I'm not sure why I care too much about saving Vintage anymore personally, because I'm not too fond of "15 minute turns" and 1st turn kills. Yes it's amazing that it can be done, just isn't my personal style. But like I've been saying, I at least want there to be a health format where these cards can be played.
Vintage is necessary to make Magic philosophically complete. You really should try Legacy, as someone else suggested. It has a lot of support and massive, massive variety.
Vintage is an exclusive club. It's not really dying, it's just a smaller community with fewer players. The people I know who play vintage have been doing so for years and will never stop
Yes, but a points system would make deck checks substantially more complicated, thereby making them take longer, thereby meaning that they're more disruptive to the tournament and less of them are going to happen.
And do people honestly cheat at Magic?
Yes. Just look at the DCI suspension list.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am no longer on MTGS staff, so please don't contact me asking me to do staff things. :|
Does anyone know of a site that explains why certain cards are banned in Legacy? I'm wondering why Land Tax is banned. I know it's great, but never thought it was game breaking since it doesn't fetch duals...
Does anyone know of a site that explains why certain cards are banned in Legacy? I'm wondering why Land Tax is banned. I know it's great, but never thought it was game breaking since it doesn't fetch duals...
I don't think there is a central list of explanations. Generally, WotC releases an explanation whenever they add or remove a card from the banned list though. You can search their site for more information. I believe in the case of Land Tax, it was banned for providing too much card advantage with Scroll Rack and for making games take too long due to searching every turn. Also, there was some issue that Land Tax tended to stall games even more because it discouraged both players from playing more lands.
That said, if you ask players which card they think could be safely removed from the Legacy ban list, Land Tax is a really common answer.
Read topic as: How to make the 10 people who still play vintage to quit playing.
How is any of this possibly going to save vintage? The #1 thing holding vintage back is the restricted list which isn't going to change.
Also, a lot of these changes are to things that you personally do not like. lol
May be time to downsize for the sake of survival. Going with what somebody said about making things too complicated, here is a simple suggestion that you guys can shred.
The Power 9 are now Super restricted. 1 Per deck... not one of each.
Vintage is vintage because of what it is. What YOU want to make it is something entirely different.
Having said that, you can't save vintage for 2 main reasons.
1. The big cards in vintage are more scarce than volcanos in NJ. And as time goes by, fewer of these cards will be available. With the reprint list, this is a one way spiral to hell.
2. Because of the limited availability of the cards, the prices are insane. Not everybody can afford them. This won't change either. That means even fewer people to play the format.
Please don't get me wrong. I love Vintage. If I had people to play against, it is all I would play. As far as I'm concerned, every other format is a distant second at best. I play them out of necessity to have something to play. But Vintage will always be my first love.
The format is dying and someday will be dead. As it is there's only one WotC recognized MAIN event for Vintage unless there's something going on that I don't know about. I think Gencon is it.
Let the format rest in peace. It had a nice run but it's over. Nobody short of rich preppy boys are going to shell out $3,000 for a Black Lotus.
Vintage casual is alive and well. Vintage competitive on the other hand....
It has a lot to do with collecting. Some of us genuinely love these older cards. Most players that have say a lotus, moxen, juzams, blue power etc have them to collect and play casually. It's not about a tournament setting for most of us...atleast not for me. A tournament is fine and all but the actual need for one is minimal. It's all about being in the club and owning these beautiful awesome cards
Your points regarding split/flip cards and level up are ludicrous.
First off, your argument against level up is purely subjective based on the fact that you don't like them and don't think they feel like Magic. That's not any kind of basis for policy (although Wizards is moving towards it with their modern ban policy)
Second off, the argument that split/flip cards let you have "more than 60 cards in a deck" is stupid. You already can play as many cards as you want, and it's usually a drawback. Also, kicker, entwine, replicate, etc.: there are many, many mechanics that give you the choice between multiple effects, split cards are just the most visually flashy but not significantly mechanically different. Flip cards are basically one card, they just happen to be printed on two sides to make them easier to read.
I suggest you polish your ideas much further and learn about what people actually want before trying to sell things no one will buy.
If you think flip cards are like one card you're insane. They are nothing alike, complete different cards. My point is playing 60 cards is statistically your best option of pulling exactly what you need. Playing with more should have a drawback. Split cards tinker with the math behind a deck, and I simply disagree with it. But that's not why this thread is about so lay off.
