The merits of allowed sets isn't a big deal for me. I have cards that would allow me to play EC rules, but so far I prefer playing Swedish. I thought it would be more interesting to talk about the aesthetics of the format. I'm relieving my teenage years playing old school, which to me is precisely what type 1 should be. I love the old cards; I love making all black bordered decks. I love 'snobbing' up and only playing unlimited white borders. I grew up on 4th and Ice Age, but right now I can only stomach cards from 1993-1994. I've even picked up the 1994 Duelists to relive the 'magic' of the era (no pun intended). I'm enjoying saving up for cards, just like when I was a kid. I can't build the best decks, so I make do with the best I've got.
Hmm, I also just noticed that I can't spell the word 'thread' in my opening post. I was on heavy Mucinex yesterday...
It takes money to get Hearthstone cards; I know people who have spent several hundred dollars and I probably spent about $100 myself. There is no way to get the cards you want directly either and no redemption or way of regaining money for your Hearthstone cards.
In other words, if the game is good, people will pay to play. But probably we all love Vintage more than the average magic player loves magic.
I lost my favorite non-Vintage format to a non-DCI entity's whim. 5-Color was a great format, based on the deck construction rules of deck minimums of 250 cards and color minimums of 20 cards (one card = one color, Fire/Ice was the best blue card in red-focused decks and red card in blue-focused decks). Then one day the website's owner decided to up the count to 300 because he didn't like the Wisconsin metagame, which was entirely different from the Philadelphia one. This broke the format into two pieces, and both metagames died within a year.
I won't play non-DCI formats again. Commander and Old School are both fractured like 5-Color's dying breath, with regional ban lists and unrealistic metagame expectations from non-DCI legislative bodies. If Vintage loses DCI oversight than they lose my playership.
I personally love the idea behind having a powered cube, that is specifically designed to feel more like vintage. My main dissatisfaction with regards to basically every powered list I’ve come across, is that they “tend” to play out more like amped up modern decks, and less like what Vintage and Legacy as a whole has encapsulated.
The one major thing I think your cube lacks, is copious amounts of mana rocks. It’s the first thing I look for in a good powered cube. I did some superficial math and would recommend 36 rocks for a 540 card cube. I also don’t see the point in drafting 4 packs of 15 and ending up with 37 sideboard cards. Also, I would cut time vault from the cube. The card is head and shoulders... just way too good. (unlike in vintage where it's fine) It just ruins games and will make players feel like they’ve wasted their time drafting.
Lion's Eye Diamond
So can you actually play two different decks or you are forced to play one that works for both? (because the banlists are different)
Nekusar is not good in dedicated French EDH. That format is pretty cutthroat. I mean for a Vintage player that does not need to be a surprise but you can just die on t3. Happens and many decks are trying to kill fast even though more people play control with combo finish so they are slower.
In multiplayer if you want to win you can go all-in more or less but in French you'll be better positioned if you will use a control shell unless the tournament is going to be really big. For big tournaments (50+) I used to play all-in combos actually.
You should be looking for Time Twister effects (there's like 12+ of them), card draw and then some cards that helps kill your opponent (for example Fate Unraveler..or how it is called), underworld dreams ...you can even abuse megrim effects if you won't take storm path
@Topical_Island With the advent of Vintage Masters in MTGO and the VSL Vintage has become more visible to the DCI and as a result they're obliged to try to improve upon it if they see fit. I think this comes down to a choice between having Vintage be a "real" format that players can actually play on a regular basis and having a format that is largely ignored by the DCI. I, for one, was under the impression that the Vintage community wanted to expand to attract new players and that Vintage Masters on MTGO was a change welcomed by the majority. If they feel it's broken then they're not just going to sit back and do nothing about it. The goal is to generate revenue after all. I suspect the perception that the format is closed, or dominated by one archetype, is a hindrance to that.