February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement


  • TMD Supporter

    @protoaddct said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    I am not totally against using it, I am suggesting guardrails on it's usage in discourse that was not intended to be a hard analytical look at a topic.

    Well, that's not what you said. You said that data analysis should not be permitted in B&R discussion threads. You said "I think data driven discussions are healthy and have a place, but I don't think you can have them in the same thread."

    That's a pretty extreme position given the centrality of the role of data in DCI B&R decision making, which you seemed to be pretty ill-informed of until now.

    In any case, no one ever said that the DCI ONLY uses data to make it's decisions - but it is absolutely the case that a good deal of what you said wasn't true. Data plays a significant role in the DCI's decision matrix.

    To take an extreme case, if there was a deck that was consistently 60% of Top 8s for more than 6 months, and also had a 60% win percentage, is there any doubt that that deck would have a restriction, regardless of any of the other factors you mentioned? There is no doubt in my mind.

    It's like coming into a post about which classical artist was more relevant to a person, Da Vinci or Michelangelo, and having someone walk into that post and say that Da Vinci had more popularly known pieces and is thus the definitive correct answer.

    Magic is a game with performance metrics. Artwork is not. We can measure market share of Magic decks just like we can measure corporation's market performance and market share or like we can measure sports teams performance and dominance. It's not the same thing as saying that a poem or sculpture is objectively superior to another.

    Saying that a deck is dominant in Magic and needs DCI intervention is absolutely no different than the US government's argument in 1999 that Microsoft was a monopoly and needed antitrust intervention for the same reason. It's a policy choice based upon market dynamics. It's not about right/wrong or beauty and aesthetics. It's about consistent application of a policy based upon precedent, past policy decisions grounded in certain policy values, like promoting a diverse format and maintaining competitive balance.

    I truly believe that workshops (and some other cards but most egregiously workshops) is the reason that the format has X amount of viable archetypes and not X+Y. Tournament win percentages and representation will not show you what decks are not viable to bring to an event, just how the things that were there did.

    Actually, the main point of Chubbyrain's post was to show that Workshops are too good in this environment. I agree with him. It sounds like you do too.



  • @nedleeds the insult wasn't directed at you, though you fall into it. Heh.

    I don't disagree that archetypes (Rituals, I'm looking at you) may become playable, but most people are arguing that if Misstep gets restricted, the blue players will play "more respectable counterspells versus Workshop", which is just blatantly false. Misdirection and more Pyroblasts and Flusterstorm will just be the new thing.



  • @13nova I disagree with this argument because, Thoughtseize is a very playable card against most blue decks but it is currently unplayable. And, Creature decks will increase with decks like Goblins, Merfolk and other Fish variants that will make Flusterstorm and Misdirection harder to play. Finally, Stifle used to be a card in Vintage. If Mental Misstep was gone, I'm sure a 1 blue land destruction spell will see play again.


  • TMD Supporter

    We can argue all day whether Mental Misstep restriction would allow for a bunch of decks to become viable, but until it happens (if) we won't know for sure. However, I am in currently in the camp that much won't change. I don't see Merfolk and Goblins being that good in Vintage regardless.



  • @moorebrother1 Stifle was a card in vintage in 2006. I wouldn't be so sure that would come back, and Goblins and Merfolk aren't a real thing either, and weren't a real thing for a long time even before Mental Misstep was printed.



  • @moorebrother1 said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    @13nova I disagree with this argument because, Thoughtseize is a very playable card against most blue decks but it is currently unplayable. And, Creature decks will increase with decks like Goblins, Merfolk and other Fish variants that will make Flusterstorm and Misdirection harder to play. Finally, Stifle used to be a card in Vintage. If Mental Misstep was gone, I'm sure a 1 blue land destruction spell will see play again.

    I'm not sure I follow. Merfolk plays 4 Cursecatcher and 1 Ancestral Recall as their only 1-drops -
    and then 4 Mental Misstep. How does Mental Misstep make Merfolk bad? If anything, Mental Misstep makes the deck better. That said, it's probably not a very good deck, but I don't get your logic on the matter.

    And, I would add, I believe that to be the case for all Fish/Hatebear decks. Mental Misstep makes those decks better, not worse: 1) Because the Fish/Hatebear decks don't play many 1-drops themselves, and 2) because these decks benefit from "free"/turn 1 answers to broken stuff and cantrips as well as protection against the most commonly played removal.



  • @griselbrother Yeah, I think the assumption that restricting Misstep makes creature decks more viable is pretty absurd. A restriction of Misstep doesn't erase 5 years of power creep. You have Goblins going up against Walking Ballistas, Elemental and Monk tonkens, not to mention whatever Paradoxicals endgame is. I don't see Goblins or Merfolk really coming out ahead in that exchange.



  • @chubbyrain It does not make tribal good specifically, but it does make delver better-ish since a large tenant of that deck is to get early tempo and keep it. Other 1 drop creatures that come to mind are Monastery Swiftspear and any number of elves.

    Not inconsequentially, it weakens Delve and some dredge decks as well. Weakening dredge specifically I think helps creature based decks as well since dredge can prey on them pretty often, but weakening treasure cruise and DDT are also things that help creature based strategies as well if only by the virtue that those decks either use those cards worse than others or not at all.


  • TMD Supporter

    As the owner of 4 Mishra ‘s Workshop, I do believe we are looking at the eventual restriction of Workshops. This is not me saying I believe it should or shouldn’t be restricted. I have not studied the data like some people here or currently as strongly opinionated as I used to be for Shops. I just feel that’s the path we are going down in. If I’m right, I hope it’s sooner than later to get it over with.

