6th December: Start around 12:30 am CET Replay Artists Interviews
6th December: Start around 15 am CET Vintage All Stars and Alpha 40
7th December: Start around 11am CET Modern Main Event
7th December: Start around 12am CET Vintage Main Event
8th December: Start around 11am CET Legacy Main Event
Wanted to let people know that we're going to be doing live coverage of the Vintage event here, and I flew all the way to Italy to do it!
I'll be streaming with with my Italian cohost, Niccolo Covoni (@CovoniNiccolo on twitter)
the event will be streamed at https://www.twitch.tv/nebraskaswar_mtg
It's a full weekend, multi-format EW style event. The exact streaming schedule isn't completely fixed, but the current plan is the following:
tomorrow, Friday the 6th, 11am CET (5am ET) we'll be streaming Pioneer, Alpha 40, and Vintage All Stars.
Saturday the 7th, 11am CET, we'll be streaming matches from the main Vintage and Modern events (Vintage starts at noon)
Sunday the 8th, 11am CET, we'll stream the the Legacy main event.
The original plan was to stream more Modern than Vintage, but we talked the TO into upping the Vintage content if we promoted the event, so let's try and get some eyes on this and show them some Vintage love!
I think that encapsulates the unhappiness perception. Vintage frequently doesn't feel like the vintage we're used to playing.
I agree entirely, but don't forget that "the vintage we're used to playing" is pretty ambiguous. I got into the format around 17 years ago, and back then there were plenty of players who were upset that their 5-color Keeper control decks couldn't keep pace with the bleeding-edge new style of play brought about by Fetchlands and Quirion Dryad. The game is constantly changing year over year, and almost by definition you're going to love the version of the Vintage that people played when you first became passionate about it (because if you didn't love it, you never would have gotten hooked). So almost by definition, as it changes you're going to run into patches where you enjoy it less than you used to. People tend to interpret this as a steady decline from some golden age, but it seems more like a sampling problem to me.
I'm not sure it is ok for you to be the arbiter of what is universally fun or unfun in any circumstance, as it is by definition a subjective judgement, including it being a neutral one.
I think we're in agreement here. That was entirely my point. Brainstorm is a card that makes the game more fun for me, and less fun for you. Therefore we can't just blanket state that it's fun or unfun, because that's subjective. I wasn't trying to make the claim that the card is fun-neutral. I certainly don't believe that I can arbitrate which cards are universally fun, my position is that nobody can do that, that different people like different games and it's impossible for any card to be universally fun or unfun.
Maybe my post needed more context. Even though the WotC explanation for the Narset restriction was "fast mana and draw spells", there have been several high profile comments in high visibility places about Narset being fun police. What comes first to mind is LSV's tweet that Narset stops him from doing the things he enjoys in Vintage. Make no mistake, of the people involved in the B&R decision process, more of them follow LSV on Twitter than have accounts on TMD. The idea that Narset stops people from having fun doing "Vintagey" things is one of the reasons why it was restricted. It is very probably not the only reason, but it's the one I was reacting to.
Anyway, my point is that judging anything from the perspective of fun is not a good metric.
That's trouble, because I think you make some good points there, and I strongly believe that making policy decisions based on fun has some real problems. Some cases seem clear cut, but others get vague very quickly, and I think it ultimately always comes down to picking specific groups of players to exclude, whether the deciding body is conscious of it or not.
But on the other hand, it's also sort of the only thing that matters. Because more easily measurable metrics like card diversity, strategic diversity, metagame penetration, win rate, game length, decisions per game, deck cost, etc ... these are all just proxies for the only question that matters: Do I want to spend my afternoon playing Vintage, or have a cup of coffee?
We know that basing policy decisions on fun doesn't work, but at the same time, we know that the only way to make policy decisions is to base them on fun, if only indirectly. C'est Absurde!
The last few posts here have gotten me thinking. At least to an outsider, it does sort of look like the format is circling around itself, eating its own tail maybe. But I think more precisely this is a back-and-forth between two or more separate factions.
