Sardonic responses don't always come across terribly well in text.
My response was a bit tongue-in-cheek while winking at the elephant in the room.
I thoroughly enjoy the VSL. Most of the games are enjoyable and most of the commentary is enjoyable (like most, I certainly have my preferences).
At the same time, to paraphrase from Steve's fantastic article on The Deck- players lobbying for the restriction/banning of certain cards is as old as the DCI. I even remember Randy joking about "are we trying to get ____ card restricted this season" in acknowledgement of that perception. He was likely mocking the notion that the VSL had that sort of influence, which came into focus following his rather vocal dislike of Chalice of the Void (especially during the Eternal Weekend coverage) and its subsequent restriction.
I'm of two minds on it.
One one hand, the DCI also restricted Dig Through Time at the same time as the Chalice restriction, and there was absolutely no chatter on in on the VSL, and one can be certain that the DCI does not solely consider the opinions of pro-players when it comes to the restrictions in Vintage. Thus winking at the elephant.
On the other hand, I think that the VSL does serve as a very wide-reaching platform for the format and as such it can impact perceptions of cards and the health of the format.
I also, as stated in other threads littered through the site, fall in the "as few restrictions as possible" and the "let the metagame adjust" camp. The lodestone restriction was not as welcome with me for those reasons (I think more time between the Chalice and Lodestone restrictions should have passed.)
Thus, I balance my enthusiasm for the VSL with the vague thought that I hope they realize that their voice carries weight.
@bobbyvictory said in October 17, 2017 Banned & Restricted announcement:
@mourningpalace Shops' mwp has continued to increase. I remember when it sat around the 55% mark and players were like "omg, over 50% mwp, imba".
One of the constant things to ask when citing the data collected for vintage is what conclusions can (or should) be drawn from said data.
It's the only deck that gets a 4 reusable black lotuses that don't even need to be cast.
This statement needs to die in a fire. If you could use workshop mana to activate artifacts, then you'd be a lot closer to having a metaphor The restriction on casting artifacts is very much a thing.
People turn a blind eye and as shit hits the fan over and over the player's get blamed for their reactions?
Look at it from the other direction- in this small segment of conversation, you say that a deck is overpowered, cite its namesake card as being problematic, and then represent how that card functions in a hyperbolic way...
Is it any wonder that players that enjoy playing in that archetype might get grumpy when they are told "your deck is overpowered" when half the time the audience calling for restrictions A) doesn't play vintage, B) Really means "I don't like the way your style of deck plays and would enjoy vintage more with it gone,
I think the biggest reason that Shops pilots are getting cranky is that after a big event that featured two incredibly fine workshop pilots playing a great tournament we aren't debating the technology in their lists. We aren't talking about Rich's decision to go all in on Ravager in round three.
Instead, we are debating (again) if Workshop is too overpowered and if something needs restriction from the deck. And that is tiresome. Because as opposed to celebrating the first win of Shops at EW in over 10 years, defending the right of the deck to exist is tiring. Because the back-handed "congrats at EW with your overpowered deck" to those who had a great weekend at EW is insulting to the playing skill and good sportsmanship of those who did well.
The fact that we have seen this dance over and over again only further disheartens and frustrates people.
Dredge does well? Dredge isn't real magic. Dredge is a brainless deck that requires no skill to play. Bazaar of Baghdad needs to be restricted.
Shops does well? Prison decks are no fun to play against. Workshop decks are monkey simple and take away from an enjoyable vintage experience. Workshop needs to be restricted because it is a reuseable black lotus that you can run four of.
Oath does well? Oath is completely unfair. Given the ridiculous powercreep that Wizards keeps putting into creatures it is only a matter of time before it needs restriction. And the start of "orchard, mox, oath" is among the most sigh-inducing in magic and requires no skill to play a deck like that.
Let me be clear that I am NOT trying to antagonize Steve further. My conduct in the past was inappropriate and I would like to apologize to (@Smmenen ) and the broader TMD community.
In a day and age when politeness has fallen off the face of the internet, an apology is a rare thing. Cheers to you.
I won't claim to speak for anyone, but I'd rather see how the metagame responds than immediately moving to "time to restrict something" every time we have a large tournament.
It does not matter if it is an artifact, part of the Workshop picture, a blue draw spell, or whatever.
I'd go so far to argue that we've not had a truly degenerate metagame since Control Slaver was king. I'd argue that vintage could be fun in that metagame.
I'll accept that the format may be better off with certain cards restricted since then. I don't think frequent restrictions make the format better.
I absolutely think that frequent restrictions cater to the mtgo contingent of Vintage, Whether that is good or bad is a wash, but it understandable makes those moving paper cards around a little gun shy due to the investment of time and resources to constantly adjust/adapt to a b/r announcement every three months.
