The actual effect of Restricting Chalice

[YamiJoey]

So I just wanted to get some feedback on how people think the Chalice restriction is actually going to affect the game.

From what I can tell, Workshop is still a deck (not that I expected it to just die or anything) and it's still doing well. It dropped off a little (maybe due to the ban?) and has come back absolutely storming. Thirst decks are hugely popular, but I'm not certain how much of this is Thirst being as good as it might seem, and how much of it is people like to play anything that says "Draw 3" on it. I have a feeling it's the latter, but I am more than prepared to be wrong, as the Gifts unbanning did next to nothing, and people (ie. I) love that card.

If what I am suggesting is correct, and Shops is just as good as before, and is going to retake its place as the best deck in the format (which I firmly believe it was) then what has to happen? When these discussions were happening, I was always a champion of banning Golem. A Sphere and a threat all in one seems way better than yet another lock piece. (Albeit one that acts on a different axis.)

If you disagree, why?

[brianpk80]

Shops is still a playable deck but the restriction severely hampers its ability to jam multiple early lock pieces that are so crucial to its success, forces them to compensate by playing a comparatively bad card (Null Rod) that is inflexible, not asymmetrical, and costs more to play than the superior Chalice 0.  At the same time, it makes handling the larger threats easier for smart opponents (allowing hyperefficient cards like Nature's Claim to flourish) while encouraging mages to run less greedy and more expansive mana bases like traditional Big Blue.  And then those that remain on Delver-ish builds can't be one-shotted to oblivion with a silver bullet Chalice @ 1.  So Shops are pulled in two different directions since Null Rod is dead there while Chalice was superb.  On the other hand, more sophisticated Roland Chang-esque 5C shops stand to gain a lot.  Given the vulnerability of LSG and his lack of effect on Moxen, it's not clear whether a Thalia deck with Missteps, Stony Silence, and other types of disruption is even clearly inferior to Shops as an option for Wasteland oriented players. 

If Thirst decks get out of control, we can always revisit the question of whether it's the draw spell or the brutal wincons it encourages, which would revisit the Ban Tinker/Time Vault concept, neither of whose extermination would make many of us (myself included) shed a single tear. 

[Commandant]

Opinion:

Chalice is all that needed to be done. It was 100% the correct choice out of potential candidates. It lowered the frequency at which the archetype could deploy two lock pieces on turn one (shutting out the opponent completely) – now this only happens with above average hands instead of mediocrity plus Chalice, as it should.
Workshops as a whole is still tier one but will most likely require some retooling, time will tell.
It’s still early to open up this kind of discussion; the metagame is not even close to established.

So Shops are pulled in two different directions...

Oddly enough, what Chalice has done to the format since 2005. Except this time, one does not get punished on both ends of the spectrum. Yay meta gaming!

[gkraigher]

I was always a champion of banning Golem

translation:  Ban everything I'm not playing in my 75, unless it's blue, because we need diversity in the blue decks.  

[Smmenen]

Opinion:

Chalice is all that needed to be done. It was 100% the correct choice out of potential candidates. It lowered the frequency at which the archetype could deploy two lock pieces on turn one (shutting out the opponent completely) – now this only happens with above average hands instead of mediocrity plus Chalice, as it should.
Workshops as a whole is still tier one but will most likely require some retooling, time will tell.
It’s still early to open up this kind of discussion; the metagame is not even close to established.

So Shops are pulled in two different directions...

Oddly enough, what Chalice has done to the format since 2005. Except this time, one does not get punished on both ends of the spectrum. Yay meta gaming!

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years?  It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time.  Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.    

[gkraigher]

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years?  It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time.  Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.    

I would certainly hope that Wizards used online data mining and found that Chalice on the play turn 1 for 0 led to some extraordinarly high win percentage (i.e., greater than 85%), and decided that was the reason to axe it in particular.  Online Vintage has to yield them some numbers to work with.  

If not, then the DCI really does look like this:

[vaughnbros]

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years?  It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time.  Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.    

I would certainly hope that Wizards used online data mining and found that Chalice on the play turn 1 for 0 led to some extraordinarly high win percentage (i.e., greater than 85%), and decided that was the reason to axe it in particular.  Online Vintage has to yield them some numbers to work with.  

If not, then the DCI really does look like this:

Cards don't exist in a Vacuum.  Chalice became a problem with the printing of Lodestone, and thorn of amethyst.  Even then it took them a long time to act because of the dissenting views of Vintage as a whole and general disregard for the format.