I think, for the most part, there are players who want certain strategies hated out, and those are not the same players who want those hate cards restricted. (And for any given player, they probably lie in a different camp regarding each card/strategy etc). You have a rotating group of vocally angry players as the metagame moves month to month. Sometimes it's a near-consensus, and sometimes it's just a vocal minority, but at the scale of players we're talking about, to anyone outside the community (read: WotC) it just looks like Vintage players are always unhappy.
If Narset was bad specifically because it stops people from playing fun cards like Preordain, then you could restrict it. But if cards like Preordain are fun and you want to let people play more of them, you could also just unrestrict Brainstorm instead.
But of course, Brainstorm isn't a fun card. Neither is it an unfun card. Brainstorm is a card that some players enjoy and some players don't. There's no cohesive view of which sorts of cards and decks and play patterns are considered vintage-appropriate (in the way that Modern has a more clear vision), and therefore all B&R decisions end up being reactive, which can often make things self-contradictory.
Please don't read too much into this as an opinion on Narset specifically ... the same could be said about Chalice of the Void and Lotus Petal, Mental Misstep and Ancestral Recall, Gush and Thorn of Amethyst.
The completely reactive approach we have isn't necessarily the worst possible approach, it may even be the best approach available, given what WotC has to work with, but certainly isn't without its flaws.
This is super cool, I don't feel like I have enough Dredge expertise to comment on the results, but I love people taking vastly different approaches to to analyzing the game and seeing how they shake out.
Are there any decisions/conclusions you came to from running simulations that were counter to your assumptions going in? If you end up running a list you built with this method, I'd love to hear how it worked out for you!
oops! the old thread for this post got displaced so I'm recreating it - Brass Man
Fun episode as always! Looks like it was recorded right before Mystic Sanctuary was spoiled which is why they didn't mention it.
So far personally this has felt like a pretty nice set for Vintage. Wishclaw is playable, but not as scary as I personally feared, Sanctuary and Stonecoil both seem solid without being problematic. A nice balance was struck here, I think.
0:16:25: Modern Horizons Report Card
0:59:00: Throne of Eldraine Mechanics
1:04:12: Wishclaw Talisman
1:46:50: Once Upon a Time
2:01:00: Mystical Dispute
2:06:10: Shimmer Dragon
2:10:10: Witch’s Vengeance
2:20:00: Questing Beast
2:27:20: Emry, Lurker of the Loch
2:34:51: Deafening Silence
3:22:55: Stonecoil Serpent
3:34:47: Robber of the Rich
Total runtime: 3:50:50
– Throne of Eldraine visual preview
Hey @clausuk23 ! The site theme is custom, and honestly a little hacked together, I'm not sure I'd recommend using it, but you're absolutely welcome to, I've open sourced it here: https://bitbucket.org/andyprobasco/nodebb-theme-themanadrain
Some of the design also comes from plugins and custom widgets, which I'm happy to talk about, but it could definitely be annoying to put it together.
However the theme is MOSTLY based on the existing 'Material' theme, which you can get here: https://github.com/pichalite/nodebb-theme-material. It looks like it was updated 3 months ago so it might be in better shape than mine anyway. I'm willing to bet that the Material theme will give you a lot of what you're looking for with a lot less work than setting up mine would be. Both my theme and the Material theme should be free to use so don't worry about that.
I'm happy to talk forum-admin'ing so if you have any other questions let me know.
As someone who's played a lot of Cranial Plating I think this card can probably close out a game faster than it looks. There's no doubt this doesn't have the raw power and flexibility of Workshop staples like Arcbound Ravager and Walking Ballista, but it could serve a role in matchups where racing is more important than resiliance (combo? the mirror?). This works at full capacity under a Null Rod and could be a piece in the Null-Rod-Shops deck/transformational sideboard that's been slowly bubbling below the surface for years.
