The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop



  • @moorebrother1 Fair enough. Could you stop misrepresenting the most common argument for Shop's restriction? Play sequences like the one above are being used to 1) emphasize the aggressive nature of current Shops builds and 2) explain how this doesn't imply a weakening of the archetype. No one is (or very few people are) arguing that Shops is doing something more broken than other decks. I am certainly not.

    Based on your background, you are an example of Vintage trying to serve different masters. You play in monthly small events with metagames that diverge from broader, more competitive metagames. This isn't meant to invalidate your opinion, but I would counter that it's going to lead you to different conclusions than those who play more regularly in larger events.



  • @chubbyrain said in The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop:

    Yeah, this was an insane start

    Thanks for the screenshot.

    Dear lord, that's crazy. He get's to play his entire opening hand of 7 cards plus the one he drew.....and then topdecks the Ravager?

    Situations like these are definitely outliers. It's fun when it happens (unless you are the opponent), but that's such an anomaly.

    Statistically, a turn 2 Oath should win with a higher frequency. While it definitely shows the potential explosiveness for Shop Aggro, I'm not sure how much this situation matters for the big picture.



  • @madmanmike25 That's why we collect the data and why they are the most important part (or should be the most important part) of any argument. Again, the point is not that Shops is doing anything inherently unfair in a format that has Power. It's that it's winning way more than other decks. I only mentioned it because you expressed disbelief that the deck was still winning despite the restrictions of Lodestone and Chalice. Shops as it's built right now asks "do you have the right answers", "did you draw enough mana to cast them" and "can you assemble them before you die?" It's the advantage of playing an aggro/tempo deck of considerable power.



  • @chubbyrain

    It’s possible that in that particular game it almost doesn’t matter WHAT he forces he maybe still just loses. My point is that if I’m on the oath side of the table there I easily force the inspector in vacuum cause that usually slows my opponent’s win by at least a turn and likely 2. Players not understanding the simple math of inspector and how busted it is is what irritates me when they complain about losing to it. Again, this situation may have been one where the hand was too broken to fight through with a single fow but many will not be and the play pattern of letting inspector resolve is almost always incorrect in my experience.



  • @stormanimagus You Force the Inspector when you have turn 2 Oath of Druids? Noah, I'm pretty sure you're shouldn't be the judge of which Blue players are competent or not....



  • @chubbyrain

    Blind? Sure. There’s no guarantees that they have a sphere at all and certainly not on turn 1 if inspector didn’t resolve. You are missing the forest for the trees. The forest is their clock, which is dangerously fast with mr. inspector. Without it one can trust an oath deck to get to 3 lands by the time it matters. With it in play all bets are off and insane speed is no a possibility. Remember that sphere hampers their speed as well with no inspector in play and their ability to lethal you. I have the same problem with players who don’t force Lotus vs blue only to get blown out by multiple threats the following turn. Again, do not conflate my comments with this particular scenario where the shop player kinda had it all and also topdecked like a champ. Understand that I’m playin the numbers and making the play that wins me the majority of games.



  • @stormanimagus Yes, Inspector is a good card. No, you don't blind Force it. It's contextual and I have played many more competitive matchups against Shops with Blue decks than you have. Having a turn 2 Oath of Druids on the play is one such instance when I wouldn't do so. Please stop assuming 70% of Vintage players are morons.



  • @chubbyrain

    I only do cause they repeatedly demonstrate that they are. Sorry, but i also have a lot of experience with the matchup and your line is frequently incorrect even if you have a turn 2 Oath. It really depends on your hand and the other support cards you have though. Sorry, not backing down on this.


  • Administrators

    It is absolutely possible for two people to disagree on a line of play without calling each other names. Please find a way to do so.



  • This post is deleted!


  • Are people still calling for a Shops restriction or did this blow over? My personal feeling was that blue decks just needed to start playing 8+ artifact hate spells between the main and SB. I think you're starting to see that now.

    Take this Grixis Pyromancer deck (6-0 Vintage Challenge Dec 02, 2017): https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/847695#paper

    MD: 1 Dack Fayden
    SB: 4 By Force, 3 Shattering Spree, (1 Mountain)

    And this Team Leovold deck (6-0 Vintage Challenge Dec 16, 2017): https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/861860#paper

    MD: 2 Dack Fayden, 2 Abrupt Decay, 1 Kolghan's Command
    SB: 1 EE, 3 By Force, 1 Abrupt Decay, 1 Ancient Grudge

    I think Kolaghan's Command and Abrade are underplayed and so are wrath effects.

    I also support the Mental Misstep restriction-- to me it ticks all the boxes: (1) too good, (2) not fun, and (3) format warping/homogenizing. But I'm willing to see how the format evolves.



  • @hyperborea This strategy really only works if you believe in vintage being a binary format (maybe trinary if you count dredge) between shops and blue. The argument from many people is that the very existence of Shopsx4 keeps decks out of the format.

    I think this debate still rages in the hearts and minds of everyone, it's just that everyone made their point and really all we can do is wait for the banned list announcement or a new set to come out with some other card that contributes to the discussion. Otherwise nothing has changed much and everyone is just beating the horse.