[enderfall]

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years?  It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time.  Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.    

I would certainly hope that Wizards used online data mining and found that Chalice on the play turn 1 for 0 led to some extraordinarly high win percentage (i.e., greater than 85%), and decided that was the reason to axe it in particular.  Online Vintage has to yield them some numbers to work with.  

If not, then the DCI really does look like this:

Cards don't exist in a Vacuum.  Chalice became a problem with the printing of Lodestone, and thorn of amethyst.  Even then it took them a long time to act because of the dissenting views of Vintage as a whole and general disregard for the format.

Here is a situation where we can thanks MTGO for providing the data that WotC hasn't had for years.

[nedleeds]

The effect is the overall weakening of all the other cards in Workshop. Chalice had a massive amount of synergy with a number of other cards, I don't believe the DCI took this into account or understood it in much depth. Even the text of the restriction explanation "A major problem is that a turn-one Chalice of the Void for 0 deprives the opponent an opportunity to put Moxen on the battlefield. While players can adapt by not playing Moxen, the point of the format is to provide a place to play those cards." is oversimplifying the impact and showing ignorance of how the card was used tactically.

* Chalice is often played at numbers other than 0, in fact I'd say 0 being the default has declined in the last 2 years dramatically. 0 is specified in the text, but a chalice on 1 or 2 was often the right choice, knowing what to choose was a (drumroll) skill tester.

* "Players can adapt by not playing Moxen", or instead of maining Flusterstorm, 3-4 x Missteps, and Reds they could you know ... play permanent removal, but I guess then they'd be dead in matches of "real magic" ... like this



Isn't this interesting and skill testing? Who has the most free countermagic and a Flusterstorm for lastsies. Makes my control and concurrency college work look like tic tac toe.

We all slept well at night for years playing Disenchant in our maindecks. Not-shop playing people seemed (for the most part) to be recalcitrant to include cards like EE, Powder Keg, Wear/Tear, Disechant etc.. Oh I know, I know ... "but those cards are dead vs. my skill intense Urx opponent! That's no fun!"

* The splash damage is huge. Just walk through a few of the ripple effects, play a few dozen games and you start to really realize how far it goes. Tangle Wire, once a stalwart of shops (especially on the draw), is severely neutered. Chalice 0 was not only the cheapest non-mana producer buddy for wire, it also impeded your opponent from playing out multiple 0's to tap to your wire. Not being able to play a chalice on 1 means a shop deck no longer has access to protection for LSG, Metalworker, etc. against Bolt and Plow the 2 ubiquitous creature solutions in Vintage. So really all the creatures get worse, there are different directions to go (Ravager, Lightning Greaves) etc.. Or the workshop adherent can just get in on the Misstep Orgy himself I suppose. All the turn one sphere plays suffer from not having the option to also play a chalice. Thorn go, just isn't exciting against Island, Mox, pass ... Force your actual threat since your Thorn is a Bone Flute.

* Rest in Peace other decks that didn't want to bath in the Misstep/REB/Fluster sauna. Creature dense hate decks lost access to a good way to slow the game down and protect their men. Blue decks that wanted to go over the top (MUC, Moon blue decks) of the derp cantrip derpstep blue decks lost the only real tool to differentiate themselves and make up for the loss of the consistency that the cantrip engines provide.

* Dig didn't really matter anyway. It's Dack that was making Dig insane. You know there were as many Dacks as Digs in the top 8. Oh darn, I lost 1-2 Digs. Dack is also a big reason there were only 2 Shop decks in the top 8, one of which had byes. Back to my earlier point, the weakening of all the other lock pieces around chalice strengthens Dack which even further weakens shops. You can no loner hope to protect a Revoker naming Dack, since you can't Chalice on 1 (but hey you too can play Misstep!). Then the pile of salt to be rubbed in the wound is unrestricting another blue draw engine as if there weren't half-dozen already present.

I'm not losing any sleep over the BNR but I personally thought it wasn't needed. Champs was well attended, the top 8 had a sprinkling of everything that was played in any numbers. I think the restriction was in most part because of the outcry of people who happen to have 'loud' voices in the ears of the DCI. It was hard enough to get consistent openers and draws to navigate a long (8+ round event) with shops, barring additional printings I believe this restriction is fairly backbreaking. In shorter events it may not be felt ... but I wouldn't bring shops to any large event if I had hopes of winning.

