October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement

@topical_island It's okay, you are definitely in denial. You aren't the only one. It's just a shame that this format will suffer because of it.

@bobbyvictory I guess I'll just have to learn to live with the pain, man. I appreciate the diagnosis though. Thanks for doing everything you could.

last edited by Topical_Island

@topical_island What are you going to do as players continue to sell out of vintage because of how bad of a place the format is in(for the last 3 years)? Will you still think everything is fine? Hell, vintage has already plateaued as of 3 years ago according to attendance data. Do you still think vintage is fine? Something tells me you can't see negative trends until it's way too late to fix.

@bobbyvictory What will I do? Ummm.... read books. Take classes. Cook dinner for my wife and play a couple games of vintage against her most nights... Will I think everything is fine?... Yes. Do I still think Vintage is fine?... Well, your last question already assumed that I do. But it was right! Yes I do.

Negative trends... ummm maybe? I was blindsided by a negative trend in my relationship with Lisa Haines once... She broke up with me on second recess. So that theory of yours actually has, what I would call, evidence.

last edited by Topical_Island

@topical_island What a shame :(. I wish you the best >.> and hopefully one day you'll let go of the "brushing things under the rug" mentality that serves no purpose other than to uphold the illusion that everything is fine.

@bobbyvictory Cheers to my continued personal growth. See you the next time any deck wins a tourney... I guess?

last edited by Topical_Island

Wasteland and Bloodmoon warp the meta, forcing people to run basics. Both need restricted.

@serracollector ehhh... naaa... I think they're fine.

Quick guys! While Andy is streaming some video game with Stefan, let's make all the inane posts we can. Make sure there isn't a shred of strategic value in it, and let's keep it devoid of anything approaching a rational argument.

@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:

Actually, it's one of the main reasons for the restricted list. Cards that are way too powerful that warp the metagame are put on it.

I think the point that @fsecco is trying to make, which is valid, is that 'power level' alone, however you might measure or define it, is not usually a reason for restriction.

Rather, in Vintage, we look at performance, not some abstract measure of power. After all, it's how Yawgmoth's Bargain or Paradoxical Outcome can be unrestricted and Thorn of Amethyst restricted.

And, there is no more important precedent or well-established measure of performance than % of Top 8s. More than any other measure, that tends to be our benchmark for restricting cards. A card can be uber-powerful - but if it doesn't dominate Top 8s, it's very unlikely to be restricted.

Terms like "warp," "power," "distort," etc. are largely subjective heuristics or conventions that lack an objectively discernible meaning let alone an empirical measure. That's why B&R list policy has largely turned over, appropriately in my view, to data analysis, such as % of Top 8s. The DCI cited the % of Shops and Mentors in Top 8s in it's last restriction decision.

Simply being over-represented in Top 8s is not, by itself of course, a sufficient condition for restriction. After all, there are broadly used utility cards or tactics like Flooded Strand, basic Island, and Force of Will, that are not likely targets for restriction.

But if you look historically since 2004, there are almost no cases of restriction where those cards were less than 20% of Top 8s. And, once a deck, archetype or general strategy reaches around 40% of Top 8s, that's usually a trigger for restricting something that is viewed as central to it. Brainstorm, Merchant Scroll, Thorn, and Thirst For Knowledge were each cards that were around 40% or more of Top 8s when they were restricted (Brainstorm was much higher).

The kind of analogical reasoning you are using, and used to see in old B&R announcements, where the DCI would compare a card to another card that is restricted or a card type (such as "tutors" or "fast mana"), is a largely outmoded way of looking at the B&R list. This is true for many reasons.

To name a few, it turns out that analogical reasoning in Magic is a fairly poor form of logic. Minor differences in card design or contextual utility make a tremendous difference. Compare Chrome Mox with Mox Diamond. Both "fast mana." They used to simply restrict cards that had the word "mox" on them. Or, perhaps even better, compare Mystical Tutor and Personal Tutor. Personal Tutor was pre-emptively restricted on the basis of analogical reasoning. Unnecessarily, as it turned out.

Another problem with analogical reasoning is that it assumes that the analog deserves restriction. Half the time that these arguments are made, the comparison card is questioned whether it even should be restricted.

As a result, arguments that are framed in the form of "Workshop is a reusable Black Lotus" are no longer very persuasive, either to the Vintage community or Vintage policy makers. Whether a card is like another card that is restricted or not is viewed as far less important than a card's actual performance.

last edited by Smmenen

@chubbyrain I'm so already there, man.

@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:

Stop taking what I am saying out of context and making a bad comparison. You can't compare lord of atlantis to black lotus, they are two entirely different types cards.

@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:

cards like ponder and imperial seal are on the restricted list. Do you mean to tell me that these cards have a higher power level than mishra's workshop?

Am i missing something here?

Comparing Ponder to Workshop is a very bad comparison, like almost the worst.

Forgive me if this is already covered, but how do you feel about not restricting Shop and restricting instead more toys from it? Particularly the ones that won't really affect other decks much. For example, Inspector, Ballista, Ravager, Walker all have no other home and could be targets.

@smmenen Thanks for that post, Steve. I've been trying to tell Bobby that very thing in several forums, but I guess english not being my native language and my patience running low never allowed me to be so precise as you just were. 😉

If they don't ban MWS, I'd at the very least wish they'd print answers that you can cast and resolve. Decay and cavern answer blue, and they can't counter it - and there are plenty of "can't be countered" spells. Leyline otV answers dredge and it can't stop it (though they can remove it). But only shops has the ability to negate your hate from ever being played by virtue of just playing their sphere gameplan. Several times I've heard people asking for cards that can be cast through spheres without paying the tax or some kind of kitaki leyline...why will wotc not print those? I mean, they can't even print a delve naturalize?

last edited by Thewhitedragon69

@Topical_Island If you cant see how unbelievably powerful, dominant and warping Wasteland and Bloodmoon are, forcing all us blue mages to play with at least 1basic, sometimes 2, or even 3, including SB, then I just cant help you sir. Vintage is for broken things, not basic lands. This isn't standard sir.

@thewhitedragon69 They lost a great chance by not putting Delve into Release the Gremlins.

@smmenen damn you, I had to go look up what Personal Tutor is. Haha

@thewhitedragon69 Whatever is the card at stake, i always rather have more answer cards than restriction. Actually, Wizard sort of already did something to help shop hate cards being played ...
Some years ago, shop was playing 13 sphere effects (+ 4 chalice). I agree that then playing shop hate cards was very difficult. But now, there are only 7 sphere effects (+1 chalice), that density is not enough to prevent hate cards to be played. There are already quite a lot of artifact hate cards with cc1 or cc2 that can be played. Then, i am not sure another one is really necessary but if it could help to settle things, then why not ... like i said i rather have more answers than any restriction.
In some games, it might not be enough but well it is the high variance of Vintage. The quick tempo of nowadays shop decks can make it difficult too but that only means that you should have enough density of hate cards (or the tutors to get them) in your deck.
The best artifact hate cards are not blue ([joke] strangely enough i find that being a good news [/joke]) and what is needed are not 1 for 1 cards but some that can deal with several artifacts.

last edited by albarkhane

@fsecco You don't need Release the Gremlins when we already have Meltdown

  • 308
  • 99642