TheManaDrain.com
May 19, 2019, 07:36:57 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7
  Print  
Author Topic: Vintage Super League: Who Would You Like to See?  (Read 33424 times)
vaughnbros
Basic User
**
Posts: 1574


View Profile Email
« Reply #150 on: March 10, 2016, 04:39:01 pm »

Complaints about narrative are fair but when the meta naturally gravitates towards the most competitive of archetypes and subsequently the players get tired of said archetypes - a switch up is probably for the best unless you want to keep the assumedly incorrect narrative rolling.

Arguments about meta representation are rapidly becoming wearisome. You're just not going to get an accurate representation of paper meta on MTGO even excluding player bias, meta constraints, and the minuscule sample size. At the end of the day VSL is about displaying the most interesting Vintage content and Dredge/Workshops just isn't that for the majority of the MTG playerbase. The match ups tend to be fairly repetitive and lacking in interaction - this more than anything else feeds into preconceived notions about the format.

Man o man.  Based on these statements I'll assume you've never picked up a workshop or dredge deck, but knowing that you like to make hyperbolic statements that might not be the case.  Dredge and workshops have a ton of interactive games with high level thought involved.  Ochoa vs Detwiler in the play in is a great example of this, which was in fact VSL content.  We of course get no good dredge content because no one in the league has any clue on how to build or play that archetype.

The meta has gravitated to 4 pillars banning 2 of those 4 pillars on a gentlemen's agreement is most decidedly not Vintage content at all.   If a majority of the viewers enjoy it so be it, but please don't call it Vintage content.  Some of us actually enjoy watching real Vintage.

So calling the format a 2 deck format, while there are clearly 4 pillars, is incredibly disingenuous.  Especially considering 3 of the 4 pillars have large amounts of diversity.  How many formats in magic right now have 4 main pillars, and a number of tier 2 non pillars?
Logged
PeAcH
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 472



View Profile
« Reply #151 on: March 10, 2016, 04:40:25 pm »

LSV and Efro can play whatever they want because they are in the league to do so.

On the Hatebears topic, come on...once we have the spotlight on (at least for the visibility of the format) not playing GW Hate on the VSL is not bad for Vintage at all. Quite the contrary. You need first turn kills, impossible comebacks, counter wars and card drawing explosions.

People watch videos of other people riding a Harley or a Maserati. Not a Toyota Yaris or a Scooter. VSL is the same in terms of Magic players. You want to see the Top players playing the fancier decks. And this is what sells.

Once you are lured into the format, someone will ruin your tournament with well-timed strip effects and a stony silence and you will understand how this all works! Smile

Don't complain about the gentleman's agreement.

We could be seeing the Modern Super League...but no...instead we get the top players in the world playing our beloved format.

This is nothing to complain about.

This is getting visibility and a status of the format which is "not dead". It's ok for me.
Logged

"Your deed cannot be undone. You, however, can be."

@Peachmtg
MirariKnight
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 428

Lotus, YawgWill, Lotus, Go

xHollyw0odx
View Profile Email
« Reply #152 on: March 10, 2016, 06:02:52 pm »

I know that the 5-6 people that like Hatebears and think it's a good deck are gonna hate this post, but the fact is that deck is just subpar when card availability isn't an issue. And unlike other Vintage decks, it's not uniquely entertaining; it's no different from what you can play in Legacy, Modern, or Standard. I say this as someone who played "hatebears" for a few years (back when it we called it Fish and it had actual awful creatures). Lots of people want to watch Vintage-y games, not Gaddock Teeg beatdown. And it's about entertainment after all. VSL's purpose isn't to do anything for the format. It's just supposed be a fun and different way to maximize viewers on Twitch and Youtube.

Just like there are a few diehard fans of Shops and Dredge (and hatebears, I guess), there are a ton of people who specifically play Vintage because they love casting Mana Drain and Ancestral Recall. I'd say a sizable portion of Vintage players fit this. Lots of whom happen to be in the VSL. This is entertaining, both to that sizable portion of players and to unfamiliar viewers. It's entertainment first. We haven't seen a Time Vault deck in almost this entire season, but that's what a lot of people are tuning in to see. For the purpose of entertainment, not all decks are created equal.