[YamiJoey]

I was always a champion of banning Golem

translation:  Ban everything I'm not playing in my 75, unless it's blue, because we need diversity in the blue decks.  

So my suggestion of banning a card from a specific deck over the card they banned was more extreme than them actually doing it, even though Golem makes my Ancestral cost 2, and Chalice makes it uncastable? Excellent analysis, friend.

I didn't really understand nedleeds' post entirely, but I think the general idea was "Stop being pissy and play Disenchant", which I totally agree with. Every deck has answers to every other deck if you're willing to play them, and if you're complaining that the field is 66% of a deck, then you should stop telling everyone so you can crush the tournament.

I mean, it's not even like people are hateful of doing that. Red Elemental Blast is in main decks, and that only hits Blue and is 90% dead against Dredge and Shops.

[Jostin123]

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years?  It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time.  Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.    

I would certainly hope that Wizards used online data mining and found that Chalice on the play turn 1 for 0 led to some extraordinarly high win percentage (i.e., greater than 85%), and decided that was the reason to axe it in particular.  Online Vintage has to yield them some numbers to work with.  

If not, then the DCI really does look like this:

The same can be said for playing a Turn 1 Jace or Dack, (especially against shops) but I don't see shop pilots clamoring for Jace or Dack's restriction.  

From this shop player's perspective, Chalice forced players to change their "answers" to artifacts to be able to play around it.  It just so happens players don't like being pigeon-holed into playing around Chalice, as it makes their deck-building and in-game decisions much more impactful and high-risk/high reward.  

While I respect your opinion Vaughnbros, Chalice was never a problem when Thorn of Amethyst was printed.  Blue decks still dominated tournaments.  Thorn made shops competitive, which is a big difference.  With the extra sphere effect, you couldn't just sit back and play draw go with a greedy manabase until you hit your Hurkyll's Recall, you actually had to try to fight through the spheres.  With each additional sphere printed, blue decks had to increasingly make harder and harder decisions with regard to what hate they play and how they play it.  No longer could a shop player pay   or to commit another non lethal 2 drop to the board, often at the cost of 2 or 4 life,  just for an instant speed 1 mana spell or a pitch counter to clear it off the table.  Chalice made you have to pay just as much in resources and tempo: 3 mana and 2 mountains, 2 cards, 1 life and 3 mana, etc.  In my opinion, chalice made it a fair game.  I've heard a lot of people complain that chalice locks players out from being able to compete, but it did the same to shop decks.  For how many years did shop players correctly play chalice at 0 just to lose all that tempo when they draw three straight moxes off the top.  We call it variance.  The critics call it unfair.  Just because we pay a format where we can play all the broken artifacts and cheap spells doesn't automatically give us the right to have those spells resolve.

I'm glad that a change gave ritual based lists life, I really am, as I used to play rituals many years ago and have a love for the archetype.  but I've seen some amazing decks thrive solely because a card like chalice gave those decks a chance to compete.  Stormanimagus played his Humans list at Worlds and was 6-1-1 entering round 9.  That kind of innovation would not be possible without the leverage Chalice offers fair decks to interact with broken ones.  With that said, we have worked so hard to grow the community and dispel the myths that Vintage is a 1st turn kill format.  With the restriction of chalice, it might be just that.  People keep saying that Force of Will is the glue that keeps vintage together.  I feel that Vintage is going to experience a combo winter, and after it's all said and done, Chalice will have earned the same title as Force.  

[Commandant]

Why bother?

[vaughnbros]

Chalice fair?  What am I reading?  The card literally says you can not play cards of this mana cost.  I could understand if you went on to butcher other combo decks, in essence saying all control cards are fair, but you go on to rip Jace and Dack.  Chalice at 0 is an automatic turn 1 play if its in your opener, Jace or Dack are extremely low percentage turn 1 players since you need lotus or multiple pieces of artifact acceleration. the two are not comparable.

Stormanimagus played his Humans list at Worlds and was 6-1-1 entering round 9.  That kind of innovation would not be possible without the leverage Chalice offers fair decks to interact with broken ones.

Doesn't this speak to the brokenness of chalice more than the fairness of it?  What are your definitions of broken and fair anyway?