    I just wonder if they keep hitting shop pieces, is a Shops deck just going to end up looking like a blue deck with a bunch of 1 ofs. Either way is fine with me. Either you have a bunch of shop pieces restricted, or remove most of them from being restricted (within reason) and restrict shops.



  • There's been enough unrest in the past month that I think Wizards is going to make B&R changes because the community is clamoring for it. With less than four weeks to go, it's probably a good time to step away from brewing and just play what's performing well until the hammer falls. Hopefully the decks I've been keeping my eye on to try will still be relevant on April 16th.



  • @mdkubiak said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    As the owner of 4 Mishra ‘s Workshop, I do believe we are looking at the eventual restriction of Workshops. This is not me saying I believe it should or shouldn’t be restricted. I have not studied the data like some people here or currently as strongly opinionated as I used to be for Shops. I just feel that’s the path we are going down in. If I’m right, I hope it’s sooner than later to get it over with.

    I just wonder if they keep hitting shop pieces, is a Shops deck just going to end up looking like a blue deck with a bunch of 1 ofs. Either way is fine with me. Either you have a bunch of shop pieces restricted, or remove most of them from being restricted (within reason) and restrict shops.

    It think it will have a lot more one ofs, but it will never reach the level that blue has. The mana base will compensate with a bunch of 4 ofs. Wastelands and Tomb are not going anywhere, and I would think the deck would go more heavily on redundancy at the 2 drop level with 4x ravager, ballista, etc. Basically workshops will only run singletons where it has to because of the restricted list.


  • TMD Supporter

    @hierarchnoble

    @hierarchnoble said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    There's been enough unrest in the past month that I think Wizards is going to make B&R changes because the community is clamoring for it. With less than four weeks to go, it's probably a good time to step away from brewing and just play what's performing well until the hammer falls. Hopefully the decks I've been keeping my eye on to try will still be relevant on April 16th.

    I would not be surprised. I have given it thought about trading my workshops for duals. Not just because of a possible restriction, I'm just undecided if I want to go back to a more typical blue deck vs. 2 Card Monte.



  • @mdkubiak I got rid of my Shops back in 2004 and I did not miss them for years. I recently got them back because I am very tired of Blue mirrors. When I traded my Shops the field was a bunch of Shop mirrors because this was the Trinisphere era of Vintage.

    Blue was more innovative back then and had way fewer counterspells with blue mirrors all looking very different.

    I am frustrated by the constant attack on Shop because to me it adds diversity to the field. I got off of MTGO because the blue mirrors there are just awful.


  • TMD Supporter

    @moorebrother Sure, it definitely does. I'm not saying I'm for or against a restriction, as I don't want to get in the middle of the arguments. I'm just looking at it outside and I just see it happening.

    On a side note, I do think Shops can still be a good deck without 4 workshops. It won't be as fast, as consistent, but I think it is wrong to say the deck would be dead without it.

    I do happen to really enjoy playing blue (I loved my Grixis Painter and Thieves deck), which is what I'm debating on. Not necessarily those decks, that's just an option. If I do, it would either most likely be a Jeskai or Grixis deck (possibly BUG).


  • TMD Supporter

    @hierarchnoble said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    There's been enough unrest in the past month that I think Wizards is going to make B&R changes because the community is clamoring for it. With less than four weeks to go, it's probably a good time to step away from brewing and just play what's performing well until the hammer falls. Hopefully the decks I've been keeping my eye on to try will still be relevant on April 16th.

    I don't think the clamoring is nearly as loud as it was last year, but there does seem to be a sad inevitability to it. I also think Vintage is approaching (still a ways to go, however) critical mass and is destined to become a bunch of highlander-eque decks. I would imagine this is a long-term consequence of restriction versus banning.

    Vintage "customers" now have a lot more products to choose from (Old School, EDH, Cube, etc) for their time, so the desire to "fight for stagnation," is probably not as strong as it once was. The schism between casuals and spikes will widen.

    I do feel sad however that the Workshop decks seems like it will eventually solidify as a 2cc aggro deck instead of the diverse and dynamic deck it once was (stax, martello, dark depths, terra nova). Those decks seem so interesting and complex in hindsight. I can see a ravager/ballista deck still being fine after losing three shops. I don't see a Stax or Martello deck surviving that hit. But who knows??

    Nobody does, which is why we keep playing!!

    /old man rant 🙂


  • TMD Supporter

    @joshuabrooks said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    interesting

    I think my tier 3 (or is that 4) 2 Card Monte deck can survive, albeit with much changes to it. I already want to cut the workshops down from 4 to 3. I have a few ideas I'm tinkering with to make it be able to win beyond the combos.



  • So if we banned everyone's pet card to hate on, what will vintage look like next month?



  • @gremlin-lord said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    So if we banned everyone's pet card to hate on, what will vintage look like next month?

    If we restricted everyone's pet card to hate we might be playing highlander.



  • @nedleeds said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    @gremlin-lord said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    So if we banned everyone's pet card to hate on, what will vintage look like next month?

    If we restricted everyone's pet card to hate we might be playing highlander.

    Highlander has a bigger following than vintage so that might be a good idea.



  • @joshuabrooks said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    @hierarchnoble said in February 12, 2018 Banned and Restricted Announcement:

    I can see a ravager/ballista deck still being fine after losing three shops. I don't see a Stax or Martello deck surviving that hit. But who knows??

    No chance even Ravager / Ballista survives a Shop restriction. The Eldrazi are so much better at that point it's not even close. The Shop creatures are bulk rare castaways without Workshop. Especially compared to the last 4-5 years of insane creature printings, most notably Eldrazi but secondarily the hate bears.


 

WAF/WHF