Also, the term "Gentleman's Agreement" has nothing to do with the character/morality of Blue, Shops, or Dredge. The term just means that there is no rule in place other than their "reputation as a gentleman" holding together the agreement. No one ever said it's ungentlemanly to play Dredge or Shops.
Logged
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #153 on: March 10, 2016, 06:10:11 pm »


I think diversity is important for the health of the format, and that includes non-blue decks and a diversity of blue options.  That said, I was getting a bit tired of watching and commenting on matches in which every single match involved a Workshop deck, which seemed to be the case in the last few weeks.  Workshops are good for the format, in my opinion, but when every match involves a Workshop deck, a good deal of what happens in vintage isn't visible to the audience. 

I don't see the "gentlemen's agreement" as an attempt to avoid playing non-blue decks as much as it was an attempt to showcase some other Vintage dynamics and lines of play that weren't likely without such an agreement.  Shops are so good right now that without an agreement, it's a high probability event that every match would have had Shops on one side or the other.

I suspect that the finals matches will be a huge shop fest.  I hope I'm wrong, though. 


Logged

Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #154 on: March 10, 2016, 06:13:14 pm »

So calling the format a 2 deck format, while there are clearly 4 pillars, is incredibly disingenuous.  Especially considering 3 of the 4 pillars have large amounts of diversity.  How many formats in magic right now have 4 main pillars, and a number of tier 2 non pillars?

Modern? UW, RG, UR, and colorless Eldrazi are all viable Tier 1 decks. And Affinity. Isn't color diversity great?

Seriously though, I'm not trying to put down any archetype or pet deck. The VSL is not supposed to be a representative view of Vintage: it's a bunch of Magic celebrities (from the VSL website) playing cards legal in Vintage on Magic Online for entertainment purposes. This response to two player's making an agreement by themselves to play what they wanted to play is frankly ridiculous... Rich even chose to run not 1 but not 2 Shop decks, and that was perfectly within his rights as a competitor.
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...
Ten-Ten
Basic User
**
Posts: 473


Shalom Aleichem


View Profile
« Reply #155 on: March 10, 2016, 08:28:00 pm »

Why should there even have to be any "gentleman agreement"? just play. If they didn't want to pilot bazaar or shops, then dont. Seems silly to even announce it. If this continues to be a "thing", why not change the name to something more fitting and not Vintage Super League.
Maybe this:
Quote
Arbitrary Eternal Format Super League
Logged

Colossians 2:2,3
 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, both of the Father, and of Christ; In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #156 on: March 10, 2016, 10:27:36 pm »

Why should there even have to be any "gentleman agreement"? just play. If they didn't want to pilot bazaar or shops, then dont. Seems silly to even announce it. If this continues to be a "thing", why not change the name to something more fitting and not Vintage Super League.
Maybe this:
Quote
Arbitrary Eternal Format Super League


Sigh...

Did you watch the VSL last week? Out of six matches, there were zero that did not feature a Shops deck. The VSL is entertainment and frankly the viewers were getting bored watching reruns...

But by all means, if this continues to be a "thing", feel free to not watch.
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...
Hrishi
Basic User
**
Posts: 391


hrishikesh29@gmail.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #157 on: March 10, 2016, 11:18:05 pm »

No offense to those who enjoy decks like Hatebears, but in my opinion a deck like that does not show the unique attributes of Vintage. I am absolutely not surprised that nobody has chosen to pick it up. VSL is, first and foremost, entertainment.

As for people complaining about the VSL being a blue-fest, surely you must've not watched this entire season...
Logged

Lyna turned to the figure beside her. "They're gone. What now?"
"As ever," said Urza, "we wait."
Ten-Ten
Basic User
**
Posts: 473


Shalom Aleichem


View Profile
« Reply #158 on: March 11, 2016, 03:47:25 am »


But by all means, if this continues to be a "thing", feel free to not watch.
The same could be said to those tired of watching Shops??
This gets us nowhere.

