October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement
-
@cutlex I hear the "knee-jerking" reaction comment quite often. We've had 2 full years of shops being dominant, almost 3. Shops has won just about every single major tournament this year. The paper meta is for champs is finally mimicking MTGO when it comes to MWP/Win rates. This is not anything new to the scene so labeling player reactions calling for restrictions as "knee-jerking" couldn't be any further from the truth. We even have a metagame analysis showing proof of how dominant shops is.
-
@bobbyvictory Thorn of Amethyst and Monastery Mentor were restricted less than two months ago. Blue decks haven't even had a chance to get their feet under them yet, and, as @JACO has pointed out, were grossly misbuilt for this Champs. Vintage is a format about slow changes and I know there is a large segment of the population that is sick of huge changes looming.
Not every metagame problem should be solved with a restriction. Perhaps people simply need more time to figure out how to beat the robot menace, like has happened for years.
-
@cutlex MTGO has sped up the development of the vintage metagame substantially, in fact, the changes pretty much start there and trickle down. They've trickled into champs clearly.
On a side note, All shops has to do is build with 4 hangarbacks and 4 precursor golem main deck and the whole mass sweepers/value-snapcaster mage plan gets out swarmed.
-
@cutlex said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
@garbageaggro You are correct, however, why does shops need an extra 4 ways that is also a threat to do this? Mishra's Workshop is currently on the chopping block and will probably get axed. I think we are better off axing inspector/misstep. Are you suggesting it's better to just restrict Mishra's Workshop?
I don't think he's suggesting that we restrict anything. There are a lot of people who are ready to wait and see instead of knee-jerking a restriction.
I don't think we need to restrict anything. I do think blue decks are built incorrectly to fight shops at the moment. I was just trying to show you that the things you wrote aren't a good argument for why we should restrict inspector instead of shops.
So, i think a lot of people that have been talking about built correclty have been talking about a mix of point removal and things like energy flux, since shops is at its worst at preventing you from casting those slightly more expensive, but better answers with 3 fewer lock pieces, that have been replaced for the most part with more threats.
-
@bobbyvictory I think MTGO right now is an example of why nothing needs restricting, especially from shops. Shops is not over dominating on-line like it did at champs. It is quite a diverse meta on-line right now. I think we are in a really good spot right now. Shops is actually fun to play against, as they don't tend to lock you out as much as they used to. They are aggro as hell now, but that's fine. No different than playing burn in legacy or modern. They are trying to get you dead quick. They still have lock pieces, but it is not as consistent as it was. Especially multiple lock pieces.
There is nothing screaming restrict me like there was with Mentor. -
Actually, I would even argue that another un-restriction would be nice. I think bargan was a good move, and is a fun deck to play. Windfall or memory jar seem like good candidates to me. Fast bond as well as long as MM remains unrestricted.
-
@mourningpalace Shops' mwp has continued to increase. I remember when it sat around the 55% mark and players were like "omg, over 50% mwp, imba". The trend within the last 6-8 weeks is a 56%-62% MWP. That's insane. At what point do you admit that Mishra's Workhops is too strong? It's the only deck that gets a 4 reusable black lotuses that don't even need to be cast. I mean, cards like dig through time that take time to get up and running are on the restricted list. Is dig through time better than mishra's workshop? People turn a blind eye and as shit hits the fan over and over the player's get blamed for their reactions? Shops is OP, every shops player knows it and they use the "Oh I'll quit vintage" argument if it were to get restricted. We all know they'll just deal with it. Get it over with already.
-
@BobbyVictory your rhetoric is insane and fear I've been successfully trolled.
@mourningpalace said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
Actually, I would even argue that another un-restriction would be nice. I think bargan was a good move, and is a fun deck to play. Windfall or memory jar seem like good candidates to me. Fast bond as well as long as MM remains unrestricted.
[[Windfall]] is terrifying from a "turn 1 on the play" standpoint, but I was very worried about [[Gifts Ungiven]] and [[Yawgmoth's Bargain]], too. Maybe it's fine? What deck would even use it? DPS? PO?
-
@cutlex I don't think any deck would run 4, as a lot of existing decks that would run it don't run all the draw 7's as it is. Thats why I think it would be fine. Same with Jar. Could open up something new.
-
@bobbyvictory I don't play shops, so I am not one of those that have a vested interest in the card. I just don't think it is that bad, or any more OP that many other vintage decks. Vintage is supposed to be OP and broken shit. That's what's fun about it. So, I just don't think you and I can agree on this one.
-
@bobbyvictory I love seeing Precursor Golem when I'm running Smash to Smithereens.
