@vaughnbros said in Cards to unrestrict:
Your inability to ever use context ceases to amaze me. Its like everything has to be written out like a formal legal document.
And your failure to grasp simple ideas (such as the distinction between a goal and byproduct, or the difference between competition and tension, to take but two examples) results circular argumentation and repetition of ideas.
I would actually very much appreciate it if you treated communication here like a formal, professional document. That would improve your writing and enhance communication.
Consistently as in MORE consistent. We are talking about unrestricting a singular card, no? One component of a large structure.
Please. You said:
"A deck that can consistently go off on turn 1 is not good for the format."
"Windfall is pretty clearly a turn 1 card. I'm not sure there is anything to be gained if you are going to be stumping for cards that are clearly turn 1 cards, while simultaneously trying to tell me that you don't want a turn 1 format."
No one reading your words would interpret you to mean, say, a 5% Turn 1 kill rate, which would be an increase from current levels for those decks and the format as a whole.
If you don't want to be misunderstood, please use more care in presenting your ideas. That's why, to avoid exactly what's happened anyway, I've sought clarity first. Your consistently sloppy and lackadaisical presentation makes it very difficult to understand your ideas, even when they make sense.
A biproduct of adding a deck that kills on turn 1 is that there are more turn 1 kills. > Yeah, I got it. Thats not necessarily adding strategic diversity.
So, you didn't understand anything I just wrote about the difference between a bYproduct (not biproduct) and a goal, did you? Re-read my analogy to taking an antibiotic until you understand it, and maybe you wouldn't have made that statement.
If Flash and TPS/DPS become viable decks again, that increases the strategic diversity of a format that is primarily defined by Mentor/Thorn, and by PO to lesser extent, with Oath and Dredge a bit further behind.
It introduces NEW decks to the metagame that either don't currently exist OR are extremely marginal right now. I don't get how you don't see this.
Anything added comes at the cost of something else. What decks do you suppose a Storm deck cuts into?
That's actually a reasonable question, and a good one.
We don't have the NYSE breakdown yet, but let's take the breakdown from the last Vintage challenge:
6% Big Blue
And the rest is under 5%
A goal, in my view, is to get more decks above 5% of the metagame, and into Top 8s. That gives people more viable deck options. I think unrestricting Flash could definitely do that, and unrestricting Bargain and/or Windfall have the potential to do that as well.
If both Flash and TPS were viable again, we would have a much more diverse metagame, and that's the kind of metagame we should be working towards.
My guess is that Pyroblast decks that can sideboard Leyline would have the best Flash matchup, and Workshops would have among the weakest. So, I'd guess that unrestricted Flash would probably reduce the % of Shops in the metagame a bit over time.
On the other hand, unrestricted Windfall, even if it made TPS viable, would not likely make it good enough to be what TPS used to be, but it could make it more than 5%. My guess is that it would be strongest against Control decks, so it might take a few points out of the various control decks, and a little bit (1-3% points) out of Oath and Dredge in the long run.
So, my best guess is that, if you could unrestrict enough cards to engineer TPS/DPS and Flash to above 5% of the metagame, you could do it in a manner that would not take any existing deck already above 5% below it. Instead, you'd likely shave a few %ages off of the decks already above it, and a bit from the smattering of decks below it.
But, if an unrestriction has no effect on the metagame, then that card doesn't deserve to be restricted anyway.
Or is it simply changing the cards in each decklist?
This is a good example of how your posts could benefit from a bit more care. What the heck does this mean?