(p.s. I'm not a shop pilot. Dark Ritual, Drain and fow, all day everyday. Watching shops helps me understand the archetype better. That's  entertaining to me.)
Logged

Colossians 2:2,3
 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, both of the Father, and of Christ; In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
desolutionist
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 1130



View Profile Email
« Reply #159 on: March 11, 2016, 04:24:36 am »

Hrishi,

Hate bears does show a unique attribute of Vintage. There is no other format in magic that a hate type deck can be good.  A hate bears deck is stocked full of creatures that literally see no play outside of Vintage because of unique abilities that are only relevant vs. decks like Workshops, Storm, and Dredge
Logged

Join the Vintage League!
Hrishi
Basic User
**
Posts: 391


hrishikesh29@gmail.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #160 on: March 11, 2016, 05:12:20 am »

Hrishi,

Hate bears does show a unique attribute of Vintage. There is no other format in magic that a hate type deck can be good.  A hate bears deck is stocked full of creatures that literally see no play outside of Vintage because of unique abilities that are only relevant vs. decks like Workshops, Storm, and Dredge

Shawn,

Fair point, I'll concede to that. Let me re-iterate that I definitely agree that Hatebears constitute a relevant part of any Vintage metagame. If the VSL was aiming to represent an actual metagame, Hate Bears should be in it.

I guess what I was more trying to get at is that "going broken" is really exciting on camera. Whether going broken is drawing a million cards, Mana Draining into a giant Yawgmoth's Will, using a repeatable Black Lotus to pump out ridiculous artifacts (Mishra's Workshop) or dumping your entire deck into your graveyard (Bazaar of Baghdad) to win on turn 3, it's plays like this that can tend to excite audiences and make for a very interesting display.

In my opinion, it's such displays that will excite people to pick up Vintage over what a creature hate deck can do. It sure worked that way for me. I remember being specifically frustrated at the broadcast of Eternal Weekend 2013 because it showed way too many "legacy-like" creature decks on camera and less "broken" Vintage decks. I was getting into Magic then, and specifically Vintage, and I wanted to see more of the craziness Vintage decks could do. I'm not sure I would have bought in if coverage showed nothing but creature combat, speaking as a new player at the time. In my ignorance I would have assumed it's just like every other format, when that is most certainly not true.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2016, 05:24:05 am by Hrishi » Logged

Lyna turned to the figure beside her. "They're gone. What now?"
"As ever," said Urza, "we wait."
Commandant
Basic User
**
Posts: 611



View Profile
« Reply #161 on: March 11, 2016, 06:50:05 am »

Complaints about narrative are fair but when the meta naturally gravitates towards the most competitive of archetypes and subsequently the players get tired of said archetypes - a switch up is probably for the best unless you want to keep the assumedly incorrect narrative rolling.

Arguments about meta representation are rapidly becoming wearisome. You're just not going to get an accurate representation of paper meta on MTGO even excluding player bias, meta constraints, and the minuscule sample size. At the end of the day VSL is about displaying the most interesting Vintage content and Dredge/Workshops just isn't that for the majority of the MTG playerbase. The match ups tend to be fairly repetitive and lacking in interaction - this more than anything else feeds into preconceived notions about the format.

Man o man.  Based on these statements I'll assume you've never picked up a workshop or dredge deck, but knowing that you like to make hyperbolic statements that might not be the case.  Dredge and workshops have a ton of interactive games with high level thought involved.  Ochoa vs Detwiler in the play in is a great example of this, which was in fact VSL content.  We of course get no good dredge content because no one in the league has any clue on how to build or play that archetype.

The meta has gravitated to 4 pillars banning 2 of those 4 pillars on a gentlemen's agreement is most decidedly not Vintage content at all.   If a majority of the viewers enjoy it so be it, but please don't call it Vintage content.  Some of us actually enjoy watching real Vintage.

So calling the format a 2 deck format, while there are clearly 4 pillars, is incredibly disingenuous.  Especially considering 3 of the 4 pillars have large amounts of diversity.  How many formats in magic right now have 4 main pillars, and a number of tier 2 non pillars?

