Posts made by Smmenen

@BazaarOfBaghdad said in Vintage Restricted List Discussion:

Looking at the top 8 postings of the 7/22 Vintage challenge, I see 3 Shops lists, 4 Mentor list (1 Esper, 2 Jeskai, 1 Jeskai PO), and a UB Dark Depths combo list (eschewing Solemnity, interestingly).

How many more weeks of a 2-deck metagame will we get?

Oh, but everyone who points this out is "wrong", remember? We just haven't given the metagame enough time to develop. We are only the beginning of a metagame cycle where people are developing cool, new interesting decks are going to shake up the metagame, remember?

I mean, it's ONLY been three months give it some time right?

@desolutionist said in Cards to unrestrict:

Last but not least, this deck isn't dredge. It's flexible and attacks from more than one angle. If more Mentor players start bringing in Cage against me, I can adjust my sideboard plan accordingly and either take advantage of their tactic or counter it.

Firstly, Dredge doesn't just attack from one angle. The DD/ Dredge decks attack from two or more different angles.

Second, there is a kind of circular quality to these back-and-forths.

I say: Card X creates difficulty for your deck.

You (not you Shawn, but whomever I'm talking to) say: But my deck can defeat Card X. All I have to do is A, B, and C.

I say: Yes, I realize you can do all of that. It sounds like a decent plan, and it mitigates the damage that card X does to you. But it's still not ideal for you. You would be better off if players didn't use card X against you.

And you say: But I can still defeat players who use Card X.

And, I say: I never said you couldn't. Just pointing out that it takes away some of your natural advantages/strengths...

And so on, and on ad infinitum.

No Dredge decks wants to face gaveyard hate. No combo deck using lots of free spells wants to face Sphere effects. No Paradoxical Outcome deck wants to face Null Rod effects. No Workshop decks wants to face artifact hosers. And no Gifts deck wants to face Grafdigger's Cage.

Does that mean those decks can't beat those tactics? Of course not. There is rarely such a thing as a complete silver bullet in Magic. Going back as far as when White Weenie was able to Disenchant Moat, there is rarely a card that can't be overcome. Dredge can beat Rest in Peace. Workshops can beat Energy Flux. PO can beat Null Rod. And Gifts & Oath can beat G. Cage.

But dealing with those tactics often means unusual distortions or suboptimizing the deck in other matchups. A Dredge deck that plans for GY hate by stuffing 10 bounce spells maindeck is less consistent. That same principle applies to any deck facing any match in Magic.

If you go some strange or unusual plan to deal with the threat, that doesn't render the threat meaningless. It's very presence has fundamentally changed your deck's game plan and/or eaten up SB space, potentially making other matchups dicier.

I undersatnd that people get very defensive/touchy whenever anyone points out that there are strong tactics against their preferred strategy, and that might make it difficult to understand what I'm saying in non-hyperbolic terms, but I'm not saying your deck, whatever that might be, sucks and can't win games.

@desolutionist said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Smmenen said in Cards to unrestrict:

If PO/Thirst/Gifts decks start rising up, the Mentor/Shops decks will just pack more Stony Silence/Null Rod and other cards like that, and they'll drop back down again, much like more Dredge leads to more GY hate.

First of all, PO and TfK are pretty awful cards. They definitely aren't deserving of being lumped into with Gifts Ungiven. Second, Stony Silence doesn't do enough on its own. I only play 7 artifact mana sources.

You ignored the other part of the sentence, which said "and other cards like that."

Specifically, in the case of combating Gifts decks, Grafdigger's Cage is a custom made hoser.

It's the single best anti-Gifts card ever printed, possibly. Since it stops Recoup effects like Snapcaster/JVP, and Tinker/Will simultaneously. If Gifts starts doing very well, you're going to be facing Cage much more often.

@ChubbyRain said in Cards to unrestrict:

@desolutionist Steve has his narrative. If he believes that Gifts and Thirst decks can be crushed simply by running a couple of Stony Silences or other hate in the SB of Mentor, it allows him to maintain that the format continues to be dominated by two decks and that the Gush restriction didn't accomplish anything.

He's wrong. A well-designed and well-piloted Outcome deck can easily beat Stony Silence. But he didn't listen to me before in chat and I doubt he'll start listening to me now.

Because that's a complete misrepresentation of what I said. I never once said that Stony Silence "simply crushes" PO/Thirst decks.

What I actually said in chat is that the matchup of PO/Thirst decks against Stony/Null Rod was "far from hopeless. It's just fighting against crosswinds or uphill battle/ pick your metaphor."

In other words, PO/Thirst decks can defeat Stony Silence decks, it's just an uphill battle.

