Is anyone enjoying this new meta?

@evouga said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

One idea I've suggested in the past is testing Vintage tournaments where matches last more than three games (by adopting a best-of-five format, say). This is one way to combat the variance/"polarity" concern articulated in this thread. Individual games might still be blowouts but the outcome of the match would shift more towards deckbuilding and play skill than blind luck.

Just to be clear, matchup polarization & variance arent the same thing.

You can have extreme polarization with zero variance, as in rock, paper, scissors.

In fact, Turning matchups to best of five would actually heighten/increase/exacerbate polarization, because it would reduce the wins underdogs accrue through luck.

That doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea; just that it wouldn’t reduce polarization.

@craw_advantage said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta

Let me know when you choose not to include a card in a new deck (without your own 3.8 Missteps) because it gets countered by Force of Will.

I think this effect has been somewhat overstated. Most decklists I see still tend to favor 1cmc spells over 2cmc alternatives, even when the latter exists as a stronger version of the effect.

And those decklists all play Misstep. Even Dredge. Outcome with Preordain is maybe the lone exception among the 4 decks that get played in Vintage.

@john-cox said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds FWIW I have a lot of turn one kill decks I can't play because they auto loose to Force of will.

Sure but "turn one kill decks" is a strategy, not a card.

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@craw_advantage said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta

Let me know when you choose not to include a card in a new deck (without your own 3.8 Missteps) because it gets countered by Force of Will.

I think this effect has been somewhat overstated. Most decklists I see still tend to favor 1cmc spells over 2cmc alternatives, even when the latter exists as a stronger version of the effect.

And those decklists all play Misstep. Even Dredge. Outcome with Preordain is maybe the lone exception among the 4 decks that get played in Vintage.

Yeah, but I don't think that's such a mitigating factor. Decks play Misstep if it fits into their gameplan because it's a powerful card. Protecting your own spells is nice, but you'd rather use it to counter something your opponent plays, right? If Misstep were really fundamentally distorting the value of 1cmc versus 2cmc spells, I think people would choose to play superior un-Missteppable versions of cards and thus preserve their Missteps in hand and pull way ahead in the Misstep wars.

@craw_advantage said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@craw_advantage said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta

Let me know when you choose not to include a card in a new deck (without your own 3.8 Missteps) because it gets countered by Force of Will.

I think this effect has been somewhat overstated. Most decklists I see still tend to favor 1cmc spells over 2cmc alternatives, even when the latter exists as a stronger version of the effect.

And those decklists all play Misstep. Even Dredge. Outcome with Preordain is maybe the lone exception among the 4 decks that get played in Vintage.

Decks play Misstep if it fits into their gameplan because it's a powerful card. Protecting your own spells is nice, but you'd rather use it to counter something your opponent plays, right? If Misstep were really fundamentally distorting the value of 1cmc versus 2cmc spells, I think people would choose to play superior un-Missteppable versions of cards and thus preserve their Missteps in hand and pull way ahead in the Misstep wars.

Decks play Misstep because it's 0 or +1 mana and you need it to Misstep Missteps as well as other efficient spells. If it were really to counter other spells it would probably get played more in Shops (though multiple Spheres pose an issue with casting it off Shop).

It's gotten a little bit better I guess, I mean a couple of years ago Misstep was +1 mana and +1 token. Misstep as a 0 mana / +1 mana investment against casting a Deathrite Shaman or a Thoughtseize is such a complete tempo and mana investment beating that if you choose to include the latter two cards in your deck you are compelled to either play your own 3.8 Missteps or choose to just get destroyed by every non PO, non Shop deck.

Some people don't mind and just stuff every deck they make with them, they don't mind the 'i haz more' play pattern either. I think it's a miserable card at design time and at run time.

There's also the cascading effects of Misstep like making Redpyroblast unplayable without it. There could be competitive decks with red that could actually resolve the card Pyroblast against opposing blue decks without watering down their 75 with their own 3.8 Missteps.

Cards like Mystic Remora, DRS, Hierarch, and 100 other creatures.

Then there's the game one effect vs. sphere decks where the 3.8misstep.dec player keeps a 2 misstep hand just has a non-game.

I know some players have only begun playing on the last 4-5 years but there was actually a time when Misstep Incest (tm) hadn't taken ahold yet. It was before delve, dack, tokens ruined Vintage forever.

http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=6153

483 players. Basically the biggest paper sanctioned Vintage event ever (?). Top 8 has 2 Missteps in a sideboard. But once decks begin to play it in large numbers maindeck, then you are forced to also play it or skip 1 because nothing beats free.

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@john-cox said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds FWIW I have a lot of turn one kill decks I can't play because they auto loose to Force of will.

Sure but "turn one kill decks" is a strategy, not a card.

I'm not playing Goblin Charbelcher because of force of will. I think Two Card monte would get really good without Force of will too, so theres Helm of Obedience and Painter's Servant/Grindstone I'm not playing because of Force of will.
I know people play these decks, but the metas are light on blue and the decks get a lot better without FoW in the pool.

