Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Vintage Community read more

@smmenen said in Brian Kelly is actually responsible for the Unrestriction of Mishra's Workshop:

@nanakini said in Brian Kelly is actually responsible for the Unrestriction of Mishra's Workshop:
I also know the format has been around here for a long time and it's still alive, but I think it's probably very difficult for new players to get in and stay, because as soon as the excitement from playing such powerful cards wears off, there is not much left (at least for me).

Really? There isn't much left? How about the most complex and intricate lines of play offered any format?

Vintage is not a friendly format for new players, but that's because it's the deepest format. I enjoy Old School formats immensely, but they can't come close to Vintage in terms of the depth and range of the lines of play that Vintage can offer on a consistent basis. The tutoring, library manipulation, draw and cantripping make Vintage an enormously skillful format, and quite punishing for dabblers or novices.

What does Vintage offer after you get used to the power level? It offers only the most intricate lines of play with the starkest deck choices of any constructed format. The separation between decks like Dredge, Dark Petition Storm, Ravager Shop Aggro, and Oath, to take but 4 examples, could not be more stark, and that starkness can't be found in other formats in combination with the depth of the lines of play offered.

I'm going to address this so that there is no misunderstanding. Perhaps my statement came off as too general, but I meant it very subjectively. That's why I put the "(at least for me)" in the brackets there. I agree that Vintage, generally speaking, has a lot to offer and a really good Vintage match feels far superior to anything else in magic.

I've been playing pretty much all the archetypes (or pillars, if you want) in Vintage and I've enjoyed all the "good stuff" Vintage has to offer. Seeing the "arrogant" blue mage's face twitch when they see Bazaar T1 or Workshop->Trinisphere is fun (for me)! Slowly baiting countermagic, setting up with cantrips and patiently waiting for that Duress so that eventually you are able to slip the critical spell through in a "calm before the storm" fashion is very satisfying, too! And of course I know how good it feels when you kept a risky hand with Oath, no Orchard and your opponent goes Workshop->Inspector/Ravager.

One thing I would point out is that for me (subjectively speaking), Vintage can't deliver those really good Vintage matches on a consistent basis (we disagree here), at least not anymore. Of course, we could speculate why that is? And there is certainly a whole range of possibilities which could explain that, specifically for my case. But, seeing as lots of people are unhappy about the current state of Vintage and seeing arguments being brought up which sound very familiar to me, it feels like there is something in common.

I would say that the ratio of really good, close and interactive matches versus the matches where players are essentially taking turns in blowing out their opponents is a little bit off. Vintage always had this interesting and scary feeling that someone can chain lots of broken things together and win out of nowhere and it's something I've always enjoyed and loved the format for. But when the broken things happen with too much consistency, it takes over and becomes the race of who can do that more quickly (taking away the interaction in the process and trading it for speed). Also, one of the best ways to win this race is winning the die roll.

Please, keep in your mind that this is my opinion only. I'm not saying that things should change to accomodate my thinking and what I personally would find more enjoyable. I know that there are lots of people who enjoy Vintage specifically for what I've just said and that's perfectly fine. Because it's also a question of perception, which is very subjective and I'm no judge and jury.

posted in Vintage Community read more

Very interesting discussion. I thought I'd share few words here as I've been playing and following Vintage for a long time. I know there are lots of knowledgable and skillful people posting here. I'm really not looking for any kind of argument and I'm not trying to prove anyone's point here. I'm just bringing my own perspective from an amateur point of view.

I used to own power on paper and play in events, but eventually I stopped (multiple reasons). Later on, I got back with MTGO, but ultimately (and sadly) I've stopped playing Vintage there, too. There has always been a drive for Vintage inside me, but I would find it really hard to continue playing for a long period of time, being still very passionate about it. Recently, when I was playing other formats (having surprising amount of fun), I was thinking about why it is like that. I still remember the time I played few moxen and recall/lotus for the 1st time in my life and I still remember my hands shaking as it felt incredibly powerful and really magical. I felt like a really powerful mage.

The thing is, as time passed, I got used to play with such powerful cards (especially on MTGO where you can cast millions of recalls a day in a competitive match). And the excitement from casting and playing with such powerful cards shifted to something else. It was mostly the question of "do I really have fun and do BOTH players feel entertained in a really good, close and balanced match?" or "is it just one of us doing broken things, feeling good about it while goldfishing the most broken deck they can build with some variance in terms of who is more lucky and get to do that every given match"? I have to say that for me, the answer was the latter. I wasn't thinking that much about it, until I started to play magic more recently again, in different formats, having different perspective and also as I got older, the way I value my free time has changed drastically (I'm over 30).

Recently I had a spike of a feeling that I might want to check Vintage again, but in the current state of the metagame, I just know that I would be able to play for few months perhaps and then I'll go away again, so there is no point for me buying into it again.

I know that people feel very strongly about this. I absolutely do respect that people want to play with as many cards as possible (what Hrishi said few comments above) and they have lots of money in that as well. That's why I've chosen to leave the format myself rather then whine on forums and struggle having fun playing Vintage. But I also absolutely agree and understand what Brian Kelly is saying. For me, personally, something like lots of restrictions across the whole field would have to happen to open up the format a bit again.

If I wanted to come back to Vintage today, I'd have literally just 1 deck as an option to play right now (Jeskai Mentor - yes, I'm a blue player) to stay competitive. The drive for Vintage from playing powerful and restricted cards is diminished and I'm interested in more balanced/competitive and interactive gameplay (my definition of interaction would be that both players get to cast as many spells as possible and the outcome is determined by a small margin and strategical decisions - I will add that I still value and enjoy fighting the prison/gy strategies and they absolutely should stay in the format). I understand the hate people might feel towards something like a "Modern Vintage Highlander with moxen" and they are interested in doing broken things with very old and powerful cards they don't get to play anywhere else. That's totally legitimate and that's why I'm currently playing other formats. I also know the format has been around here for a long time and it's still alive, but I think it's probably very difficult for new players to get in and stay, because as soon as the excitement from playing such powerful cards wears off, there is not much left (at least for me). I wish I could feel differently about this.