You're basically complaining to complain and now resorting to making baseless character assumptions. Good luck man.
Logged

Quote from: David Ochoa
Shuffles, much like commas, are useful for altering tempo to add feeling.
UndeadBus
Basic User
**
Posts: 41

Ichorid is my spirit animal


View Profile Email
« Reply #162 on: March 11, 2016, 10:53:47 am »

Hrishi,

Hate bears does show a unique attribute of Vintage. There is no other format in magic that a hate type deck can be good.  A hate bears deck is stocked full of creatures that literally see no play outside of Vintage because of unique abilities that are only relevant vs. decks like Workshops, Storm, and Dredge

Death and taxes and maverick in my opinion are much more important to the legacy meta than hatebears is to the vintage meta. Both of those decks put up more results and are more popular than hatebears. I'm not saying hatebears is irrelevant or not viable but the statement that no other format has a "hatebears" type deck just isn't true. Even modern is starting to see hatebears decks pop up. The creatures may change but the goal of mana denial, creature utility, and taxing of spells is generally the same.
Logged

"If you can't take the heat... well thats going to be a problem"
desolutionist
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 1130



View Profile Email
« Reply #163 on: March 11, 2016, 11:53:58 am »

The hate bears decks in vintage tend to be hyper focused. For example, last year around this time I was playing RW, which kills workshop decks by the way. I never had such an easy time beating Rich Shay than I did when I was on RW bears and he on Shops. Anyway, even though I had great game against Shops and 50/50 against the rest of the meta, I was paired against a random modern deck and was just absolutely destroyed.  I could not stop the barrage of Lingering Souls.  I'm assuming a legacy version doesn't lose to Lingering Souls, but probably will lose to a Shop deck.

If hate bears "kills" the top performing deck, Shops, then it should definitely be viewed as a major part of the metagame. I acknowledge that not many people play the deck, but the ones that do are keeping real life shop pilots out of top 8s. If more people picked up the deck, we'd probably see a decline in Workshop top 8s.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2016, 12:04:38 pm by desolutionist » Logged

Join the Vintage League!
The Atog Lord
Administrator
Basic User
*****
Posts: 3451


The+Atog+Lord
View Profile
« Reply #164 on: March 11, 2016, 01:11:18 pm »

"Hate bears does show a unique attribute of Vintage. There is no other format in magic that a hate type deck can be good."

This isn't remotely true. Death and Taxes is a considerable part of the Legacy metagame, and it has shown up in Modern as well.
Logged

The Academy: If I'm not dead, I have a Dragonlord Dromoka coming in 4 turns
Varal
Basic User
**
Posts: 165


View Profile Email
« Reply #165 on: March 11, 2016, 02:57:06 pm »

To prevent other players from winning tournaments isn't important if you can't win yourself.
Logged
desolutionist
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 1130



View Profile Email
« Reply #166 on: March 11, 2016, 05:24:41 pm »

Death and taxes comes up as #9 on mtggoldfish meta breakdown. 3.1% of the metagame. Additionally, the hate creatures in the deck are only a portion of the total strategy. More card slots are devoted to "beat down" (Stoneforge Mystic, Serra Avenger, Brimaz)

If you read my post you'll see that I am noting the differences in Vintage hate bears deck and decks like death and taxes; Vintage hate bears is not very good against opposing "fair" decks such as modern legal decks.  Legacy death n taxes has more impactful cards for "fair" metagames (Such as Stoneforge, Brimaz, and Serra Avenger)

Vintage hate bears has won and will will Vintage tournaments. But I'm not really interested in arguing with anyone. As someone who has piloted hate bears, I can say hate bears is a good Vintage deck specifically for the role it plays in keeping Shops in check.  I'll also double down on my statement that hate type decks in Vintage get away with a lot that modern/legacy decks cannot.  Staxless stax lost to a turn one Raging Goblin, remember?  That sort of thing is a recurring element of Vintage.

What else isn't remotely true?