[Commandant]

Chalice fair?  What am I reading?  The card literally says you can not play cards of this mana cost.  I could understand if you went on to butcher other combo decks, in essence saying all control cards are fair, but you go on to rip Jace and Dack.  Chalice at 0 is an automatic turn 1 play if its in your opener, Jace or Dack are extremely low percentage turn 1 players since you need lotus or multiple pieces of artifact acceleration. the two are not comparable.

Ridiculous, have you met Mental Misstep and Force of Will? Seriously guy, trading one for one and two for one, once or twice a game - OUTRAGEOUS. Clearly the boogieman of the format, needs to be restricted. It's unreal that you think a permanent lock piece that's as interesting as an episode of the Kardashians, has it's symmetry completely broken open by Mishra's Workshop, and requires a one time investment of zero or two mana is deserving of restriction. It's like you haven't played a game of Vintage in the past 10 years. Dear sir, I believe it's time you get good and just run Ingot Chewers.

[Smmenen]

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years?  It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time.  Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.    

I would certainly hope that Wizards used online data mining and found that Chalice on the play turn 1 for 0 led to some extraordinarly high win percentage (i.e., greater than 85%), and decided that was the reason to axe it in particular.  Online Vintage has to yield them some numbers to work with.  

If not, then the DCI really does look like this:

Cards don't exist in a Vacuum.  Chalice became a problem with the printing of Lodestone,

Exactly right.  Which illustrates my point.  Chalice has existed since Mirrodin was released in 2003.  The chatter about seriously restricting something out of Shops only occurred after Golem become prevalent.  Which makes Chalice the wrong target.  Restrict Golem and Chalice goes back to what it was pre-Golem. 

[Commandant]

Exactly right.  Which illustrates my point.  Chalice has existed since Mirrodin was released in 2003.  The chatter about seriously restricting something out of Shops only occurred after Golem become prevalent.  Which makes Chalice the wrong target.  Restrict Golem and Chalice goes back to what it was pre-Golem.

Classic Stevemantics.

Yes Steve, some of what you say is true. Except there is a more than fair argument that restricting Golem takes Workshops out of the format whereas Chalice brings it back in line. Golem is infinitely more reasonable to answer than Chalice and is a threat that makes the archetype competitive in modern Vintage.

[Smmenen]

If that's true, then it supports my point that Chalice isn't the problem and undeemines if not refutes your original claim that it was. 
 
If true, then your "100%" claim is hilariously hyberbolic bunk. 

[Commandant]

If that's true, then it supports my point that Chalice isn't the problem and undeemines if not refutes your original claim that it was.  
 
If true, then your "100%" claim is hilariously hyberbolic bunk.  

It does? I believe I said 100% correct. Within the context of modern Vintage, restricting Chalice is 100% the correct choice if your goal is a healthy meta that still contains Workshops.

How do you feel about Survival of the Fittest being banned in Legacy upon the onset of Vengevine? Clearly Vengevine was the problem, why did they choose Survival?

FWIW, the only thing truly hilarious here is how seriously you continue to take yourself after 15 years of spewing utter nonsense. It's no wonder Daniel Chang and a known cheat are your bffs.

[The Atog Lord]

Folks, please keep the tones civil. No warnings, but I'll ask everyone to behave respectfully toward one another. Steve, this means not calling people's arguments "hilariously hyberbolic bunk." John, this means not calling people's arguments "spewing utter nonsense." Please conduct this discussion with civility.

[mmcgeach]

Isn't the Rise of Workshops just due to The Decline Of Mana in blue decks?  I mean, the most popular blue decks play 17 mana sources.  Of course those decks lose to workshops.  Blue decks used to play 24 mana sources.  Those decks don't lose to workshops very often.  It seems to me like a meta gaming issue.  Blue decks could increase their mana counts and greatly increase their percentages against shops. Or, I guess, try to get something banned from shops.

[The Atog Lord]

Isn't the Rise of Workshops just due to The Decline Of Mana in blue decks?  I mean, the most popular blue decks play 17 mana sources.  Of course those decks lose to workshops.  Blue decks used to play 24 mana sources.  Those decks don't lose to workshops very often.  It seems to me like a meta gaming issue.  Blue decks could increase their mana counts and greatly increase their percentages against shops. Or, I guess, try to get something banned from shops.

Absolutely. But these are related. Having Chalice running around punishes you for playing a full set of Moxen in your deck. And if you're playing 24 mana sources, then you're probably playing a full set of Moxen, too.

