Also you can put me on record saying I'll snap run shops rather than play serum visions. That card is awful and is the reason I refuse to play modern.
Posts made by diophan
RE: SMIP Podcast #63: "Where Do We Go From Here?"
RE: Eternal Extravaganza 6 Metagame Report
@p3temangus Click the link at the bottom of the post, go to the "Players and Wins" tab, and do a find on "tokens". To answer one of your questions: there were 3 Paradoxical Mentor lists playing tokens and not gush, along with Jeremy Beaver's list playing gush and not tokens.
Eternal Extravaganza 6 Metagame Report
88 players signed up for some vintage in Baltimore last Sunday. We would like to thank Michael Caffrey and Tales of Adventure for the tournament series and providing the information necessary for the metagame report. Also thank you to Calvin Hodges for prize support and awesome commentary. For anyone who missed it, the vod is available on twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/129764439
Nick DiJohn took down the tournament through a stacked east coast top 8.
- Nick DiJohn - Car Shops
- Hank Zhong - Sylvan Mentor
- Jeremy Beaver - Hydra Leovold Gush
- Charlie Welsch - Ravager Stax
- Joe Brennan - Jeskai Mentor
- Mike Herbig - Jeskai Mentor
- Roland Chang - Sylvan Mentor
- Jonathan Suarez - Mentor Silence
Other consisted mostly of Fish decks. Outcome decks without Oath or Mentor were placed in Combo. Paradoxical Mentor was placed in Big Blue.
As expected, the battle of positioning between shops and gush continued. A full 75% of the top 8 was gush decks. Delving a bit deeper, Hank and Roland were the only players on Sylvan Mentor, which was very well positioned in a meta light on Combo decks (a poor matchup). Mentor Silence had a very poor conversion rate into the top8, likely owing to being unfavorable in the mirror and a lack of Outcome decks to prey upon. Jeremy Beaver's list is quite spicy, running his favorite critter Managorger Hydra.
Shops was underrepresented in the overall metagame but had the highest winrate in the tournament, as well as taking down the tournament. The lists were mostly split between Car and Foundry Shops variants. Charlie Welsch's Ravager Stax list is another beast entirely. It is refreshing to see a variety of lists being played.
RE: SMIP Podcast #63: "Where Do We Go From Here?"
Thanks for the podcast Stephen and Kevin. I have only listened to the general section so far.
Perhaps this question went unasked because it has been previously covered, but the announcement made me wonder if WOTC cares about the results from unsanctioned vintage tournaments. Specifically, do they care about results more than secondarily through any negative "feedback from the community" that they might generate?
What prompted this question is the sentence from the B&R announcement "However, we have a large data set [tournament, not data set] coming with the European Eternal Weekend Vintage Championship at the beginning of April." My immediate reaction was that Eternal Extravaganzas are roughly the size of EW: Europe last year. Does WOTC care about what happened yesterday in Baltimore?
Personally, I found "[f]or Vintage, data is often difficult to gather" a bit laughable since there is very detailed data being handed to them on a platter. Do they know it exists? It seems a sad potential state of affairs if the top eights of two Eternal Weekends a year are going to determine what cards are restricted or unrestricted. Note that last year @stsung and @Thiim asked Bazaar of Moxen for access to every decklists to make a metagame report but their request was denied.
RE: MTGO February 2017 Power 9 Challenge
I think people would gain more insight from this if they didn't think in terms of binaries (shops is too good, restrict gush, etc.). Performance needs to be understood in the context of the expected and actual metagame.
IMO the evolution of the metagame and the results from these snapshots should be thought of more like a stochastic process/Markov chain.
If you look at the daily results leading into the P9, there was a larger than usual proportion of paradoxical and oath decks. Assuming people aren't operating on anything higher than the 0th or 1st level, this rewards people playing something like Mentor Silence and disincentivizes shops. To be clear, Mentor Silence can play Stony Silence in the maindeck, which does huge damage to a large portion of the metagame, can FOW/MBT a turn 1 play, and has access to powerful white sideboard cards for Oath and Dredge. Also note that gush decks were near an all time low, so they were less incentivized to cannibalize themselves for the mirror. Shops was put in an awkward position where they have a hard time dealing with the mirror and token generators (ballista), being able to run null rod to deal with paradoxical, and beating Saheeli Oath.