There is a huge difference between these three sentences:

1. Outcomes decks can easily beat Stony Silence

2. Outcomes decks have an uphill battle against Stony Silence

3. And Outcome decks get crushed by Stony Silence.

You assert (1), but you claimed I asserted (3). My actual position is (2).

In any case, there is more evidence for (3) than there is (1). The most recent Vintage Challenge results has PO with a 20% win percentage against Mentor (with a very small sample size).

And, perhaps most importantly, despite many of the best players in the field playing PO/Thirst in these challenges and the NYSE, these decks penetration into the top 8 is very poor relative to the skill level and representation in the field. I mean, consider the fact of how good the Drain Tendrils pilots are, and the fact that zero percent of them made Top 8 at the NYSE, while all three of the Jeskai Mentor decks played Stony Silence. The only PO deck that made top 8 was one that, according to the pilot, was built from the list I played at Vintage Champs last year. But zero of the PO/Thirst decks made top 8, despite the firepower their pilots brought into the room.

I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from playing whatever they want, but PO decks are going to perform even worse than their already subpar performance at EW, since EW will have a much greater than usual representation of Null Rod.

Keep up the good work with Gifts, Shawn. Only time and repeat performances will prove people wrong.

I'm not saying that Gifts can't do well, nor that PO/Thirst can't do well. I'm just saying that if those decks start to do better, the metagame will pack more hate for them, like Cage and more Null Rod effects, making them weaker again.

No matter how well you design or plan for these tactics, they undermine your deck's strengths.

Right now, the fact that very few people actually play Gifts is a big advantage for Shawn. I hope Shawn continues to do well, since he seems to enjoy playing Gifts, and I like Gifts as a card. But let's not kid ourselves. It's extremely unlikely that Gifts will become a sustained, tier 1 choice in Vintage over a long period of time without changes to the Banned and Restricted list or new printings. I'm open to being proven wrong, but does anyone really disagree? Do you really think we are going to see Vintage metagames with 20% Gifts decks and 60% win rate over multiple months in this reality anytime this year? I'll take a reasonable wager from anyone who would like to bet against me on that. Just PM me.

@JACO said in Cards to unrestrict:

I'm not saying this isn't a good deck, I just don't think it would be dominant. Vintage has so many tools for combating these types of decks these days.

I said you would start with the deck shell in the aforementioned article, not use it as printed. You would want to dramatically lower the mana curve, and will not play 4 Gifts (1-2 will suffice at that point when you have 4 copies of Flash), because Gifts is more of a game-ender in that scenario. The consistency and power with 4 Flash and 3-4 Show and Tell is much more powerful than any combo deck we're currently seeing in Vintage at the moment.

But if Show and Tell were really that good, it would see more play than it currently does.

And, I don't think that combining Flash and Show and Tell generates some untapped synergy that really makes it significantly better than either a Show and Tell deck or a Flash deck is individually. There may be some synergy there (in weakening specific hate, much like DD/Dredge combo), but there are costs as well. The Flash deck I posted earlier is significantly more consistent and faster than your deck is with Flash/Rector. And you lose insane cards like Pacts.

I'm not sure how unrestricting Flash does anything to change the power and effectiveness of unrestricted Mentor decks (and the corresponding metagame),

The idea of unrestricting Flash is an alternative way to deal with a metagame that is strangled by Shops/Mentor. It doesn't do anything about Mentor directly, except create a deck that could compete with it. Unrestricting Flash either creates new decks or strengthens an existing, marginal strategy. I don't think anyone can dispute that from a purely logical perspective. The issue isn't whether unrestricting Flash would do that, the question is whether the costs of having that kind of deck outweigh the benefits.

I understand this sentiment, and don't think giving the format a more busted combo deck is a great solution.

As I said, I think the issue is whether the costs of having a Flash deck outweigh the benefits of another angle in the format. Reasonable people can disagree on that.

Some people might reasonably argue that having another angle of attack in the format would increase the diversity of the format at not much cost.

And others would emphasize, as you do, the games that are spoiled by having a silly combo go off.

Where people fall on that line depend on their tolerance for combos and a slight increase in Turn 1-3 kills, and the % or frequency of games "spoiled" or "unfun" as a result.

But what I don't think is fair or reasonable is some claim that the deck you outlined above would be some kind of unbeatable format killer. That, I doubt. In fact, were Flash unrestricted, I'd be shocked if your deck, or some variant of it, were more than 15% of Top 8s six months later.

People are doing well enough with Outcome and Gifts decks, and frankly are still in the beginning stages of innovating and adjusting those to compete with Mentor and 9Sphere.dec Workshop variants.

Eh, I don't think that some new "innovation" or brew is going to change the fundamental structure of this format at this point. It's been 3 months since the restrictions, and Magic metagames, especially on MTGO, are capable of changing overnight. If something in the format was going to fundamentally change - if a Gifts deck, for example, was really going to break out, I think it would have done so by now.

