@vintage_rage i doubt they will have enough data collected to make a change for the October announcement, just because they'll want to give it some number of months to see how this change affects things and EW will be a good testing ground for them to see how things changed.
I'm sure someone has data or at least just the dates of all the previous B&Rs and we could find out an average amount of time between any change and another change.
@topical_island i hadn't run it with any flicker effects, but that would be fun. i would be hesitant to go into another color though (outside of planeswalkers), but it may not make sense to force jund in vintage in the first place.
@topical_island In Legacy, I found Oath of Nissa to be an absolutely insane card. It also opens up your sideboard really wide, with both Domri Rade and Ashiok along with making LotV much smoother. I absolutely loved playing Oath and would recommend it for others - the high likelihood of replacement helps you fight in the same card advantage axis instead of mostly ceding the battlefield and I always find Jund to be a type of tapout control decks, so getting another land isn't normally a bad thing. Oh, and multiple copies just feed the Tarmogoyf or some other delve spell you may eventually play.
@Topical_Island I agree, I think that as we all talk about the B&R and generally we all want to play with the cards, we should consider how to use them and then be able to make arguments to pull cards off or not and get ideas going.
There would be some value, imo, in getting a thread about each Restricted card and building decks to prove how it's broken or not since we get new cards every 3 months that changes the context. There are likely some cards that don't need to be considered in such a way, but a main thread like this one could do that. Meanwhile, the Single Card Discussion - Unrestriction threads would be a great place to store institutional memory of why a card is busted, spring boards for decklists, and counterarguments with examples.
edit: I wish that the official banlist site included links to the banned list announcement archives that tied to each card, so there was an Archive, but each card had for instance
@Topical_Island if I may, I think that @Brass-Man meant that Wizards paying attention to Vintage players feedback would be a negative if the feedback is "devoid of historical context" or critical thought, which would make restrictions less based on objective data and more on emotional outcry by a vocal minority.
@ajfirecracker it's not a great way to set up an experiment tbh (restricting variables is always best practice), but in your favor, new sets get dumped in every couple months that change the card pool anyways.
@Brass-Man yeah i agree with that, i was talking about how they have tournament results every day or so to draw from that can replicate the paper tournaments, so they could draw from that data. Not disagreeing with you, tangentially adding to your point
@joshuabrooks no way, never give up the pro/con Gush debate - now we just re-litigate how much better the format would be with Gush vs how much worse it would be with Gush forever and that will really be fun /s
@Smmenen why do you think that this strengthened Mentor? Were storm decks competing well and fueled by Gush, G Probe? Or is it more herding, in that without those cards, there are fewer ways to build the deck?