« Last Edit: March 11, 2016, 05:28:42 pm by desolutionist » Logged

Join the Vintage League!
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #167 on: March 11, 2016, 06:19:56 pm »

Death and taxes comes up as #9 on mtggoldfish meta breakdown. 3.1% of the metagame. Additionally, the hate creatures in the deck are only a portion of the total strategy. More card slots are devoted to "beat down" (Stoneforge Mystic, Serra Avenger, Brimaz)

If you read my post you'll see that I am noting the differences in Vintage hate bears deck and decks like death and taxes; Vintage hate bears is not very good against opposing "fair" decks such as modern legal decks.  Legacy death n taxes has more impactful cards for "fair" metagames (Such as Stoneforge, Brimaz, and Serra Avenger)

Vintage hate bears has won and will will Vintage tournaments. But I'm not really interested in arguing with anyone. As someone who has piloted hate bears, I can say hate bears is a good Vintage deck specifically for the role it plays in keeping Shops in check.  I'll also double down on my statement that hate type decks in Vintage get away with a lot that modern/legacy decks cannot.  Staxless stax lost to a turn one Raging Goblin, remember?  That sort of thing is a recurring element of Vintage.

What else isn't remotely true?

Rishardan Ports are 180 tix a piece (Black Lotus is 140) and not typically played outside of that deck. I'm guessing that is responsible for the 3% figure from MTGO as the deck has put up several recent finishes in SCG events. In any case, it seems disingenuous to cite the Death and Taxes % in legacy and not mention Hatebears % from MTGGoldfish. Which is 0.
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...
vaughnbros
Basic User
**
Posts: 1574


View Profile Email
« Reply #168 on: March 11, 2016, 06:57:12 pm »

The entertainment arguement seems to be continually brought up.  Isn't every game and sport designed for entertainement purposes?  Changing rules for this sake would be the equivalent of the NFL deciding no more running plays because they are boring to a casual fan.  Or baseball allowing legalized steroid use so that we can see more home runs and strikeouts.  The nice thing about many sports and games is that at every level the game is mostly the same (maybe some very minor changes).  The Vintage I play has the same rules as the Vintage the VSL plays.  When they decide to make massive rules changes, in the middle of the playoffs no less, we are no longer playing the same game.

Complaints about narrative are fair but when the meta naturally gravitates towards the most competitive of archetypes and subsequently the players get tired of said archetypes - a switch up is probably for the best unless you want to keep the assumedly incorrect narrative rolling.

Arguments about meta representation are rapidly becoming wearisome. You're just not going to get an accurate representation of paper meta on MTGO even excluding player bias, meta constraints, and the minuscule sample size. At the end of the day VSL is about displaying the most interesting Vintage content and Dredge/Workshops just isn't that for the majority of the MTG playerbase. The match ups tend to be fairly repetitive and lacking in interaction - this more than anything else feeds into preconceived notions about the format.

Man o man.  Based on these statements I'll assume you've never picked up a workshop or dredge deck, but knowing that you like to make hyperbolic statements that might not be the case.  Dredge and workshops have a ton of interactive games with high level thought involved.  Ochoa vs Detwiler in the play in is a great example of this, which was in fact VSL content.  We of course get no good dredge content because no one in the league has any clue on how to build or play that archetype.

The meta has gravitated to 4 pillars banning 2 of those 4 pillars on a gentlemen's agreement is most decidedly not Vintage content at all.   If a majority of the viewers enjoy it so be it, but please don't call it Vintage content.  Some of us actually enjoy watching real Vintage.

So calling the format a 2 deck format, while there are clearly 4 pillars, is incredibly disingenuous.  Especially considering 3 of the 4 pillars have large amounts of diversity.  How many formats in magic right now have 4 main pillars, and a number of tier 2 non pillars?

You're basically complaining to complain and now resorting to making baseless character assumptions. Good luck man.

Like I was saying you seem to love using Hyperbole... I'm not sure how that statement is interpreted as a baseless character assumption unless you factor in some massive exaggeration.
Logged
Aaron Patten
Basic User
**
Posts: 132


Mox Dragon of the Lotus


View Profile Email
« Reply #169 on: March 11, 2016, 07:04:32 pm »

Maybe we should collectively agree to vote someone (or several someones) in to the super league who we believe can make a show of putting some underrepresented archetypes up on display.  On the other hand it would be really unfortunate if people felt forced to play something that has a decreased chance of winning just because of a promise to do so.  That might give someone the feelbads.  
Logged