Except that "what is fun to watch" is weirdly subjective. I've heard arguments that magic isn't fun to watch regardless of format.
Or to put it another way- Vintage doesn't need to be standard, or modern. It can be Vintage.
Changing Vintage to resemble other formats to draw in viewers is probably to Vintage's detriment.
It may be a losing battle, but I don't want Legacy or Modern with Power. I'm not even certain if Vintage changed if the people vociferously complaining about the "lack of fun" or "this is boring" folk would be entertained; there are aspects to Vintage (the swing of some opening hands, the raw power of so many cards) that are inherent to the format that aren't necessarily to everyone's taste. I don't think changing vintage to those tastes serves Vintage; there are other flavors of magic.
The finals ended up Paradoxical Storm vs. Rav shops.
Round one: Paradoxical Storm wins the die roll. Gets to storm count 22 ish before resolving paradoxical outcome, opponent sees DT in hand and a ton of artifact mana and agrees to scoop it up.
Round two: Shops deploys thorn and tks n quick succession.
Round three: Storm mulls to five, opens with Ancestral, looks like anyone's game. Turn one for shops sees workshop, sol ring, mox, mox and attempted thorn which meets FoW. A follow up revoker lands and names lotus. The next turn storm digs a bit, and the following turn the shops deck lands tks and arcbound ravager. The beats follow the next turn, which also sees trike join the fun and the match is over shortly thereafter.
@chronatog All data collected on the subject that I have been able to find in my extensive research regarding the restriciotn of Mishra's Workshop is that your opinion is representative of the minority and has been for a great many years.
As far as I can tell the loudest voices are the fewest; so at least we can agree on that. Where you're mistaken is in believing that the loudest voices are for the restriction of Workshop when in fact the loud minority is for it's maintained un-restriction (as you would know if you did any reading at all on the subject). This loud minority as you called it has held up this pillar for roughly a decade now. What we're seeing is the flood gates of new opportunities to play Vintage since the power nine were brought to MTGO and with it the realization of the truth that Mishra's Workshop has been a problem all along and that the quiet majority was right to begin with.
I'm vaguely curious as to why you've been researching this extensively...
But perhaps a better angle of conversation is to ask what arguments/articles/sources have you read that have given you these impressions?
Which is to say, that when you make statements like "I've researched this extensively" and "you would know this if you've bothered to do any reading on the subject" then perhaps it would be helpful to provide some sources/links to articles/thoughts that informed your view on the issue to see where your thoughts are coming from.
This spring is one of the most interesting times in Magic's long hstory.
We have War of the Spark, with so many planeswalker (including a slightly different design approach) cards that ask a lot of questions.
We have the London mulligan rule, which if adopted will alter the way the game is played and shift how we evaluate certain cards.
We have the upcoming Modern Horizons set, which has the potiential to print new cards that carry effects that will easily find a home in Vintage.
It is a fascinating time to be a magic player.
@p3temangus That is where my concern is- the vague implications in that if we take that challenge and are successful they'll just restrict workshop.
I'm really eager to explore other aspects of the workshop pillar, but the announcement leaves me a little wary. Owning shops in paper is a significant allocation of resources.
The format is only a month old in its current incarnation.
I'm a fan of having as few cards restricted as possible, and giving the players time to develop different approaches.
I'd rather see cards come off the restricted list in response to "certain decks have established dominance" than to add others to the list.
Let's see where things evolve.
My observation, influenced heavily from Twitch chat:
I think by and large there is still a bit of a disconnect with some of the people that tune into the VSL with what Vintage is.
People hate Workshop prison decks. They're "unfun". They don't lead to "exciting" matches to watch.
People hate that combo decks require thought and don't necessarily offer awesome interaction with the opponent. There isn't a flurry of attacking and blocking to watch. It's boring.
These things are a part of Vintage. They are enjoyable to the people that play them. They perform in the Wild West that is the format where all of Magic's history gets a seat at the table.
In short, these decks are what make Vintage such a thriving, dynamic organism, and why I appreciate it.
I've no qualms with them not decrying Mentor as busted: it hasn't proven itself to be yet. Same with Gush in my eyes.
The verdict is out on where shops falls currently, but there is a very visceral dislike for the deck among the VSL viewership (whether or not this was influenced by some participants views of the deck in the past is irrelevant). I really wish people would stop advocating the destruction of the pillar.
All that said, I enjoyed the matches from this week, loved the Eternal weekend plug, and am looking forward to the rest of the season.
Caught up on the start of Season 5.
Very interesting to see the various takes on white eldrazi. Enjoying watching the evolution of a new archetype as well as seeing it get sorted into the vintage metagame.
This is going to be a fun season. Vintage feels very wide open right now.