@wfain said in JULY 2, 2018 BANNED AND RESTRICTED UPDATE:

@griselbrother when you play against landstill etc., if you get them down to 1-2 cards in hand and have advantage on the board you don’t lose that game. It happens all the time vs PO. I’m not arguing that it should be restricted because it isn’t fun, just that saying it is fun isn’t a good reason to keep it around.

Beating different decks requires different strategies. You're right that card advantage usually beats Landstill but not necessarily Outcome. But a single Sphere effect, a Leovold, a Kambal or a Spirit of the Labyrinth often beats Outcome but not Landstill.

@wfain said in JULY 2, 2018 BANNED AND RESTRICTED UPDATE:

@bandswithothers it gives the pilot that feeling, but the opponent is just sitting there watching you draw 30 cards and replay the same 8 spells over and over.
What I’ve noticed in this thread is basically people seem ambivalent to restricting anything that isn’t in 40% of decks, or some annoying Shops tax effect. We lack solid data due to the way league results are now reported and, in my opinion, lack data on how often the PO pilot just wins by resolving one copy, and how often when resolving two and whether those numbers put it on par with DTT/Cruise/Gush pre-restriction.

Some here seem to believe that since PO is worst against fair blue decks and better against Shops it actually diversifies the field (I find this specious at best, people have always played fair FoW decks, and certainly would continue to do so- while as long as Shops remains unrestricted people will play that card.)

Both you and someone else have now used as an argument that it's in some way less fun to lose to Outcome. I disagree. It's never fun to lose. Is it more fun to lose to Landstill, getting beaten down by a Factory and being fatesealed for 10 turns when the loss is inevitable? Is it more fun to lose to Jeskai, getting beaten down by a Snapcaster for 10 turns when the loss is inevitable? Is it more fun never to cast a spell against Workshops? I don't really buy the argument, honestly.

@hrishi said in JULY 2, 2018 BANNED AND RESTRICTED UPDATE:

I'm amazed and disappointed by this thread. There's no results that say Outcome is dominating Vintage by any means, and yet I can't help but feel that going by this thread it's going to be restricted anyway. I'm not sure I really want to play a format where public opinion on the internet is the deciding factor of what cards do and do not get restricted.

If Outcome's results are oppressive, by all means restrict it. Until then I don't see any cause for restrictions. We seem to be restricting multiple new cards every year. Are we trying to get the restricted list to stretch for a mile long? Is Vintage not the format where you get to play all cards ever printed or does it come with the qualifier "you get to play everything but every powerful card ever printed will get restricted until we are playing highlander"?

This!

@13nova said in JULY 2, 2018 BANNED AND RESTRICTED UPDATE:

@griselbrother said in JULY 2, 2018 BANNED AND RESTRICTED UPDATE:

I think Outcome is fine and I don't think it should be restricted. Sure, it's very powerful but it's also very fragile. Both in the sense that there are a lot of tools to stop the card itself and in the sense that most builds have a high degree of variance.

You should have seen some of the people who were doing well with it at SCG. My opponent didn't even fucking know to upkeep his Ancestral Recall.

Outcome is absurd - it's fucking Mind's Desire and shouldn't be a 4x.

There's often talk about attracting new players to Vintage and in that regard Outcome could be good to the format. It's powerful, relatively easy to play and a lot of fun. I don't see how your opponent not playing Ancestral in upkeep is a testament that Outcome should be restricted.

I think Outcome is fine and I don't think it should be restricted. Sure, it's very powerful but it's also very fragile. Both in the sense that there are a lot of tools to stop the card itself and in the sense that most builds have a high degree of variance.

@13nova said in JULY 2, 2018 BANNED AND RESTRICTED UPDATE:

Unfortunate that Outcome didn't go, but I think that's probably an okay thing. I think these are the right decisions. I might actually want to play Legacy, now.

Why do you think that's unfortunate?

@chubbyrain said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

My actual thoughts on the card (rather than my campaign to fight against bad comparisons in card evaluation) are:

1. Let's start with general concepts when it comes to evaluating planeswalkers. First, individual planeswalkers have significant diminishing returns with additional copies. The first JTMS might be the best possible walker you could possibly be playing at that moment. However, the second JTMS is either FoW fodder or a card to be brainstormed away. Not necessarily a dead card but certainly not as good as an additional walker you could cast and have an impact on the board, such as a Dack, Teferi, or even Arlinn. This is the first half of the ... "Superfriends theory" (I'm making up names for these concepts as we go...).

2. The second half is that, by the nature of having several abilities, planewalkers are often capable of serving multiple strategic roles. They are not equally adept at performing these roles. To continue with JTMS, I think it is generally accepted that his Brainstorm ability is his most powerful mode. This gives Jace the primary role of a card advantage engine. His other roles are as a win condition (through Fateseal into the ultimate) and removal (the unsummon). However, if forced into these roles, Jace is suboptimal. The Modern format exemplifies how the roles Jace, or any walker, fill may be inadequate given a format's constraints. Consider Teferi, Hero of Dominaria now. Teferi also has a primary role as a card advantage engine, but is weaker than Jace as drawing a card is less powerful than Brainstorming. At the same time, Teferi is a more resilient card advantage engine given his starting loyality and uptick to draw. Teferi is also the better removal spell, as his -3 can target noncreatures, effectively puts the opponent down a card, and does not allow the opponent to recast the target the next turn. Now it might be tempting to debate which is better for Vintage by focusing on these roles, but it's not of incredible importance when it comes to deck building. Just like the diminishing returns of individual planeswalkers incentivizes more planeswalker diversity, the variable roles of planeswalkers also encourages more diversity. It means I can use JTMS as a pure card drawer, knowing that Teferi is in my deck to answer the random Oath of Druids or Planeswalker the opponent might be able to cast. Or that I will draw a Chandra or Nahiri or Arlin to actually close out the game. A name for this: "role optimization".

