Out of all of the Modern Horizons cards, this was the one that I was most excited about. There is a deck that is making some waves with guy. Is it any good? Can it win in this meta? Will London Mulligan make it better? @IamActuallyLvL1 has a sweet list. Maybe he can do a quick write on this guy?
@brass-man I really like your perspective on this, because it is my perspective on this as well. The fact that the NYSE is allowing proxies is a big part of why I started this thread.
SCG Con attendance was a bit lower this year and paper events have had some issues with attendance for a while.
At the same time Old School events are thriving and they do not even allow proxies.
I thought Vintage could follow the Old School model and do events similar to how they have low EV events but dedicated players. I was wrong. We cannot do low EV events but that may change. If paper Vintage is going to survive a few things will need to change and I think at this point we know what they are. I just hope that something does change.
You guys a bit hard to read. So, the take away is some proxies are good but this won’t grow the format. I guess I’ll just plan to attend the 2 major events and try to drive 2 or 3 hours once a month to play some paper vintage.
What about my other point? Does anyone think that MTGO is expensive for what it is? It could just be me.
@craw_advantage The prospect of only having 2 or 3 paper events is the reality of Vintage right now. The interesting thing is that Old School has several well attended paper events without proxies.
I can barely keep up with the number of Old School events and the attendance is typically more that 32. I picked that because it is the So Many Insane Plays cutoff.
Is this more of a card pool issue? Is it nostalgia? Why is that player base able to sustain more events, at least for now, for paper events?
These are interesting perspectives but I think you are missing the point. We have a total of 3 large vintage events in the US this year and one of them is partially proxy. We also have the vintage qualifiers.
Take those and make them all proxy. Does that increase attendance and interest?
Now people with the cards don’t need to bring them. If you want to show off your old cards go to old school. And new players just show up and play.
I think Wizards should support this and just print good proxies for old cards.
As for MTGO, they should drive up the print runs on all of the cards in eternal formats and bottom out the deck costs. Get decks down to about $200 to $300
Why is force of will expensive online? That stupid. It should cost $5 per. That’s my opinion anyway.
I have been giving the cost of playing Magic a lot of thought especially looking at Vintage lately with all of the new sets coming out. I want to have a very serious discussion about looking at the format as a 100% proxy format.
People say MTGO is inexpensive and it kind of is. My issue is that MTGO is a digital gaming area that turns off several players. Paper on the other hand is super expensive.
Vintage is a very complex format and new cards are having a big impact on the format. I think there is room in Vintage for many more decks in the meta-game and I think the cost is preventing new players from getting into paper.
On the digital side, learning how to play Vintage on MTGO is hard. Honestly, unless you are really invested there monetarily as well it is very difficult to break in and innovate.
Would viewing Vintage as a 100% proxy format, grow the player base? Would it help the meta-game?
I have avoided complaining and ranting but I will put my rant hat on for a minute. So be warned.
The issue is not the shake up itself, it’s the balance of how we shake things up. Wizards is printing hosers. They print cards to mess with your deck and your plan but not the solution to fight it.
People love free counterspells and they love super tutors and lopsided hosers. These cards and the tactics that they promote polarize the meta game and community around it.
I hate this aspect of the game.
I brew quite a bit but I’m tired of having to spend a ridiculous amount of money and time to get a deck that feels right. After playing for as long as I have I should have the an arsenal that allows me to compete. Adding to an arsenal should not be cost prohibitive.
With that said I don’t expect to play the same deck forever or the same cards forever either. I expect balance. If you print super good planeswalkers then print super good removal. If all the colorless creatures are curved low then the removal should be too. If you allow people to easily blow up lands and artifacts give people a method to recover. And if counterspells are going to be free make better discard spells or more uncounterable work arounds.
The power creep is eventually going to break the eternal formats all of them. That’s my rant for what it’s worth.
@chubbyrain Generally, I think your feedback is pointing people in the right direction. I am an older player and I have come around to "new" world of MTGO and using more data.
Your point about the meta being blue, while not quite a given, it is something that is usually assumed until it is proven otherwise. I played a lot of MTGO until about February and then I took a bit of a break and I feel very comfortable playing blue decks and playing against blue decks.
For me personally, I have issues with the non-blue decks - especially on MTGO. I just haven't mastered playing against them yet. I created this thread to help players prepare for this match up, I think several other players need this help.
Usually I want to pick a deck that is well suited for the meta and invest very heavily in that deck for some time until I stop having fun. Losing to this style of deck is not fun. I HATE these kinds of decks. Instead of shouting restrict I am trying to crowd source some solutions.
I understand that Narset is also an issue but I am way more prepared to play against her. I was on PO and she is very good against PO, so is Karn. I have been looking at main deck Assassin's Trophy in PO. I have tried messing around with Oath and BUG. I am very good at Blue Red decks but I am not playing that right now. So, looking to the community for suggestions to a card or a deck or an arch type is usually a good thing.
Especially, when many of the players in this community are preparing for SCG Con.
My final point, is that I am actually taking your advice. I want to have fun in the format and the meta has shifted so I need to shift. I have not complained once in any of my recent threads. I am actually just looking for discussion.
Some decks when played by people who really know how to play are played very differently when someone is just messing around. I am not sure if you have not run into "good" players with this deck.
I would say, you need things like Phyrexian Revoker to contain Karn and this new Null Rod with legs in Modern Horizons -
Collector Ouphe. Cards like Knight of Autumn might be good.
I personally want to try cards like Blood Moon and Serenity.
@gutocmtt I’m not saying the format is bad or not fun. I’m saying that it is an us versus them aspect to it that makes people upset.
Example - I’m not a fan of prison decks. I hate losing to prison decks. Right now, one of the best decks in the meta is a prison deck. So, when I lose to the deck, which will happen, I feel worse than losing to a Xerox deck or Dredge deck.
This feeling makes for a feeling that the game or the format is not fun. I’m concerned about this based on the arch types that we have now and how good they are in the meta.
I’m just starting to play more and I am also enjoying the meta so far. I feel like I can experiment with just about anything right now.
@chubbyrain Thank you for this. Looking at this analysis is very useful. I don’t play as much as you.
Aside from the just counter it answer, or play more creatures, what are the best ways to attack this?
I have been trying Oath decks right now and they do an OK job against these decks. And I think BUG decks do alright against these decks. The main reason appears to be a diverse set of removal.
From I have seen so far, I'm not sure if we have shake up or polarization.
When Lavinia was release she polarized the format in a very negative way and the format adjusted. When the London mulligan was being tested, it polarized the format but then it went away.
Now, we have Karn and Narset creating a polarization that I have not seen since Dig Through Time and Treasure Cruise. Even 2016 with the Eldrazi onslaught does not measure up to this insane amount of polarization.
The meta-game is ok for now but the community is fractured in a negative way. The polarization creates contempt and that makes for some really bad feelings about the format.
@boerma That is a fair point. I did not want a thread about the meta-game in general. I found it interesting that this one card changed 2 deck shells so much and has impacted the format so fast.
I expected Karn to have an impact but I was expecting something a bit different. My basis for discussion why these shells for Karn?
What are their strengths and what are their weaknesses?
I am not all consumed by a card or a deck, I seek to understand.
@chubbyrain I can honestly see your frustration. I have been looking for more discussion about the shifts in the format beyond this card sucks or this card is great.
The interesting thing about Karn is he slotted into a deck that just OK and made it very good. He also was put into a new Workshop shell that on it's face does not look good but that deck is awesome.
I would like to understand how to break those synergies. It is hard to find good discussion as of late.