Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Vintage Community read more

So I can't speak for everything regarding Old School vs Vintage, but I've found the breakneck pace with which people demand change in Vintage to be extremely harmful to paper Vintage. Since MODO moves so much faster, people are tired of a new metagame in a week and begin to loudly proclaim on social media and wherever else that the format "sucks" and that we need a change and X should be restricted and whatever else.

On the flip side, we used to have one Vintage event every few months. When you have zero investment in a format that you're sure is going to change by the time the next event comes around, it's really not something you want to get into. Add onto the fact that people loudly proclaim the format isn't fun when you've barely begun to even play it, and it's not hard to see that there is not much desire to play. We no longer have Vintage events every few months.

Old School, on the other hand, fulfils this desire extremely well. This is why I don't believe proxies will do much to change anything since the cards clearly exist. The desire to play Vintage as it currently is just isn't compatible with what players on MTGO want.

posted in Vintage Community read more

I think some proxies is absolutely necessary on any level to get new blood into the format. However, I've found that 100% proxy events tend to create not much care or investment in the format. A potential player would come to play hoping to spike a Vintage event for the EV and have 60 basic plains sharpied with the latest deck that won a MODO challenge. There would be very little investment in the format itself for such a player, and in which case it is not growing the format at all. I'm not sure that's the sort of event I'd be interested in going to.

To clarify, I do think proxies are needed as I wouldn't have gotten into Vintage without it. But limited proxies are sufficient. Anywhere to 10-15 proxies sound fine to me.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@evouga said in Am I the only one amazed by the quality of design in Magic cards these days???:

It saddens me, actually, that WotC spends most of its time cranking out dross like Theros and Ixalan and Battle for Zendikar when it is capable of designing War for the Spark and Modern Horizons instead.

While I do agree with you, this is most certainly because their aim is to cater to a wider variety of players. Vintage players tend to like powerful sets such as War of the Spark, but if you look into the feedback the limited play of WAR is getting, it isn't very positive.

So I'll take the fun and broken sets as and when they come. 🙂

posted in Vintage Community read more

@serracollector said in Ravenous Giant, aka Color Shifted Juzam:

A white or green Ancestral would be nice.

I don't think this would (should?) happen because it would be a blatant disregard of the colour pie. Now, if there was a different way of gaining card advantage for W or G, certainly. But that wouldn't need to care about the reserved list necessarily, based on what sort of effect it would be doing.

Or I suppose if we ever get Planar Chaos 2, but my understanding is this is highly unlikely.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@thewhitedragon69 said in Is vintage a blue format?:

I prefer the wild-west variety. I think FoW in the other 4 colors would shift vintage to that.

No, it really won't. Not unless you also print Ancestral Recall, Time Walk, Tinker, Treasure Cruise, etc in all other colours. Once again, Vintage is blue-centric because the most powerful cards ever printed happen to be blue. Until that changes (if it ever does), it will always remain blue-centric.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

Not as crazy as I was hoping the black one to be, but still a solid card for the sideboard I think. It's not too difficult to cast, and the main difficulty would be the black card density needed for the pitch cost.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

alt text

Looks like the Modern Horizons spoiler season has begun. I am not sure how best to evaluate this card. Obviously this does a great Force of Will impersonation which will be Modern legal and will probably see play there, but I am no expert on Modern. However, does it have applications in Vintage?

The fact that it's easier to hard-cast is something, but only being usable on your opponent's turn reduces the card to a purely defensive one. Then again, we've had decks in the past that have loaded up on Pitch counters beyond the 4 Force of Wills (such as Landstill) where this could see use.

Thoughts? This is definitely an interesting and clever printing by Wizards. Personally wish this didn't have the non-creature clause though...

posted in Vintage Community read more

@moorebrother1 Better creatures and planeswalkers definitely. Better spells, though? Most of the most powerful spells are still the madness from early days like Ancestral Recall/Time Walk/Tinker etc. I don't think we're getting close yet, though of course it's possible. Even if we do, it does feel like a lot of the powerful spells these days also happen to be in blue anyway, such as Treasure Cruise or Dig through Time!

posted in Vintage Community read more

We play the most powerful cards ever printed in MTG, and a lot of them happen to be blue. Until this changes, Vintage will always be blue-centric.

posted in Vintage Strategy read more

@thewhitedragon69 said in How do I beat shops when I'm on the draw without FoW?:

@grizzly I'm saying I find it very hard to beat shops when I'm on the draw and they get the nut hand+follow-up draws.

This isn't just you. If any Vintage deck gets a nut hand you're not likely to win unless your draws are also stellar in many cases. I'm sure you could beat a nut hand from shops with your own nut hand, but you can hardly expect your average draws to get there.