Here's a new topic, though, and I don't imagine anyone will hardly agree, what's with the little kid twilightish theme to the Innistrad set? I don't know if it's just the timing of the release or what, but I hated the idea more than anything...
I don't see Vintage staying around for much longer without scrapping the reserved list and reprinting the staples in a seperate set that doesnt affect other formats.
Vintage has been dying for almost a decade now...but it never dies. If it goes on much longer, Vintage should get nominated for an Oscar.
Seriously...Vintage isn't going anywhere. If anything, the drastic rise in power of creatures has given birth to a new era of Vintage, where minimally Powered (or even unPowered) decks can compete and win. Combine the ridiculous new creatures with other new cards like Stony Silence and Grafdigger's Cage, and you see new aggro decks and revisions of old aggro decks that punish "traditional" Vintage decks for being Vintage decks.
Vintage is alive and thriving. It still needs some work, and Power availability will always stem sanctioned Vintage in the US. But we're closing on the point where someone with a decent Standard/Extended collection can build a Vintage deck that is competitive with only two or three proxies - a Lotus and on-color Moxen.
Some of the newer decks frequently get openings like turn 1 Cage, turn 2 Stony Silence/Null Rod. What is a traditional Vintage deck going to do against that? Little except lose...unless it's capable of casting Trygon Predator fast and hope it does get hit with Swords.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I was driven from this once-great site by abusive mods and admins, who create rules out of thin air to punish people for breaking them (meaning the rule does not exist under forum rules) and selectively enforce the rules that are written on the forum rules. I am currently lurking while deleting 6 years and 2 months of posting history. I will return when ExpiredRascals, Teia Rabishu and Blinking Spirit are no longer in power.
I heard it from Richard Garfield himself at Gen Con: Vintage is a terrible format full of broken plays that make for a bad experience that just isn't fun.
The forum was a few years back, someone had asked about WotC making more cards for formats like vintage and Garfield said he had all the old cards and to trust him when he says that the vintage game is just not fun.
Wizards doesn't care about vintage and honestly, I'm with Garfield on this: Just let it die.
I heard it from Richard Garfield himself at Gen Con: Vintage is a terrible format full of broken plays that make for a bad experience that just isn't fun.
The forum was a few years back, someone had asked about WotC making more cards for formats like vintage and Garfield said he had all the old cards and to trust him when he says that the vintage game is just not fun.
Wizards doesn't care about vintage and honestly, I'm with Garfield on this: Just let it die.
That is where Garfield (and a lot of players) are wrong. Vintage is a highly interactive, back-and-forth format. And it's far from "full of broken plays." It's the only format I honestly find enjoyable, because it's the only format that isn't linear and boring after about 3 or 4 rounds of a tournament. Most decks in Legacy, Modern, Extended, Block, and Standard are very straight forward and have one or two ways to win. So you're basically doing the same thing over and over and over all day at a GP or other long event.
My Vintage deck (Meandeck Gush Control) has no less than four distinctly different and viable win conditions that I can switch to on the fly if one path becomes unavailable. All of which are main decked.
Vintage isn't going to die. As much as a lot of people wish it would, it isn't going anywhere. And there is still a lot of interest in the format - me and my friend had a rather large audience at GP: Indianapolis when we were playing Vintage on Sunday afternoon. And like it or not, Wizards IS showing Vintage some love. Looking at most Vintage decks today, you can define Vintage as this:
40 Modern cards, some duals, and some Power.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I was driven from this once-great site by abusive mods and admins, who create rules out of thin air to punish people for breaking them (meaning the rule does not exist under forum rules) and selectively enforce the rules that are written on the forum rules. I am currently lurking while deleting 6 years and 2 months of posting history. I will return when ExpiredRascals, Teia Rabishu and Blinking Spirit are no longer in power.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Vintage is necessary to make Magic philosophically complete. You really should try Legacy, as someone else suggested. It has a lot of support and massive, massive variety.
Standard:
GU Prophet
Legacy:
WBU Shared Fate
Trades
Stop saying that.
sig by DarkNightCavalier
Avatar by perv90210.
Currently Running
Cryffyl
I may try Legacy one weekend or something, but it's still against what I'm wanting in a format.
Yes, but a points system would make deck checks substantially more complicated, thereby making them take longer, thereby meaning that they're more disruptive to the tournament and less of them are going to happen.
