Best posts made by rikter
posted in Vintage Community read more

@Winterstar said:

Is this the thread for the betting pool of what card the league campaigns for restriction this season?

Itll probably be dark petition, it seems likely that a bunch of vintage dilettantes will find a way to bitch and moan about it. Rich Shay and Steve Menendian are excluded from that statement.

I mean, I know the community here is eagerly awaiting g Sam Black's opinion of the format.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@Soly said:

My biggest issue with this format is that they view asthetics higher than gameplay.

I want to play a format like this; I don't want to buy old fetchlands/etc when I own new ones, just because of the asthetics of it.

Same issue I have with Old School.

A big part of the Old School experience, for me, is seeing all kinds of older cards that have been since outclassed, in all their original glory. I like that the format makes them playable again, and for me allowing all kinds of reprints just destroys 99% of the reason to play in the first place, which is to see these iconic cards in their original form. The art and overall aesthetics are the driving force of the format I think, way more than the game play itself (though this is a lot of fun too). Most tournaments feature alcohol; my experience has been that I don't particularly care about the outcomes of my games and matches so long as I get to spend an afternoon bullshitting with folks as passionate about the classic cards as me, and seeing sweet cards! 7th edition City of Brass is not sweet. Neither are Ravnica Birds, or the alternate artwork on Wrath of God, or any number of cards that they changed.

Seeing these reprint cards get played at events really just takes my experience down many notches, they destroy the feeling that you have jumped into a time machine. It's just so jarring. Issues with the aesthetic standards are the most common complaint/divergence in understanding that I see regarding these types of formats, maybe the above can help explain why these rules exist, and why I feel they are 100% necessary when talking about throwback formats. Another minor consideration is that a first print only policy makes it easier to at a glance determine if a card is legal or not.

At least in the US, Oldschool doesn't have to be backbreaking, since they allow Revised edition cards and also Fallen Empires, which can help fill out decks because of the pump knights and hymn.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

They're not gonna stop until we're all playing decks with 20 creatures

posted in Vintage Community read more

The whole thing seems very simple to me. Misstep needs to be banned, because it is a trash card that results in the wholesale avoidance of the 1cmc slot and adds nothing. It is the ultimate circle jerk card and it wrecks diversity. Mentor needs to go as well, because it chokes out all of the other creature strategies. Other than that? No changes. People managed to beat shops when it had 4x trinisphere. People managed to beat shops when it had 4x chalice. I could see restricting ballista at some point in the future, but really that's it.

It's comical to me to hear people arguing that shops is warping the format. Shops is eminently beatable, there are a ton of hate cards that have applications in other matchup, and the deck just loses to itself far more often than mentor.

Imagine a scenario where you can only hit either mentor or shops. What do you think the format looks like if you keep mentor? It will look the same. The same decks that are ridiculously outclassed are still ridiculously outclassed. If you ditch mentor and keep shops as is, you might actually see some new things pop up. Hitting mentor and misstep would go a long way towards opening The format upbagain.

posted in Workshops read more

If my only T1 is revoker in the dark, Id have to think hard about even keeping it in the first place

posted in Vintage Community read more

Could we please refer to him as Joe Bogaard? We already have a Joe B and hes a world apart from the guy were talking about

posted in Vintage Community read more

My preference is to make them legal when they are legal in sanctioned play. I prefer to maintain as many links as possible to sanctioned play, and divergences in the card pool are a big enough break that I would not play in a tournament where they were allowed.

The other issue for me is that it can be awkward enough dealing with proxies of the obvious cards, let alone cards with unfamiliar art and walls of text.

posted in Vintage Community read more

This is like Magic racism haha.

Cletus: "You should see on the internet people upset about Lodestone Golem, tryina say that shops aint takin over the meta, them workshops is 18% of the format!"

Rufus: "Hell, you should hear em tryin to say that theres all different shops! That there aint just one workshop deck but a whole bunch 'o diffrent 'uns"

Cletus: "Aw hell, I can't tell em apart, all them workshop decks just look the same to me right? A deck that plays lodestone is a deck that plays lodestone, them shoppers tryina talk about diversity...theyre all the same in my book"

Rufus: "Only good shops is a restricted shops, what my pappy always said"

I surely will not be supporting the Vagina Super League anytime soon, this is the second time now that after some high profile bitching a marquis shops piece gets hit.

posted in Vintage Community read more

I think using MODO data is a bad idea for B/R decisions in paper.

Maybe I am wrong here, but isn't workshops one of the cheaper decks to build on modo? I mean, modo is the place where card availability has turned friggin Misdirection into a $93 card. That's insanity!

But going back to point one: there is no denying workshops is a strong deck, but if you have a strong deck that is also one of the cheapest decks to make, doesn't that seem like a recipe for such high representation? Given the huge disparity between card availability on modo vs paper, is it really reasonable to draw conclusions about paper based on data from a different environment? Doesn't modo kind of cut out some decks like bomberman just because you can't shortcut?

Modo to paper seems like apples to oranges on some level. Adding VSL to the mix results in a bastardized version of the format that should have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on ANYTHING to do with paper vintage.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@msg67183 said:

This is Nature's Claim 5-8 in Dredge's Sideboard. It hits Leyline of the Void and costs one mana, two things Abrupt Decay cannot do.

I probably wouldnt play this in dredge, Id rather run serenity and pay the extra mana. Current dredge board is:
4x Decay
4x Serenity
4x Ingot Chewer
3x Whispmare

I prefer the evoke guys to natures claim, they dont get misstepped and being able to trigger bridges is a great way to win through hate like priest or cage

posted in Official Tournament Results read more

My favorite nonsense list to date was the guy who registered 59 Forests and one Lost in the Woods at GP New Jersey (Brainstorm mat). He insta dropped but I thought he should have run a few rounds since the deck has the chance to win vs creature based lists via decking/concession.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@Soly said:

@bop alright. Ill calm down. I can understand your point, but trust me, I am just stating what at least 90% of the people at EW believe as well. I doubt people like Rich Shay, Joe Brennen or @Montolio will comment because theyre upstanding non-dramatic people but trust me when I say I am only echoing EVERYONES opinion.

I gotta go with Soly on this one. I was there, and I can tell you for a fact that his views do echo the (vaaast) majority opinion. And that's not just players, mind you, it's a pantheon of stakeholders at all levels of the event. Not gonna get into the names, but the list is expansive.

Fun fact: Daniel Chang made a post on one of the Vintage FB groups about how Joseph Bogaard was gonna be associated with and doing articles and all that crap, so I guess he is now PM's new teammate.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@Vnayin You hit on something important here, which is increased reporting of GRV's. Problem is, Vintage is very gentlemanly, with players who in my opinion are happy to generally self police unless the game state gets really corrupted. I think that there is a community aversion to hitting people up for GRV's when it's something small that can be easily corrected while maintaining the proper game state, and that this aversion is probably the biggest hurdle to avoiding situations like we had this year. Given just what we saw, from Jo Bogaard, I think it's pretty safe to assume that there was a lot that didn't get caught and was probably hand waved away by his opponents. A single opponent raising their hand and calling for the judge earlier in the day could have entirely altered the course of the event. But who wants to be that guy?

posted in Vintage Tournaments read more

@Islandswamp Let me know if theres anything I can do to help, just PM me on the site or via fb (its Hunter) Im quite certain something can be done.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@jester dacardworld, too notch guys

posted in Vintage Strategy read more

@BusOfTheUndead I think part of the reason the online meta is so different is because Undiscovered Paradise doesn't work properly so they have had to take the deck in a different direction.