By restricting cards that make effective turn ones less consistent, you leave the door open for more types
of decks and high level interaction to be at the forefront of the format.
I find this argument very frustrating. Everyone plays this game for different reasons and we all want something different from the it.
No one wants to just lose a game without doing anything, I get that, I really do. But it is very exciting to figure out the mechanics of a turn one or turn 2 win.
The other view is that I play a spell you counter it, I play another spell and you counter it then you play a Narset and somehow this is better because there was interaction. I disagree.
There needs to be a balance in what keeps the format fun.
@fsecco Understood. But this card on turn one, I keep a hand with Thalia and I use this to look at the top five and get a Cavern of Souls. That is value add. Even later in the game if I draw this and I get to pick the creature or land in a creature based tempo deck that is good.
Now the bigger issue is that Human is like tier 6 but this card helps it.
I think this card opens up Humans or it can help a Belcher deck. The ability to get Spirit Guides or a Tinder Walk will help Belcher. The humans deck can find Cavern and or a creature to attack the opposing deck.
It also works in HateBears or if Eldrazi went green this card could really help it.
Glass canon decks are a feature not a bug of Vintage. My concern as a longtime Vintage player is that some of the voices about their preferences for the format will over shadow those that enjoy playing the format is a different way. My preference for various styles of decks change over time and based on new printings I will experiment with combo or something else.
I admittedly am not a consistent MTGO player but the shifts on MTGO are somewhat dramatic when the meta shifts. I find that paper players take a bit more time to shift their decks.
I like playing very broken decks and I think it is a big feature of the Vintage format overall. People seem to get upset about turn one and turn 2 wins but I have lost to a control deck on turn one not just combo decks and it does not feel good. Their plays on turn one essentially made it so that it was better for me not to even play a card and just go to game 2. All of these experiences are anecdotal and @ChubbyRain is correct to take a more analytical view of what really is happening.
Personally, I have been playing around with PO and it is very difficult to play right now. You really need to be a master with the deck and know the meta to do well with it. Vintage is format where one card will tilt the entire game and it will shift quickly. This never feels good but it is a feature of the format, not a bug.
@boerma I used to think like that but I do play MTGO on and off. I invest in it what it is worth to me as an on and off player. I play paper with my brother and some friends regularly so I mostly buy paper but when I want to really see the meta and get deeper into the format MTGO is where it is at. So it really depends how you want to spend your money and your time.
@gutocmtt I am not a Shops expert but cards like this one, Traxos, Fleetwheel Cruiser are cards that can used as innovation pieces. Currently, aggro Shops does not play equipment. Could that change? Also, the modern shops decks are all colorless but a card like this can use Fling to win a game or a card like Fling. Just some thoughts.
@mike-noble Progress is a very relative term here. I think that I have accepted that Vintage is mostly a digital format and that I can enjoy playing it digitally. To your point, there are parts that I don’t like and these discussions do help my understanding of how others use the digital platform.
Progress is slow but it is happening.
@mike-noble The reason behind the price shock was deck building. I am trying to build a bant deck and I also wanted to play around with Wrenn and Six.
The most shocking cards are Teferi and Force of Negation, because they cost more digitally than they do in paper. I’ll have to pick a deck to play and just spend the money or not play.
On a side note, I know Magic is expensive. I buy paper cards regularly. MTGO offers a way to experiment with cards but the investment is higher than I think some of you are acknowledging here. It’s all fine and good this is a game and this is another way to play it but it was shocking to see those prices.
@chubbyrain I play online off and on and I typically buy paper. I will spend $100 - $200 to update my online collection but the cost to get Force of Vigor, Force of Negation, Wrenn and Six, and Uzra is very high. I was also looking at buying Teferi which is also high.
The post was to ask people who buy cards regularly online if this is just a blip or real prices.
Looks like I'll pick very carefully and wait on the rest.
I have been building decks and making adjustments. I bought 2 boxes of Modern Horizons for paper and I just recently started looking at MTGO. The prices for Modern Horizons cards and some War of the Spark cards on MTGO is crazy.
Does anyone know why? Will these prices go down?
I am not willing to invest in cards at those prices on MTGO. So, I may just stop playing MTGO.
I think I like this card over Arcanist. I like the symmetry with Dack and the fact that you can cast spells 3 or less. Results look promising but it’s hard to tell with the current meta being what it is.
She does not fit well with Narset but if you prioritize Dack over Narset you get a more aggressive deck instead of controlling.
Not sure if she fits in the format but having fun with the card.