Yes. Just look at the DCI suspension list.
I don't think there is a central list of explanations. Generally, WotC releases an explanation whenever they add or remove a card from the banned list though. You can search their site for more information. I believe in the case of Land Tax, it was banned for providing too much card advantage with Scroll Rack and for making games take too long due to searching every turn. Also, there was some issue that Land Tax tended to stall games even more because it discouraged both players from playing more lands.
That said, if you ask players which card they think could be safely removed from the Legacy ban list, Land Tax is a really common answer.
How is any of this possibly going to save vintage? The #1 thing holding vintage back is the restricted list which isn't going to change.
Also, a lot of these changes are to things that you personally do not like. lol
The Power 9 are now Super restricted. 1 Per deck... not one of each.
Vintage casual is alive and well. Vintage competitive on the other hand....
It has a lot to do with collecting. Some of us genuinely love these older cards. Most players that have say a lotus, moxen, juzams, blue power etc have them to collect and play casually. It's not about a tournament setting for most of us...atleast not for me. A tournament is fine and all but the actual need for one is minimal. It's all about being in the club and owning these beautiful awesome cards
First off, your argument against level up is purely subjective based on the fact that you don't like them and don't think they feel like Magic. That's not any kind of basis for policy (although Wizards is moving towards it with their modern ban policy)
Second off, the argument that split/flip cards let you have "more than 60 cards in a deck" is stupid. You already can play as many cards as you want, and it's usually a drawback. Also, kicker, entwine, replicate, etc.: there are many, many mechanics that give you the choice between multiple effects, split cards are just the most visually flashy but not significantly mechanically different. Flip cards are basically one card, they just happen to be printed on two sides to make them easier to read.
I suggest you polish your ideas much further and learn about what people actually want before trying to sell things no one will buy.
Here's a new topic, though, and I don't imagine anyone will hardly agree, what's with the little kid twilightish theme to the Innistrad set? I don't know if it's just the timing of the release or what, but I hated the idea more than anything...
Vintage has been dying for almost a decade now...but it never dies. If it goes on much longer, Vintage should get nominated for an Oscar.
Seriously...Vintage isn't going anywhere. If anything, the drastic rise in power of creatures has given birth to a new era of Vintage, where minimally Powered (or even unPowered) decks can compete and win. Combine the ridiculous new creatures with other new cards like Stony Silence and Grafdigger's Cage, and you see new aggro decks and revisions of old aggro decks that punish "traditional" Vintage decks for being Vintage decks.
Vintage is alive and thriving. It still needs some work, and Power availability will always stem sanctioned Vintage in the US. But we're closing on the point where someone with a decent Standard/Extended collection can build a Vintage deck that is competitive with only two or three proxies - a Lotus and on-color Moxen.
Some of the newer decks frequently get openings like turn 1 Cage, turn 2 Stony Silence/Null Rod. What is a traditional Vintage deck going to do against that? Little except lose...unless it's capable of casting Trygon Predator fast and hope it does get hit with Swords.
The forum was a few years back, someone had asked about WotC making more cards for formats like vintage and Garfield said he had all the old cards and to trust him when he says that the vintage game is just not fun.
Wizards doesn't care about vintage and honestly, I'm with Garfield on this: Just let it die.
My Kamigawa cube.
My Mirage Cube
That is where Garfield (and a lot of players) are wrong. Vintage is a highly interactive, back-and-forth format. And it's far from "full of broken plays." It's the only format I honestly find enjoyable, because it's the only format that isn't linear and boring after about 3 or 4 rounds of a tournament. Most decks in Legacy, Modern, Extended, Block, and Standard are very straight forward and have one or two ways to win. So you're basically doing the same thing over and over and over all day at a GP or other long event.
My Vintage deck (Meandeck Gush Control) has no less than four distinctly different and viable win conditions that I can switch to on the fly if one path becomes unavailable. All of which are main decked.
Vintage isn't going to die. As much as a lot of people wish it would, it isn't going anywhere. And there is still a lot of interest in the format - me and my friend had a rather large audience at GP: Indianapolis when we were playing Vintage on Sunday afternoon. And like it or not, Wizards IS showing Vintage some love. Looking at most Vintage decks today, you can define Vintage as this:
40 Modern cards, some duals, and some Power.