Type One is just like Vintage, except that the goal of our restricted list is to maximize the number of unique cards that are likely to make a top 8. So, we'll be managing the restricted list using independent component analysis. Also, Shahrazad is unbanned.

So, to start off week 1 we will have a very short restricted list and an important caveat: you automatically lose the match if any of your turns takes more than 5 minutes. Ante cards are banned because of the logistical difficulties of switching cards between decks on Cockatrice.

Restricted list:
Ancestral Recall
Black Lotus
Memory Jar
Mox Sapphire
Mox Jet
Timetwister
Time Walk
Tolarian Academy
Wheel of Fortune

Turn 1 Draw7.dec reduces the format to pure luck, so it's preemptively restricted. Mox Ruby, Pearl, and Emerald will need to earn their restrictions.

Who's in? Or suggestions for a better B/R list?

It sound fun except for the caveat. Turns dont often go 5 mins. But when they do its usually because your hand needs a lot of thought or a lot of actions. Limiting/restricting those turns can effectively kill otherwise playable decks.

I can already see that Balance.dec is the best deck. Isn't turn 1 Balance better than turn 1 Draw7? Draw7s are usually like +4, while Balance is usually +7

@Khahan Fair, but there are some extremely involved combos in this meta. These won't be long matches, but I don't think anybody wants to sit there while their opponent goldfishes for 45 minutes. Is there a superior alternative? Is 10 minutes a better ceiling?

@shawnthehero Maybe. I assume it's a combo meta. The question is...after you get done with your 4x Leyline of Anticipation, what else do you run? Also, Balance is incredibly dangerous if your opponent can make use of the discards by Reanimating a Griselbrand or the like. It's not actually clear to me that it's better to cast Balance than to just win. If you think it is, well, I look forward to playing against you

Anyways, if I organize a Cockatrice tourney (games to be played within a week of us reaching 8 players) who else is in?

@AmbivalentDuck

count me in. I'm usually available in the evenings after 8:30 pm EST.

Obviously I won't stop anyone from participating in this exercise; your free time is your own. Here's my take, though. Vintage already struggles with legitimacy issues. We've all heard the arguments—it's too broken, too fast, too expensive, too elitist, too hard to learn, too unbalanced, and so on. The only reason Vintage matters at all is because it's still a Wizards sanctioned format, one that holds value because it's the oldest and all the cards are legal. The "Damn The Man" approach of creating a new B&R list because players can supposedly manage it better just makes the format a gigantic joke.

That said, have fun playing Magic.

@GrandpaBelcher
First and foremost, Commander doesn't have legitimacy issues despite being governed by committee.

Second, some of us have a technical background in numerical analysis of sparse data. A format designed by a machine to maximize the number of playable cards might be great. It might be awful. I'm pretty sure Lotus Petal is restricted and Mox Pearl is not, though. I don't see the harm in rethinking some of the format's fundamental assumptions.

Third, for a lot of folks Vintage is largely about knowing what's good. See: Old School Magic. Legacy has a shiftier meta that's harder to grab hold of. Mox Sapphire is good in Vintage and that's never changing. Is Deathrite Shaman good this week in Legacy? Some of us like to figure out what's good and this alternative format lets us tinker around in ways that could potentially be disastrous if WotC ever tried them.

Last, WotC has devoted zero resources to testing what would happen if Mox Pearl came off the restricted list. They will never devote those resources because they really don't care to. They don't want to waste their time building White Stax, Thalia Humans, and whatever sick Mentor build it enables. They don't want to adjust storm decks to deal with the extra Moxes and Thalias. They will never test it, but if the community tests it and it turns out fine (which is what the Commander Rules Committee does!) they might respect our testing.

@AmbivalentDuck said:

They will never test it, but if the community tests it and it turns out fine (which is what the Commander Rules Committee does!) they might respect our testing.

God I hope not. Commander is a complete joke of a format; I don't know why anyone would want vintage to aspire to that.

Wizards supports Commander with a supplemental product every other year, for starters. They invest in publicizing the format. They actually test the format before releasing products.

The fact that there are at least two versions of Commander and none of you have mentioned it yet in this thread should tell you everything you need to know about fan-supported splintering.

@CHA1N5 said:

The fact that there are at least two versions of Commander and none of you have mentioned it yet in this thread should tell you everything you need to know about fan-supported splintering.

And the multiple variants on the Old School theme.

@CHA1N5 Duel Commander is a two-player format as opposed to the standard multiplayer format. I think we can agree that multiplayer Vintage would likely also have a different restricted list.