In response to the question, I am enjoying this meta more than I have the average meta over the past few years. A big part of enjoying a meta for me is the feeling that I have some space to brew and be moderately successful.

For me to enjoy Vintage most, here are the main things I want to enable brewing:

  • There can't be an option that is so much better as to make all other plans obsolete. This was life in the heavy mentor era. There really were not alternate options to be competitive outside the established pillars. I don't feel like the current meta has a card set that can't be bested. This seems not to be true for shops. I feel for the shops players that like diversity. It's pretty much affinity style or bust - Forgemaster, Stax, Slaver, Welder, etc... are not very viable.

  • I want to be able to gain an advantage with cards you might not expect. This is why I despise G-Probe and did a dance of joy when it was restricted.

  • I don't want to have to artificially limit my options. This was the case with Chalice and is the case with Misstep. I still feel a bit stifled from this card but the recent disruptors of Hollow One and Lavinia have helped mess with the established pillars enough that there is room to explore.

As much as I would love to see Misstep gone, I have enough options to mix it up.

@john-cox said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@john-cox said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds FWIW I have a lot of turn one kill decks I can't play because they auto loose to Force of will.

Sure but "turn one kill decks" is a strategy, not a card.

I'm not playing Goblin Charbelcher because of force of will. I think Two Card monte would get really good without Force of will too, so theres Helm of Obedience and Painter's Servant/Grindstone I'm not playing because of Force of will.
I know people play these decks, but the metas are light on blue and the decks get a lot better without FoW in the pool.

Well we can agree to disagree. Force of Wills cost is pretty immense both at design time and run time. If I'm playing 2Card and my opponent is Mind Rotting themselves I'm likely to win. Now if I get Trapped ... that's a feel bad, or my Grindstone gets Misstepped those are miserable transactions where I spent mana and 1 card and my opponent spent no mana and 1 card.

@nedleeds

If your opponent can stop you on turn 0, its a pretty big thing for any turn 1 combo deck. 2-card monte plays Helm + Leyline, which is completely immune to misstep. It definitely has a number of hands that care far more about Force of Will, and that is the more limiting card for the deck.

@vaughnbros said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds

If your opponent can stop you on turn 0, its a pretty big thing for any turn 1 combo deck. 2-card monte plays Helm + Leyline, which is completely immune to misstep. It definitely has a number of hands that care far more about Force of Will, and that is the more limiting card for the deck.

Yeah if only those decks had Red Blasts. Oh wait ...

@nedleeds

That stops both Misstep and Force of Will (at a mana disadvantage). I still don't understand your point.

I haven't played a game of Vintage since SCGCon in June 2018 - I can't say I really miss it. I am slowly starting to get the desire to jam some Vintage again, but I can say I haven't really liked the format for a long time, and playing more Modern and Legacy has done a great job of allowing me to play actual magic.

The format has a problem that will continue to grow, and that is the number of restricted cards makes the games feel much more random as a whole. Workshops, Dredge, and Survival do seem to slightly avoid this issue, though games with Lotus, Trinisphere or Chalice still happen. The format has this problem inherently, and it cannot be avoided; the company (rightfully so) focuses new card designs on Standard and Limited, and perhaps slightly Modern, and cards like Monastery Mentor, which barely impacts other formats, or Walking Ballista, which is a very good card in other formats that don't have Mishra's Workshop/Tolarian Academy sometimes are printed and need to be restricted.

More game-ending 1-ofs means more games that are seemingly decided by randomness.

More cards ALSO means that decks get amalgamated into one list as more cards get printed. Walking Ballista + Foundry Inspector, combined with the other shifts in deck design, means there is no need for different Workshop strategies, to the point where the best workshop pilots only have discrepancies between 5 to 8 cards total.

Overall, there needs to be massive restrictions and/or unrestrictions, or for Modern Horizons to print cards that impact vintage, for me to really have excitement about the format again.

@13nova nah, the format's variance is actually the attractive thing about it (just like Commander). It becomes a format of reading the table/moment and making the best play you can based on that. It's much more a format of good plays/players than good matchups (the usual Modern rock-papers-scissors meta). It makes for very different games everytime you play. One of the things that bum me out of other formats is exactly that: you play 5-7 games of a certain matchup and from there all games are the same - which gets boring quite fast. High variance formats take a long while to feel that the games are the same.

@vaughnbros said in Is anyone enjoying this new meta?:

@nedleeds

That stops both Misstep and Force of Will (at a mana disadvantage). I still don't understand your point.

Because the Red Blast could actually f'ing resolve without your opponent laughing and chucking a skillstep in their graveyard. And that deck with the blasts wouldn't have to pack 3.8 missteps to misstep the misstep. How hard is this honestly?

last edited by nedleeds
  • 83
    Posts
  • 9250
    Views