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqvKjsIxT_8

University is just another one of those pyramid schemes like chain letters, the Freemason Society, Scientology, and... hmm... what's that really famous one? Oh yeah, Capitalism.
desolutionist
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 1130



View Profile Email
« Reply #170 on: March 11, 2016, 09:00:38 pm »

Matt that's exactly what I intended; a disengenous post meant to mislead people.  Wastelands, Leonin Relic Warders, Ingot Chewers; that deck is terrible against Shops!
Logged

Join the Vintage League!
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #171 on: March 11, 2016, 09:47:26 pm »

Matt that's exactly what I intended; a disengenous post meant to mislead people.  Wastelands, Leonin Relic Warders, Ingot Chewers; that deck is terrible against Shops!

Not what I meant at all. You used MTGGoldfish metagame data to undersell Death and Taxes percentage of the Legacy metagame, and I was pointing out that there is important context missing. And if you use the same database, it looks like Hatebears isn't actually a part of the Vintage metagame. I'm not debating other points you made about Hatebears having won in the past or having a favorable matchup against Shops.

My argument is that the competitors on the VSL should have the freedom to play the decks they want to and that this backlash against "anti-Shops, anti-Dredge sentiment" is unwarranted.
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...
vaughnbros
Basic User
**
Posts: 1574


View Profile Email
« Reply #172 on: March 11, 2016, 09:55:37 pm »

My argument is that the competitors on the VSL should have the freedom to play the decks they want to and that this backlash against "anti-Shops, anti-Dredge sentiment" is unwarranted.

They can play whatever they want sure, but making a side agreement to not play half the metagame is not Vintage.  I'm curious as to what does warrant criticism then?  What if they had an anti-blue sentiment?
Logged
Hrishi
Basic User
**
Posts: 391


hrishikesh29@gmail.com
View Profile Email
« Reply #173 on: March 12, 2016, 01:28:57 am »

Would you feel differently if they did not explicitly state that there was a side agreement in place? You said that they can play whatever they want, so what if they had picked those decks without telling you beforehand that there would be no workshops or bazaars? I don't believe there would have been the variety of decks that was played otherwise.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2016, 05:13:30 am by Hrishi » Logged

Lyna turned to the figure beside her. "They're gone. What now?"
"As ever," said Urza, "we wait."
vaughnbros
Basic User
**
Posts: 1574


View Profile Email
« Reply #174 on: March 13, 2016, 06:10:35 pm »

Would you feel differently if they did not explicitly state that there was a side agreement in place? You said that they can play whatever they want, so what if they had picked those decks without telling you beforehand that there would be no workshops or bazaars? I don't believe there would have been the variety of decks that was played otherwise.

No, it still would have been clear that something was going on given they played almost 0 dredge/shops hate in all 6 decks.  I guess at least they were honest in the fact they weren't playing Vintage. 

Is that what passes for variety?  3 Gush decks, 2 drain decks, and 1 storm?  5/6 decks I would barely be able to distinguish between each other if you gave me random opening 7's.  If this is the format without Shops and Bazaar, I really want no part in it.
Logged
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #175 on: March 13, 2016, 07:25:00 pm »

My argument is that the competitors on the VSL should have the freedom to play the decks they want to and that this backlash against "anti-Shops, anti-Dredge sentiment" is unwarranted.

They can play whatever they want sure, but making a side agreement to not play half the metagame is not Vintage.  I'm curious as to what does warrant criticism then?  What if they had an anti-blue sentiment?

I feel disagreements about Lodestone Golem and the state of Vintage were appropriate topics for criticism or discussion, but criticizing a 1-week gentlemen's agreement between two participants is a bit much. And I would be fine if they decided to have a week without Gush or Force of Will.
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 #176 on: March 14, 2016, 07:14:16 pm »

They can play whatever they want sure, but making a side agreement to not play half the metagame is not Vintage.

I agree. This isn't "not real vintage" in the no-true-scotsman sense (eg, the "REAL MEN PLAY WORKSHOPS AND DRINK BEER AND LOVE AMERICA"). This is "not real vintage" in the sense that the players are agreeing to play a fundamentally different format. Our own Deck Discussion forum lists five archetypes plus "Miscellaneous." The agreement eliminates 2/5 of those archetypes. By agreeing to eliminate these archetypes, the players now no longer need to prepare to play against them.