Another factor against playing all that mana was losing Thirst for Knowledge. Thirst was a big reason to play Moxen.

I think that another factor keeping Big Blue down was the rise of Delver decks. Without Dig, those decks will be much less powerful.

All three of these changes to the restricted list encourage playing Big Blue. That is good, since Big Blue hasn't been very common lately. I think that Workshops will move from being Tier Zero to Tier One. Shops aren't going away. They're just not going to be the clear best deck anymore.

[Phele]

I posted this in another thread, but it better belongs here. Will Ingot Chewer be the prefered single artifact removal for one mana or will we see a more diversified selection of one mana solutions? What do you think?

Why would Wear/Tear be better than Nature's Claims?  The point is that Chalice is restricted so you don't have to use evoke to get around it anymore.

I think this is a very interesting point, even though not directly related to the topic: With the restriction of Chalice there seems to be no need anymore to include single artifact removals that cost more than one mana. Natures Claim, Swords to Plowshares, Steel Sabotage ... are probably the way to go. I even doubt, even though I am not sure, that Ingot Chewer, an all time favourite, still makes the cut. The possibility to remove artifacts instantly under a Tangle Wire (and respond to Forgemaster, activations of Factories ...) seems superior compared to avoiding Thorns and the possible two for one effect in the late game. So even Smelt could be better. I am very curious how these sideboard choices will develop. The abbility to remove Enchantments is another story. It will be highly related to the question how vulnerable your deck is to Stony Silence or random stuff like Moat. Otherwise you could also fight Oath as the most relevant Enchantment in the format with different, more adaptable choices like Graffidiggers Cage, Containment Priest, Engineered Explosives ...

[mmcgeach]

I posted this in another thread, but it better belongs here. Will Ingot Chewer be the prefered single artifact removal for one mana or will we see a more diversified selection of one mana solutions? What do you think?

It still dodges Thorn, which nothing else does, and it's the only anti-shops card that's an efficient 1-for-1 early in the game that helps you climb back into it, while simultaneously being a 2-for-1 and/or win con late in the game when you can pay full price.

[Phele]

I posted this in another thread, but it better belongs here. Will Ingot Chewer be the prefered single artifact removal for one mana or will we see a more diversified selection of one mana solutions? What do you think?

It still dodges Thorn, which nothing else does, and it's the only anti-shops card that's an efficient 1-for-1 early in the game that helps you climb back into it, while simultaneously being a 2-for-1 and/or win con late in the game when you can pay full price.

Is this more important than using your mana under a Tangle Wire, getting factories, at least removing Sundering after cip ... all the things instants offer? Sorry for asking, I am really unsure on that.

[mmcgeach]

I posted this in another thread, but it better belongs here. Will Ingot Chewer be the prefered single artifact removal for one mana or will we see a more diversified selection of one mana solutions? What do you think?

It still dodges Thorn, which nothing else does, and it's the only anti-shops card that's an efficient 1-for-1 early in the game that helps you climb back into it, while simultaneously being a 2-for-1 and/or win con late in the game when you can pay full price.

Is this more important than using your mana under a Tangle Wire, getting factories, at least removing Sundering after cip ... all the things instants offer? Sorry for asking, I am really unsure on that.

IDK, but as already observed, losing chalice makes tangle wire a whole lot worse.

[gkraigher]

losing chalice makes tangle wire a whole lot worse.

I think the death of tangle wire is greatly exaggerated.  Tangle Wire is still the same card it's always been, it's very good on the play, it's great on the draw, and it's great with multiple copies.  

So my suggestion of banning a card from a specific deck over the card they banned was more extreme than them actually doing it, even though Golem makes my Ancestral cost 2, and Chalice makes it uncastable? Excellent analysis, friend.

For starters, nothing got BANNED...so choose your words a little bit better before trolling me with comments like "Excellent analysis, friend"

From what I can tell, Workshop is still a deck

as the Gifts unbanning did next to nothing, and people (ie. I) love that card.

If what I am suggesting is correct, and Shops is just as good as before, and is going to retake its place as the best deck in the format (which I firmly believe it was) then what has to happen?

I stand by what I said, you want the cards you don't like banned (or restricted) because you want to be free to play all the blue cards you love.  You have a bias.  

I play MUD decks, I have a bias towards them, kind of.  But I honestly think I keep a pretty open-minded approach when considering what cards should and should not be playable in the format.