-
@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
@cutlex I hear the "knee-jerking" reaction comment quite often. We've had 2 full years of shops being dominant, almost 3. >Shops has won just about every single major tournament this year.
I'm not sure one can call the last two years the "year of shops dominance" with Monastery Mentor's rise, and subsequent multiple restrictions smack dab in the middle of that.
@cutlex MTGO has sped up the development of the vintage metagame substantially, in fact, the changes pretty much start >there and trickle down. They've trickled into champs clearly.
I don't know if MTGO has sped up the development of the vintage metagame or just the stabilization of it.
-
@mourningpalace But you didn't answer my question. I'll give you more examples.
Do you think cards like dig through time, ponder, brainstorm or merchant scroll are better than mishra's workshop?I mean, think about it, for the first time ever in champs history, one deck, all with the same identical list sans a few cards took up 5 out of 8 top 8 spots. What else is it going to take for players to either realize the truth or stop giving them a free pass?
-
@bobbyvictory Yes, I do think they are more powerful. Card advantage is inherently more powerful than mana acceleration. These cards provide powerful card advantage.
-
@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
@mourningpalace Shops' mwp has continued to increase. I remember when it sat around the 55% mark and players were like "omg, over 50% mwp, imba".
One of the constant things to ask when citing the data collected for vintage is what conclusions can (or should) be drawn from said data.
It's the only deck that gets a 4 reusable black lotuses that don't even need to be cast.
This statement needs to die in a fire. If you could use workshop mana to activate artifacts, then you'd be a lot closer to having a metaphor The restriction on casting artifacts is very much a thing.
People turn a blind eye and as shit hits the fan over and over the player's get blamed for their reactions?
Look at it from the other direction- in this small segment of conversation, you say that a deck is overpowered, cite its namesake card as being problematic, and then represent how that card functions in a hyperbolic way...
Is it any wonder that players that enjoy playing in that archetype might get grumpy when they are told "your deck is overpowered" when half the time the audience calling for restrictions A) doesn't play vintage, B) Really means "I don't like the way your style of deck plays and would enjoy vintage more with it gone,
I think the biggest reason that Shops pilots are getting cranky is that after a big event that featured two incredibly fine workshop pilots playing a great tournament we aren't debating the technology in their lists. We aren't talking about Rich's decision to go all in on Ravager in round three.
Instead, we are debating (again) if Workshop is too overpowered and if something needs restriction from the deck. And that is tiresome. Because as opposed to celebrating the first win of Shops at EW in over 10 years, defending the right of the deck to exist is tiring. Because the back-handed "congrats at EW with your overpowered deck" to those who had a great weekend at EW is insulting to the playing skill and good sportsmanship of those who did well.
The fact that we have seen this dance over and over again only further disheartens and frustrates people.
Dredge does well? Dredge isn't real magic. Dredge is a brainless deck that requires no skill to play. Bazaar of Baghdad needs to be restricted.
Shops does well? Prison decks are no fun to play against. Workshop decks are monkey simple and take away from an enjoyable vintage experience. Workshop needs to be restricted because it is a reuseable black lotus that you can run four of.
Oath does well? Oath is completely unfair. Given the ridiculous powercreep that Wizards keeps putting into creatures it is only a matter of time before it needs restriction. And the start of "orchard, mox, oath" is among the most sigh-inducing in magic and requires no skill to play a deck like that.
...and stuff.
-
@winterstar Shops pilots are getting cranky because we know that they know the card is overpowered and they continue to deny it. They know, they definitely know. It's a land that adds 3 mana. Lands normally add 1 mana. It doesn't matter that you are limited to only casting artifacts with the mana. You are effectively ahead of your opponent on resources by 2 turns when workshop hits the table. What if you T1/T2 shop on the play? You are 5 turns ahead of your opponent on mana if they only had a land to play. That's just not right lol.
Mishra's Workshop is arguably better than black lotus in the shops deck. And you can use 4 workshops lol.
Cards like Sol ring, mana crypt, dig through time and treasure cruise are all on the restricted list due to power level. Are you telling me that Mishra's Workshop is not as good as those cards? ;/
Defending the right for an overpowered deck in its current state is probably tiring. I agree. That's because there isn't anything to defends. Every argument gets busted up and then shops players resort to "O i'll quit if they take my toy away". It's a bunch of malarky.
Well guess what, I own the cards to play any deck. I've been boycotting vintage since the end of April 2017. I haven't attended a single event since then. I managed to qualify for NYSE and skipped out even though I had a free spot from qualifying. I skipped out on champs. I even prepaid for last months local vintage 1k and skipped out. This format has no diversity anymore and is stale. Islands/shops/bazaar or bust. I'm bored of that and feel limited in what I can build. Something needs to change.
