Joined
Last Online

Signature

@TeamTuskMTG on Twitter
Sometimes caster on Tusk Talk

Recent Posts
posted in Vintage Community read more

I normally put a pile of zombies out before I riffle shuffle my beta shops deck.

posted in Vintage Strategy read more

@ten-ten said in Best way to brew a deck:

@cuikui said in Best way to brew a deck:

@rat3de To cast Crop Rotation you have to sac a land, when it get MM it's a 2 for 1. When Death's Shadow is counter it's a 1 for 1.

Technically, MM a DS is still 2 for 1 since they used a mana source to cast DS.

They also made a token and got +1 mana for delve. (ducks)

posted in Vintage News read more

Great retrospective and some fair and balanced postulating! For old people like me it's a good memory refresher. An interesting follow up might be the 5 most important moments in Type I's history (assuming Type I starts from January 1994).

in no particular order

*Removal of power level errata from Time Vault
As you pointed out, exacerbated by Tezz win conditions could now be condensed down to less than The Deck levels.

*The Creation of Planeswalkers
Paradigm shifting card type that in a sense obsoleted the big midrange creature end game. Jace and Tezz in particular being wincons and engines all in one card.

*Black Monday (June 20, 2008)
Rather than some of the surgical restrictions the DCI takes a machete to the stock 4x playsets found in many blue strategies. This is the last time they take such a howitzer to any format really.

*The bifurcation of Type I and II's B&R lists
A key change that would make future decisions far more sensible. This obviously had to happen at some point but when it did it was pretty earth shaking. Vise Age was dominating Type II but the Vise was holding Necro and the Deck somewhat in check in Type I.

Phyrexian Mana & Delve
I tossed these two together as 2 of the bigger design "mistakes" that not only mule fucked Type I but also made Legacy miserable for almost 2 years in aggregate. Phyrexian "Free" and Delve "Free" went together like peanut butter and jelly, with Dack and Token Spammers as the bread. IMO a few cards died for the sins of these design errors.

The printing of Force of Will
90% of the people playing type I now don't know what a world is like without this card or it's cousins. Maybe more than 90%. But it's printing fundamentally changed how type I was played. How decks were built. It forever changed the bluffing and going for it subgame in Magic.

Anyway, just some ideas for a top 5.

posted in Vintage Strategy read more

@cuikui said in Best way to brew a deck:

@rat3de To cast Crop Rotation you have to sac a land, when it get MM it's a 2 for 1. When Death's Shadow is counter it's a 1 for 1.

Can't you just Misstep their Misstep? Or if necessary Misstep the Misstep that Missteps your Misstep?

posted in Off-Topic read more

@john-cox said in Why do you think we have a restricted list?:

@nedleeds
Thanks, I never had any idea any of that had ever happened.
Do you think that when Channel was reprinted in SoK it had anything to do with Type 2 becoming Standard around then? -I do realize that there was very little broken stuff you could do with Channel in that era's Standard.

Maybe, October 1995 Type II is 4th, IA, Chronicles, FE. So Tinder Wall go, untap channel, Fireball/Disintegrate/Lava Burst for 20 leaving you at 1. Orcish Lumberjack also could do the same. 1 Channel is still legal then for 2 months maybe, it gets banned when Zuran Orb gets restricted.

I definitely played Type II that year, Vise / Mine decks were pretty popular especially post Ice Age. Necro wasn't recognized right away as busted because so many decks played 4 Vise (Tower was restricted). When Vise got hit that Winter all I remember for the next 2 years was getting Hymned, Strip Mined and Necro'ed.

July '97 4th and all its mistakes are gone replaced with 5th (and Necro again!).

posted in Off-Topic read more

@john-cox said in Why do you think we have a restricted list?:

@nedleeds
Do you mean to say Channel was banned because of T2 or T1.5? I can see a lot of early restrictions happening because of 1.5, I have never heard of one in T1 because of T2.
If this is the case, could you explain why? I've never played T2 and I don't understand how this would interact.

Oh yeah, in the dark past Type II had a restricted list bound to Type I. There were actually restricted cards in Type II. Like Channel, Mind Twist, etc.. Mind Twist was absolutely banned because of Type I, Channel may have been a confluence of both formats wanting to be rid of the 'Oops!'. Keep in mind we are pre-Force of Will.

I specifically recall the Mind Twist debates raging on usenet. The Channel debate I don't remember quite as well other than I think it happened first, I could dig around and refresh my memory.

I was mostly posting to point out that @thecravenone was wrong even though I still love him like a brother.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@fsecco said in [RNA] Cinder Lash:

@nedleeds said in [RNA] Cinder Lash:

My preference is selection bias I guess.

I'm glad we're finally understanding each other.

Sure but to say players have preferences and get salty about it and call it selection bias is almost as big a waste of text as my reply here. No shit.

posted in Off-Topic read more

@thecravenone said in Why do you think we have a restricted list?:

@stormanimagus said in Why do you think we have a restricted list?:

I want to pose the simple question: Why do you think that Vintage has a restricted list?

WotC wanted a format where everything that could be legal would be legal. No true bans, so a restriction is the only way to reign in power-level.

alt text

But this wasn't always true (gets up out of rocking chair). For example Mind Twist and later Channel were outright banned in 1996. It still isn't true for Shahrazad and formerly Divine Intervention both of which are banned. Actually I think Shahrazad was already banned in the first event I played at that had a print out of the restricted list. I side more with @Smmenen here (ouch!) even back then the overwhelming purpose, even in the old days, was to ensure a reasonable spectrum of decks in a competitive setting. When Mind Twist was legal, even as a 1 of, the DCI felt that deck construction and in game tactics were largely centered around this 1 card. Channel being banned may have had to do more with the mixing of the newly created Type II format but it had detractors in Type I circles as well. They don't always get it right in some peoples views (mine included).

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

These hatebear and hatebear-like discussions are really just becoming tedious displays of selection bias.

What is a hatebear like discussion?

We have Leovold, Kambhal now Lavinia. While I recognize they pale in comparison to eternal powerhouse Tacotli Honor Guard they are examples of cards I'd rather have seen symmetric. Since around Thalia 1.0 it's been trending this way with some exceptions like SotL, Containment Priest and Red Eidolon.

I would prefer cards that make the deck builder create the shell of the deck around a taxing / punishing constraint rather than just shuffle them into the same tired 4xforce, 4xskillstep, 4xPreordain, Nx Blue Restricted 45 card stack. My preference is selection bias I guess.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

Echoing the sentiment on Lavinia is WotC just done with symmetric hate effects? Not that it's likely with this card but the Blue Stew (tm) just co-opts the cards into their sideboards. Like Kambahl which would be a great core creature in a "new" deck it just becomes a boring hoser in a PO mirror.

RIP Gaddock Teeg and Thalia