Alas, I don't think anything should have been been restricted in the format, but I am glad they took thirst for knowledge off the restricted list.  The only positive thing I hope to see from Chalice's restriction is that it frees up archetypes that were unplayable in a 9 round tournament because they didn't want to deal with Chalice.  However, the knee jerk reaction and complaints from the non-Mud players are suggesting the opposite effect.  That hate bear and fringe creature based decks needed Chalice to compete against the unfair decks.  I hope this move adds diversity, but many are already suggesting the opposite.  

And the Mud decks are still really good.  I don't want to see it drop off the face of the earth, I want it to remain a viable strategy.  I think it's unfair and biased of anyone to think it should be removed from the format, because it's not overly dominant.  Come prepared and be ready for it or don't expect to come home with a trophy.  

[RitNecroWin]

losing chalice makes tangle wire a whole lot worse.

I think the death of tangle wire is greatly exaggerated.  Tangle Wire is still the same card it's always been, it's very good on the play, it's great on the draw, and it's great with multiple copies.

- I haven't been playing Vintage for a few years, but I sure have been following the format (so take this with a grain of salt...)

BUT I'm not sure I agree with you. A chalice and a tangle wire combined really devestated an opponents mana base and allowed you a permanent to tap down to the wire without impacting your ability to pay for more threats... It's still a very strong card, but I don't know that it's alive and kicking now(?)

[gkraigher]

Tangle Wire is the same conditional two turn time walk it's always been.  

It worked with Chalice, but it never needed chalice to be great on it's own.  

[Chubby Rain]

However, the knee jerk reaction and complaints from the non-Mud players are suggesting the opposite effect.  That hate bear and fringe creature based decks needed Chalice to compete against the unfair decks.  I hope this move adds diversity, but many are already suggesting the opposite.  

There have been knee jerk reactions and complaints on both sides of the argument (with both Chalice and Thirst for Knowledge). Regarding Hatebears, I think the biggest nail in the coffin for those decks have been the printing of Delver, Young Pyromancer, and Mentor. These creatures easily outclass their counterparts in the White decks, not to mention have prompted a dramatic increase in main deck creature removal. And it wasn't like these decks were extremely viable with Chalice: of the top 128 decks at Champs, two decks ran Thalia and Noah's deck was the only one running Chalice of the Void.

[Khahan]

Isn't the Rise of Workshops just due to The Decline Of Mana in blue decks?  I mean, the most popular blue decks play 17 mana sources.  Of course those decks lose to workshops.  Blue decks used to play 24 mana sources.  Those decks don't lose to workshops very often.  It seems to me like a meta gaming issue.  Blue decks could increase their mana counts and greatly increase their percentages against shops. Or, I guess, try to get something banned from shops.

I would guess its the opposite. The toolkit that shops has is almost custom tailored against big blue:

1. Makes spells cost more (9 ways, 3sphere, resistance and amethyst).  Blue decks get by on cheap spells: 0 cost accelerators, cheap draw like ancestral, free cards like FoW. And the few expensive cards (gifts, fof etc) are just that much more expensive and its harder to get to that mana

2. Threat density - blue decks mostly flourish by countering a handful of bombs the other decks have and forcing thru their own limited win conditions. Shops decks have a) factories which can't be easily dealt with by blue.  Phyrexian revokers (why in the world doesn't this have the same 'no mana abilities' restriction that pithing needle does?), lodestone golems...which they get to push thru against blue with a black lotus effect every turn from shop

3. Win conditions and lock pieces are 1 in the same but threats (stax/wire, null rods etc) are so plentiful that blue cant keep up.  Something is getting thru and they just snowball blue control shells from there.  Other decks do just fine.  Its rock, paper, scissors.  Its just that if blue decks are scissors then they are kiddie safety scissors and shop decks are like the Rock of Gibraltar.

As a blue player I would love to see Mishra's black lot..sorry Mishra's workshop restricted.  With the redundancy of ancient tomb and colorless mana in wasteland/stripmine acting as mana or control it would give blues a fighting chance in game 1.  But it would probably slow it down too much or make it too unreliable for other match ups. More realistically they need someway to diversify the redundancy of the deck. With upwards of 12 sphere effects available and mana accelerants beyond what any other deck gets it just seems too consistent these days.

I dont see a way to accomplish that goal without completely neutering the deck considering the options we have are unrestricted or restricted, though.  I just think that chalice was a knee-jerk choice.