There is one thing I know for sure. Something needs to be done. in the last 6-8 weeks, shops mwp has been 55%-62% factoring in vintage challenges and champs. It used to be 53%-55%. It just keeps going up and up and up.
We need a nerf to workshops and we need a nerf to misstep.
P.S.- Everyone celebrated for the first 48 hours including myself. No one is discrediting any of the players either.
-
@winterstar said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
Instead, we are debating (again) if Workshop is too overpowered and if something needs restriction from the deck. And that is tiresome.
If there had only been 2-3 Workshops in the Top 8, including winning the event, and Workshops didn't feel like the most dominant strategy in the room, no one would be raising the issue.
There were 5 Workshop decks in the Top 8, and it was the most dominant performance by Workshops ever seen in this event.
That's including the 2012 Top 8, which was 50% Workshop, or in 2004, when Trinisphere Workshop decks were 50% of the Top 8.
Workshops had the highest win percentage in the event, the highest Top 16/8 penetration, 3 of the top 4, and 100% of the finals. It was the most dominant performance by Shops ever in a Type 1/Vintage Championship.
And, if this was an isolated event, again, I doubt anyone would be saying anything. But Shops has literally been the best deck for several years now as measured by practically any objective measure. It was a fluke it didn't win last year, despite having Taxing decks (although not Shops) as 50% of the Top 8. And it won the NYSE this year as well, with 50% of the Top 8 there as well.
Because as opposed to celebrating the first win of Shops at EW in over 10 years, defending the right of the deck to exist is tiring.
If only such thoughts had been applied to Gush...
This win should be celebrated. But that's not inconsistent with a clear-eyed recognition that Shops are also too good. -
I agree with @Winterstar here, on most points.
I personally prefer that the restricted list be as pruned as possible, and others may disagree with that alone. However, I still think Workshops does not need restriction currently. I think the larger tension is the notion that the perceived 'best deck' is only 20% or so of the metagame.
Whether this is due to a shortage of Workshops, people's personal preferences of what 'fun' is, or any other reason, it does not matter to me. 'Blue mages' are criticized for running multiple dead cards for their toughest matchup pre-board in the form of mental misstep, pyro/reb, etc. and then complaining that this boogeyman needs to be taken down a notch via restriction. The issue is that sacrificing those slots has negative consequences in the 70% of blue matchups. I understand that, and those two issues are in direct conflict.
I don't believe that this tension gets better from restriction, which is why I think restriction is not the right move at this point. As @Smmenen likes to model, thinking about the intended effect of a restriction is a helpful framing for why that restriction should or should not be made, and I think we can (as a community) be more thoughtful about that when discussing possible restrictions.
I'd love for there to be a simple solution in lieu of restriction, but if there were, I suspect it would have been discovered by now. Rather, I think the solution is hard, and maybe it should be. Players need to innovate, take risks, and be more cognizant of shortcomings or challenges in their deck/playstyle/ability and correct them. Cut these dead cards and find a way to shore up percentages in other ways; build something new; etc.
I don't mean to stand on a soapbox and preach, because I have neither the pedigree nor the desire to condescend to others; I am simply trying to express my thoughts about the current state of the game I love, as I believe it would be a shame to see Wizards change the game in a way I believe is not aligned with our collective desires and would not have the intended effect
-
@smmenen said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
If only such thoughts had been applied to Gush...
This win should be celebrated. But that's not inconsistent with a clear-eyed recognition that Shops are also too good.I couldn't recall if the push for Gush's re-restriction was centered around EW last year or not. If it did, add it to the list.
At this point I'm not convinced that Gush truly needed to go. Gush combined with Mentor was problematic, certainly. But I'm not entirely certain that adding 3 more gush into the current mixture of cards creates an overwhelming advantage to the pyromancer decks. Kaladesh altered the artifact decks and the combo decks in ways that hadn't fully unfolded when Gush went back on the list. Knowing what we have now, I think Gush might have been fine to stay off the list.
But again, I come down on the side of "Restrict as little as possible" when talking B/R.
-
@archae said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
I agree with @Winterstar here, on most points.
I personally prefer that the restricted list be as pruned as possible, and others may disagree with that alone. However, I still think Workshops does not need restriction currently. I think the larger tension is the notion that the perceived 'best deck' is only 20% or so of the metagame.
This has never been the metric for evaluating restrictions. Rather, % of Top 8s is, not % of the metagame. It's winning that leads to dominance, not mere presence. Shops was 63% of the Top 8, 75% of the Top 4, and 100% of the finals.
The DCI specifically mentioned that Shops 40% of Top 8s in the summer was too high, and that was why Thorn was restricted.