3. Because of the Superfriends theory, I tend to spend much more time looking at the strategic implications of new planeswalkers and looking for synergy than I do comparing them to existing planeswalkers. So let's do that now. I think it's pretty clear that Tezz 3.0's best ability is his 0. His +1 ability combined with his starting loyalty makes him very difficult to kill the turn it comes into play in modern formats. If upticked, you are looking at 6 loyalty and a 1/1 flying blocker. It makes it likely that its controller can untap and start to take over the game. Now, this point is somewhat moot in Vintage and Legacy, where I think the majority of planeswalkers that are removed are either countered or Pyroblasted, but I try not to have tunnel vision for just Vintage, as you never know when interactions and tech from one format might find their way into Vintage. Most recent example is "Teferi + Search for Azcanta". In any case, I would classify Tezz as a strong and resilient pure card advantage engine. I think his capacity as a win condition is negligible and he really shouldn't be used for this purpose.

4. Now what cards work really well with Tezz? Again, I tend to consider other formats when evaluating cards and I think Tezz is going to be a format defining staple in Standard. This is mostly due to the rather absurd synergy between Tezz and Karn, Scion of Urza. Karn's ideal role is pooping out constructs, making him a midrange threat or control finisher. It just so happens this mode generates Artifacts for Tezz's 0 and protects Tezz from being attacked, allowing Tezz to function as a pure card advantage engine without having to use his +1. Speaking of the +1, if drawing cards is not necessary at a certain stage of the game, assembling Thopters is much more impressive when those Thopters are pumping up Constructs. I'm actually considering buying into Standard on MTGO to explore this interaction, as it seems very powerful in the context of that format. In Vintage, it might not be powerful enough, but it's something to keep in mind in trying to find shells for Tezz.

5. The other card that works really well with Tezz (and is actually Vintage-related) is Dack Fayden. I don't think this has been discussed in this thread, but it's something that immediately jumped out at me when I looked at Tezz. Dack's -2 ability has the effect of both increasing the amount of artifacts on your side of the board, along with ramping from 3 to 5 mana to cast Tezz the next turn. Dack's +1 also is more powerful with raw card advantage and Tezz generates that more quickly than other planeswalkers. Taken with 4, I can see a powerful Vintage shell forming around Dack, Karn, and Tezz, and that is indeed my starting point for playing this Tezz in Vintage.

Note, I didn't really answer whether I think this card is playable. I just tried to arrive at the ideal starting point for a deck that would use this card. If I think a card is unplayable, it will generally be because I can't find a shell that really utilizes it after looking at its strategic roles and synergies. The ultimate determination of what makes a card playable in my opinion, I save for testing (which I plan to do on stream).

If you found this approach interesting, please let me know and I will try to talk through my evaluations of other cards.

Great post. That really sets the bar for how card evaluations should be done. This new Tezzeret also has great synergy with Tezzeret 2.0.

@hierarchnoble said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

@griselbrother said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

If someone says that the earth might be flat, it doesn't really matter

It does too matter. What if that person is a high school

Sorry, this doesn't make any sense.

@chubbyrain said in [M19] Tezzeret, Artifice Master:

@griselbrother Please take the time to post these quotes in context.

Rich actually said:

This card is actually worth considering. First, it triggers more easily than Pyromancer -- such as off Moxen. Second, the Tokens this generates themselves have Prowess. This means that you can very easily win the game with a handful of these tokens. In a way, the damage output multiples your spells from one turn with your spells for the next turn. Now, there is a huge cost when you move from 2 to 3 mana. This card might be unplayable. But it's actually a card that might be awesome.

Rich is decidedly more optimistic on this card than you conveyed. I didn't bother checking other quotes - I was curious what my first impression was and Rich happened to be the first response in that thread. But now I'm pissed at the lack of journalistic integrity.

Haha relax. Yes of course it's taken out of context, but the quote is still as funny as it would have been if I had quoted the whole post he made. Saying the card might be unplayable shows how wrong the evaluation was no matter what else was said.

And honestly, I don't really think it makes his evaluation that much better that he said that it might be awesome when it should have been obvious to everyone and their dog that Mentor was gonna be completely bananas.

If someone says that the earth might be flat, it doesn't really matter if that same person also says that the earth might be round.

My post was never meant to be demeaning to anyone, and so I apologize if you feel offended because Rich Shay is your friend or idol or something like that, but I do think that Rich himself would just find his post hilarious.

Edited because some apparently found my post offensive or demeaning which certainly wasn't my intention. My apologies.