  • The meta's been drifting a bit. Shops is less prevalent/dominant at the moment (compared to a month ago), Oath is enjoying a lot of popularity, and blue decks are finding new and inventive ways to murder each other.



  • @protoaddct said in The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop:

    @hyperborea This strategy really only works if you believe in vintage being a binary format (maybe trinary if you count dredge) between shops and blue. The argument from many people is that the very existence of Shopsx4 keeps decks out of the format.

    I think this debate still rages in the hearts and minds of everyone, it's just that everyone made their point and really all we can do is wait for the banned list announcement or a new set to come out with some other card that contributes to the discussion. Otherwise nothing has changed much and everyone is just beating the horse.

    The best cards in the format are blue or artifact so the impression of binarism makes sense, but I think the issue is more about strategic diversity, and Shops plays a very important role as the tier 1 aggro deck in the format. For many, many years aggro simply was not respected in this format. I think more people just need to adopt the modal artifact destruction cards like Abrade and Kolghan's command and Shops will feel less OP. Oath is another way of preying on aggro decks, as Winterstar mentioned.



  • @hyperborea The best cards in the format are blue and workshops (and bazaar) would be my argument to you. Many of the artifacts that are very powerful are so because of the existence of Workshops as a 4 of. This is long established.

    I do agree that people who play the format tend to want to play linear decks that think about answers and hate as a secondary consideration, and people can be slow to adapt even though the adaptation is there, but ultimately I still believe that vintage is a format of pillar strategies, and those pillars are dwindling because of the strength of others.

    I remember when I started playing again, back around M10, Rituals were considered one of the pillar strategies, and it is now an afterthought at best. In the time since then ritual/storm has gotten very few new cards to supplement or strengthen there strategy, and the one prominent one (Gitaxian probe) got restricted, where as:

    Blue based decks got Treasure Cruise, DDT, Mental Misstep, Delver, Pyromancer, Mentor, multiple Jaces, and more
    Workshops got Ballistia, hangarback, Mox Opal, Spyglass, Chief of the Foundry, Steel overseer, Metamorph, Other stuff that has come and gone
    Dredge got Sun titan, Bloodghast, Prized Amalgamation, Dragonlord Kolaghan, Elish Norn, Hollow One, Gurmag Angler

    Look at other eternal formats of magic, and you'll find at least 10 different decks that are all viable and all play very differently, whereas with our format you really have 3-4 main strategies and then derivatives of them. It is far closer to a binary than those formats.



  • @Protoaddct I agree that Big Blue has gotten more toys than Ritual based combo as of late, but I don't see how restricting Workshop (and unrestricting stuff like Trinisphere and Lodestone Golem) helps in any way. Isn't the problem stuff like Mental Misstep then?



  • If mishra’s workshop is not restricted then phyrexian metamorph and sphere of resistance should be estricted



  • @hyperborea said in The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop:

    @Protoaddct I agree that Big Blue has gotten more toys than Ritual based combo as of late, but I don't see how restricting Workshop (and unrestricting stuff like Trinisphere and Lodestone Golem) helps in any way. Isn't the problem stuff like Mental Misstep then?

    The argument is that making workshops less powerful allows other decks to have a chance of seeing play. Workshops alone may not be all that is needed, certainly MM has been in question and could merit it as well, but most people side with restricting the obvious offender first, seeing what happens, and then making more restrictions as needed instead of restricting multiple cards at once.

    Restricting workshops could, for instance, make colorless eldrazi a much more attractive option in the format, since right now it does not see play since it is considered a mostly inferior version of what shops was doing. Colorless eldrazi just so happened to be a pretty decent check to decks that run Misstep, since most lists runs no 1 drops, and run Cavern of souls to make FOW much less powerful, and therefore also devaluing MM even further since you cant use it as convenient pitch fodder. So maybe restricting shops has a cascading effect that adjusts the meta so MM is not such a powerhouse.



  • @protoaddct

    Have you been following results of late? Workshop decks are under control so restricting any piece from that deck is utter nonsense. Folks have adjusted, get over it.



  • @protoaddct said in The Curious Case of Mishra's Workshop:

    Restricting workshops could, for instance, make colorless eldrazi a much more attractive option in the format, since right now it does not see play since it is considered a mostly inferior version of what shops was doing. Colorless eldrazi just so happened to be a pretty decent check to decks that run Misstep, since most lists runs no 1 drops, and run Cavern of souls to make FOW much less powerful, and therefore also devaluing MM even further since you cant use it as convenient pitch fodder. So maybe restricting shops has a cascading effect that adjusts the meta so MM is not such a powerhouse.

    Let me break it down into

    1. restricting Workshop making Eldrazi more playable
    2. more playable Eldrazi rendering MM restriction unnecessary.

    Regarding 1, restriction of Workshop will not make Eldrazi more (or less) playable, at least I cannot see it how. If I have to make a stretch, it just suggests that the vacant where the Shop decks left will be occupied by inferior choices, be it 'Colorless Eldrazi' or any other decks, but not necessarily make any other deck more competitive or better position. In contrast, storm deck is better positioned if Shop decks are gone.

    For point 2, if Shop occupied more 50% of the meta, MM will be irrelevant more often than not as well.


Log in to reply
 

WAF/WHF

Looks like your connection to The Mana Drain was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.