Reply #87 on: December 23, 2014, 03:56:33 pm »

Cruise is very much part of the deck's consistency in so much as it allows the deck to refill quickly for little resource cost. How is that not obvious? Cruise (in combination with Gush) is how the deck gets card advantage. There is absolutely no card advantage when they cantrip a dozen times. Yes, they get better card quality, but not card advantage (which conveniently allows them to find and cast more Forces in a game in addition to all their threats and various other counters).

Without those cantrips it becomes very difficult for them to fill their graveyard consistently. Gush is a powerful card, but also sets them back on resources (unless they are running fastbond) which means that if you shut off their CMC 1 spells then they are very limited in what they can do.

I will admit that there are certain delver archetypes where this is not the case, but most of the ones I've seen roll over to a chalice on 1, unless they have chewer because they have no way to dig to their power house cards (cruise, gush, pyro etc) without those 1 CMC cards.
Logged

Bill Copes bought me a beer after using the power of his mind to remove all the Bazaars and Serum Powders from my deck in two consecutive games.

Team TMD
"Dice have six sides for a reason.  There is no excitement in surety my friend."
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #88 on: December 23, 2014, 05:29:14 pm »

Just got back from Christmas shopping all day - I'll read through what you guys wrote and respond in a bit but we should probably move it to the Vintage Issues forum as we aren't really talking about the MTGO Holiday Tournament anymore.

Edit: Never mind, the Treasure Cruise poll is still locked for review and I have no desire to create another restriction/unrestriction thread.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2014, 05:32:09 pm by Chubby Rain » Logged

"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"

"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"

"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"

Random conversations...
TheMonadNomad
Basic User
**
Posts: 82


View Profile
« Reply #89 on: December 23, 2014, 05:50:41 pm »

I'm really hoping that there is an answer to this printed in the next set ... but I'm not confident that it is going to happen.  I'd much rather that than another restriction. Confused
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.082 seconds with 20 queries.