Contrast this to the last P9. Coming into the tournament there was a ton of Mentor Silence. Paradoxical hadn't been doing well because it was being oppressed by this deck. This scares people away from the achetype, and the field was such that shops was allowed to crush with ballista. Even though Mentor Silence ran two null rod effects, they aren't Leyline of the Null and it's in no way guaranteed they can resolve with such a small manabase while being taxed.
RE: MTGO February 2017 Power 9 Challenge
@jhport12 That said, if you're interested in doing something like this we have/should have all the data publicly available.
MTGO February 2017 Power 9 Challenge
As a signifcant improvement over last month, we had 63 players register for this month's Power 9 Challenge. Congratulations to ecobaronen for taking down the tournament!
ecobaronen - Jeskai Mentor Silence
ReneRandrup - Jeskai Mentor
Call1Me1Dragon - Leovold BUG Fish w/ Painful Truths
Blululululu - Jeskai Mentor Silence
kleuter - Jeskai Mentor Silence
jacksad - Omni Oath
thehello32 - Grixis Tezz
Becks84 - Foundry Ravager Shops
Dishonorable 17th place mention: Myself
I think the most interesting dynamic of this tournament was the relative positioning of Ravager Shops, Outcome, and Mentor. Walking Ballista has given Ravager Shops a significant advantage over Mentor. However, if Shops pushes too hard in this direction they can fall prey to a traditionally strong matchup, combo. Shops may have spheres, but Outcome has an expansive manabase and Hurkyl's (which notably does not work against Stony Silence). Although we can always complain about sample sizes, this is supported by the archetype vs. archetype winrate percentages.
Note: Other includes 2 Leovold BUG Fish decks, 1 Null Rod Merfolk deck, and 1 goblins deck. The two BUG Fish players did fairly well at this P9. Big Blue was completely encompassed by Outcome (both Paradoxical Mentor and Paradoxical Storm). Paradoxical Oath was listed separately under Oath. If you want to play around with the data on various combinations of tags, save a copy of googledoc to your account and change the Include/Exclude tags fields (B24-B25).
EDIT: Updated a couple tags based on the published decklists. Will update screenshots when I get home.
RE: Notes on the State of Vintage, Jan 2017
Let's pretend there are 3 decks in vintage:
Paper (big blue/blue control)
Each has a favorable (60% matchup) against the one you would expect. You can argue against my assumptions but that's not the point.
If everyone acts rationally the metagame reaches an equilibrium of equal representation and equal winrate. The problem is that 60% of the metagame refuses to play Rock. To quote Chris Pikula from two seasons ago "Why are you playing vintage if not to cast ancestral recall?"
The result of this bias is exactly what we see in the current metagame. Most of the anti-Rock people switch to Scissors because a disproportionate amount of the meta is Scissor/Paper. Rock has an overall favorable winrate because of its Scissor matchup and the lack of Paper.
I am pretty sure that Rich's point is that this state of affairs is not particularly fun for the anti-Rock players. Your guy's point is that Rock has a good winrate. There is no contradiction here. How much should we care that people don't have fun playing Rock? This gets back to @Brass-Man 's point about the philosophy of B&R policy.
RE: What are the biggest Vintage tournaments in the US?
There were 2 EEs last year:
EE4 was in Allentown/Coopersburg, PA. Considering there were 99 players it seems silly not to include it.
RE: MTGO Outside Assistance
I don't think you understand my point.
You made a general comment that you have to "hardcast stuff or resolve serenity to beat cage" in the middle of game two. Unless you made this comment at the end of the match, you are providing outside assistance, regardless of where your comment was directed. Especially since there was a cage in play for IIRC half an hour of the remaining match time. That advice is useful as long as the game is going on. Just because your advice is general does not mean it is not outside assistance.
You are making up rules as you go along to make your behavior ethical while smearing other people (including Oestrus by the way) for being provided assistance in person or via Skype. Providing less outside help than you could have is not a tenable ethical position.
It would be nice if we could all just agree that streams like Rich's, Oestrus's, and Brassman's benefit the community and part of streaming is communicating in near real time with other people. Your actions certainly imply you see the value of people streaming.