My annual, mid-year take on what should change in every format I care about. Five suggested changes for Vintage:

Let me know your thoughts!



For episode 47, Geoff Moes (@ThallidTosser on Twitter), Nat Moes (@GrandpaBelcher), and Josh Chapple (@joshchapple) talk with Jerry Yang. Jerry is a longtime Team Serious member and a big influence on many teammates’ love of fun Magic and incredible food. If you want credible, he also has multiple StarCityGames Power 9 Top 8 appearances to his name. But who are we kidding, you don’t listen to this podcast for credibility.

Here’s the timestamped table of contents for your listening ease and enjoyment:
00:42 – More Like ComBANion
11:42 – Now THIS Is Podracing: Vintage Unleashed
44:01 – Food & Drink: Staying Inside
1:08:21 – Outro
Total runtime – 1:09:06

If you want to skip right to the inaugural UX tournament information without listening, Vintage Unleashed is the format for the third tournament in the Team Serious Virtual Realm, July 11 at noon ET. I would love to have a great turnout for this inaugural event!

alt text

The signup sheet is here, including a link to the Discord and more complete rules for the format. As with our previous Virtual Realm events, we’ll have a Friday evening Pub Quiz leading up to the tournament on Saturday.

  • Maybe highlander Vintage is the only way to move forward with the new cards. I’d at least be interested in trying it out.

    If not highlander then the restrictions shouldn’t be so biased as to allow Workshops, PO, and Bazaar but disallow Gush, Channel, etc. What makes Workshop or PO so much more vintage worthy than Gush?

    People claim PO is non issue because of Null Rod. (LOL) meanwhile there’s another two mana artifact called Ankh of Mishra that has similar affect against Gush strategies. It’s just craziness. This restriction list is very dumb.

    It seems to me that PO players just want to play by themselves anyway so I’m happy to give them what they want and play other formats.

    read more
  • @griselbrother

    You could certainly view the deck as needing balance, but cards that are only hate or only a bear threaten to disrupt the balance of the deck.

    Just the overall idea of a “hatebear” is that it is both hate and a bear. Both a disruption card and a threat. A deck dense with these cards will always have hands loaded with both disruption and threats. It’s always balanced.

    Tarmogoyf, I actually consider a “hatebear” in a number of creature heavy matchups since I mostly use her as a wall to prevent my opponent from attacking without losing one of their creatures in the process. Her hate being that she disrupts their ability to play aggro. Similarly, I’d look through each card and decide if it can be considered both under special circumstances, certain matchups, against certain cards, ect.

    The hardest problem to me with these decks is the 1-drop problem. Very few 1 mana hatebears are printed. Weak hate cards aren’t real disruption, and 1 power creatures aren’t real bears. Deathrite is really the only card I consider to be a true hatebear. As a result, these decks tend to be very slow outside of Deathrite hands.

    This is why I think the best iterations have played some 0/1 mana hate only cards, like counterspells. These aren’t hatebears, but they function to cover the deck’s biggest weakness of losing before you even get to play a bear.

    A secondary problem with these decks is the card advantage problem (which is the main problem OP is running into). Hatebears are good, but they don’t generate card advantage. I think the best solution is to play Hatewalkers as they stay on strategy. May have to get creative since the restriction of the best hatewalker in Narset though. Wrenn and Six seems like a prime option.

    Traditionally, hatebear decks have tried to play these “dual threat” cards, like Bob and Cold Eyed Selkie. These again, are nice cards, but they don’t satisfy the hate component of the deck.

    read more
  • G

    @vaughnbros said in How do you beat W&6 with fair hatebears?:


    My main point is the stuff like Rest In Peace and Shroud enchantment are nice effects, but they aren’t threats. Reducing your threat density hurts the strategy.

    Ah, I see what you mean now and I agree, but only to a certain point. This is a question of speed vs disruption which is actually a very complex topic. Basically, you want to win while preventing your opponent from winning, but if you prevent your opponent from winning at all, it doesn't really matter how fast you kill them.

    You could also look at this from a "time" perspective, ie. how much time do you give your opponent to win? However, time is a relative concept in Magic, and I think it's a misconception to look at it in terms of turns (as in how many turns do you give your opponent), because it doesn't really matter how many turns they get if they can't do anything with them.

    Hatebears have always played non-creature threats (or answers or whatever you want to call it), for the reason that the disruption those cards provide is higher than that of creatures. Chalice, Thorn, Stony Silence, Misstep, Grafdigger's Cage, or, if you go way back, Choke, etc. come to mind. Conversely, Tarmogoyf isn't a hatebear either, but it might be a good card to play still.

    If, say, Rest in Peace lowers your opponent's chances of winning enough then it might be a valid call to play that card even though it doesn't attack. At one time, most Dreadhorde players literally had no way of winning through a Prelate @ 1 but I would never attack with it because I didn't want it to run into a Snapcaster Mage, and it didn't matter at all when I started attacking. Similarly, Peacekeeper is technically a Hatebear, but it might as well have been an enchantment because, well, it can't attack.

    When all this is said, I do agree that you probably shouldn't just load up on enchantments or artifacts and try to prevent your opponent from winning, but rather find the right balance between speed and disruption. This is what the most succesful Hatebear-like strategies (Shops and Eldrazi, which, technically, are using the same strategy) are so good at.

    read more
  • @vaughnbros said in SMIP: 2020 B&R Roundup:

    This is getting off topic though. My main point is that through Restricting everything you reduce the need to keep purchasing play sets of expensive new cards. At most you need to get 1.

    Other discussion aside, I have long loved this idea and would love a singleton vintage format.

    read more