It's often pointed out that the VSL metagame is already warped and that the decks aren't representative of the Vintage metagame as a whole. This agreement further exacerbates the problem. Try taking one of these decks, with no workshop or dredge hate*, to Vintage Champs or Bazaar of Moxen and see how well you do.

*Some of the decks had Grafdigger's Cage or Containment Priest for Oath of Druids.

Vintage Super League has drawn a great deal of excitement and interest to vintage. I'm beginning to fear that the homogenization of the VSL metagame, which is not representative of the vintage metagame as a whole, will quell that interest. I'm afraid we'll return to non-vintage players repeating the same old stereotypes; that Vintage is a coin flip format and that there's only 3 (number varies depending on who you ask) real decks.

For what it's worth, I think that the three-trimester tournament format is to blame. First, the players specifically for the expected matchups of that specific trimester. Second, and IMO more problematic, is that the players will often pick a fun deck in the first trimester and then pick decks that they "know" can win in trimesters two and three in their attempt to make it to the top. This can be seen pretty clearly in the differences in deck lists between the first and third trimesters of this season:

Trimester 1:
UW Control (With Counterbalance! And Enlightened Tutor!)
Dredge
Storm
Tezzerator
UWR Grow
Doomsday
2x Aggro Shops
Uba Staxx
Sylvan Mentor

Trimester 3:
Odd Oath
Dredge
2x Landstill
2x Storm
2x Stax
Oath Storm
Ravager Shops

I'm not really sure how VSL could resolve this (if they even want to). Allowing a new deck each week would at least allow for greater diversity. Forced diversity, whether through forced deck selections or limited deck selections, would also work.
Logged

Instead of tearing things down we should calmly explain our opinions.
Phele
Basic User
**
Posts: 562


Tom Bombadil


View Profile
« Reply #177 on: March 16, 2016, 02:24:44 am »

So congratulations to LSV for winning the league. Well done!
The dominant deck of the finals was clearly their UW Landstill build and it seems to be positioned pretty well in the meta. It has shown that it can beat Shops and Dredge and should have a reasonable matchup against all the rest.
Logged

Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow; Bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow.

Free Illusionary Mask!!
Chubby Rain
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 742



View Profile Email
« Reply #178 on: March 16, 2016, 06:58:18 am »

So congratulations to LSV for winning the league. Well done!
The dominant deck of the finals was clearly their UW Landstill build and it seems to be positioned pretty well in the meta. It has shown that it can beat Shops and Dredge and should have a reasonable matchup against all the rest.

Landstill has an abysmal matchup against the Gush decks, especially Mentor, and I would take the Dredge result (N=1) with a grain of salt - it's not traditionally a good match up for Landstill and LSVs draws were pretty mediocre. The lack of Gush in the VSL is one thing, but in a typical tournament, it tends to be 15-20% of the metagame. Just a caveat to those looking to jam this at their next event. And board your Standstills out in the mirror...
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...
UndeadBus
Basic User
**
Posts: 41

Ichorid is my spirit animal


View Profile Email
« Reply #179 on: March 16, 2016, 12:31:55 pm »

So congratulations to LSV for winning the league. Well done!
The dominant deck of the finals was clearly their UW Landstill build and it seems to be positioned pretty well in the meta. It has shown that it can beat Shops and Dredge and should have a reasonable matchup against all the rest.

Landstill has an abysmal matchup against the Gush decks, especially Mentor, and I would take the Dredge result (N=1) with a grain of salt - it's not traditionally a good match up for Landstill and LSVs draws were pretty mediocre. The lack of Gush in the VSL is one thing, but in a typical tournament, it tends to be 15-20% of the metagame. Just a caveat to those looking to jam this at their next event. And board your Standstills out in the mirror...

Depends on the list, if it's red the mentor match up is really bad but white has moat, supreme verdict, swords, as very good options to attack mentor.
Logged

"If you can't take the heat... well thats going to be a problem"
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7
  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 0.074 seconds with 20 queries.