Vasu Balakrishnan NYSE2019 2nd
Mana Sources (30)
Karn, the Great Creator has inspired several new decks, but the breakout in terms of success and popularity is a combo deck based on Karn and Mystic Forge. Karn can tutor for Mycosynth Lattice or the Time Vault/Voltaic Key combo, and Mystic Forge can draw your entire deck with a Foundry Inspector and Sensei's Divining Top, or simply generate massive card advantage. With a huge amount of mana acceleration and the occasional Serum Powder, the deck is very redundant and consistent, making it very very likely to resolve one of those two four-cost spells on the first turn, either of which is very likely to lead to a kill on turn 2 or 3.
Vasu's exact list, posted above, placed four players into the top 8 of the recent NYSE 2019 event, and focuses entirely on speed and answers to common hate cards. Other players opt to take the list in a more aggressive direction, by adding more Workshop Aggro-style threats, or a more disruptive direction, adding Sphere of Resistance.
As of today, KarnForge is the deck to beat, and it would be a mistake to enter a tournament without a plan for it. Future KarnForge development will likely revolve around reacting to those plans.
Joe Brennan, NYSE2019 1st
Mana Sources (21)
Like a Xerox deck, BUG has a mix of efficient threats, counters, and removal, but BUG decks tend to have a flatter power curve, with each card having value on its own, rather than filtering to your best cards with cantrips, which are becoming more of a liability in a post-Narset metagame. Black/Green/Blue threats tend not to have the raw power of a Monastery Mentor, but often have some disruptive or utility ability tacked onto them.
I often recommend BUG to players who enjoy midrange decks in other formats, and almost no other Vintage deck gives you that feel. BUG is one of the most personalizable decks in the format and lists tend to vary quite a bit from player to player.
What cards and strategies have you been using in BUG?
@craw_advantage Illusionary Mask is a truly insane card. Look at the Alpha wording again and remember that Morphs didn't exist for years. There was no such thing as a "face-down card", and the fact that a "face-down card" is a 2/2 creature with no abilities wasn't a thing. In Alpha, a Mask-face-down creature is just a creature with all of its characteristics, your opponent just doesn't know about them.
If you use Mask to play Shivan Dragon, you can pump its power without revealing it.
If you play a Serra Angel with Mask, you can attack with it and it won't flip until it deals damage. Your opponent can't block it without a flyer, but they don't know that it has flying.
If you use a Mask to play Rock Hydra it's going to have a bunch of counters on it. I guess. You could technically pay 10 mana and decide X=0 anyway.
If you play a Plague Rat with Mask, your other Plague Rats are bigger. It's kind of a tell, but your new rat is still face-down.
If you use a Mask to play a White Knight, and your opponent activates Pestilence, your White Knight won't flip up and your opponent won't know why. If they play a Swords to Plowshares on a Black Knight they committed an illegal action and ... well, I guess that depends on the REL level? Of course, REL levels didn't exist. Maybe you tell your opponent "sorry you can't do that, pick something else."
The card was sheer and utter madness. I don't know how long things worked this way. I'm guessing they changed the rules on this card before Arabian Nights was out, but I'm sure there were a lot of house rules surrounding the card. If anyone was around the competitive scene in the early early days I'd love to hear how it was handled. I've always been fascinated and terrified by the implications of the card before they added "status" to the game rules.
So there is some confusion here. Illusionary Mask can't be used to cheat cost on the creature. Current wording states:
"You may choose a creature card in your hand whose mana cost could be paid by some amount of, or all of"
e.g. you have to pay the mana cost or more. You even need to get the colors right, so you couldn't use a Mask to play a Goblin Welder with your Ancient Tomb, for instance. In this deck, Illusionary Mask does nothing. I don't believe Mask has ever worked that way, but I could be mistaken. I certainly don't recall any vintage deck that used it that way since 2002. If it really let people play any creature for free, it would probably be better to throw Emrakul and Blightsteel Colossus under it.
@ian-mars is correct that I only meant the deck size was illegal, if you just forgot to write some lands down than you're probably fine. It's possible to edit the original post without re-typing everything if you want to update it.