There is virtually no precedent for tier 1 breakout decks in Vintage 3 months after a restriction that is not more a result of a new printing.

If PO/Thirst/Gifts decks start rising up, the Mentor/Shops decks will just pack more Stony Silence/Null Rod and other cards like that, and they'll drop back down again, much like more Dredge leads to more GY hate.

I don't think we are in the 'beginning' stages of any adjustments. I rather think we are at the tail end of a period of adjustment, and the format is pretty settled at this point, except for any adjustments Hour of Devastation may contribute.

The point of my comment is that Mentor is likely the best kill condition in Vintage, by a long shot, and simply adding an unfun and busted combo deck to the format isn't going to do anything to cure the ills of Vintage, and bring back people in to the fold who are sick of it at the moment. The card Mentor itself has done far more to push out other decks and strategies than any perceived damage that Gush or Gitaxian Probe ever did.

I agree with that last part, of course, but the argument for unrestricting Flash, which I'm not entirely persuaded off, looks beyond the eventual restriction of Mentor. You're getting too focused on Mentor.

Once Mentor is restricted, it's likely, based upon our currently trajectory, that we'll see more restrictions as a result of this path. The idea of unrestricting Flash, or, more plausibly, Windfall/Bargain, is to try to boost marginal strategies to try to compete with dominant decks rather than continue on this current cycle of endless restrictions triggered by prior, unnecessary restrictions.

The reason that Gush shouldn't have been restricted is that it wasn't necessary; Mentor was the problem, not Gush. And the main argument that restricting Gush was not some harmless event, even if it was wrong, is that it makes other restrictions more likely, not less. So, after Mentor is restricted, without Gush there to keep PO decks in check, it's more likely that PO will get restricted, and on beyond that. If Gush hadn't been restricted, I think Gush and PO would have existed in a decent equilibrium, much like the February P9 challenge metagame.

If I'm right, that restricting Gush triggers multiple future restrictions that may not have been necessary, then one possible alternative route is unrestrictions to create metagame balance and more diversity, not restrictions. Once Mentor is restricted, this is going to be a debate that will need to be had. I'm simply projecting beyond that point, and trying to address it proactively.

@Serracollector said in Cards to unrestrict:

If Flash is "OK" to unrestrict to make a new archetype that would be of equal power to Mud and Mentor, then why not Channel and Balance? Turn 1 these are all of "equal" power and would give the same results of new archetypes if your not worried about more turn 1 wins/blowouts @Smmenen ?

I've already said this, but it bears repeating, I don't think the Vintage format should have a deck that can consistently win on Turn 1. But I do think that the current format can bear a little bit of speeding up. I don't think having a deck that wins, undisrupted, a slightly higher percentage of the time on Turns 1-3 than current decks would be a bad thing, if it measurably improved the diversity in the metagame. Closer historical baselines for Vintage would be fine.

I also said that the two cards I'd start with unrestricting are Windfall and/or Bargain, and "seriously consider" Flash, behind those two. So, I'm not on the "let's unrestrict Flash now" camp. My position is more subtle than that.

Flash is a deck that is vulnerable to very specific forms of hate that are readily available to all decks. The two main Flash creatures, Protean Hulk and Rector, don't work if Leyline is in play. Channel is not similarly vulnerable. You can do a much wider range of things with Channel, like cast Emrakul or Charbelcher.

Also, I don't think a deck designed to Balance on Turn 1 just to wipe the opponent's hand would be that good. But I do think that Balance is sufficiently obnoxious that, while it probably woudn't dominate the format, there are real risks that it is too much of a wipeout effect for creature decks, and would therefore strategically narrow, not expand, the format.

Flash is a very narrow card that would essentially create a new deck without specifically knocking anything out, and has very specific weaknesses that every deck could exploit. It appears, for example, that Pithing Needle & Leyline stop most Flash combos. From the perspective of just trying to create a new deck and improve strategic diversity, Flash is a very obvious target. The problem is that it's also probably not very fun to face and/or play against.

@ChubbyRain said in Vintage Restricted List Discussion:

I do think it's hilarious tho that so many people argued that restricting Gush would reduce the presence of Shops in the metagame. Rich Shay said that in a VSL inteview, and many others parroted it. Example: https://twitter.com/DazedYouBro/status/856521674761666563

There can be no doubt that the restriction of Gush and Probe, contrary to the claims of the pro-restriction crowd, and the DCI's expectations, has INCREASED the presence of Shops in the metagame, not reduced it. That proves, irrefutably, that Shops prevalence in Vintage had nothing to do with "Gush propping it up."

That old chestnut can be buried, forever.

@Brass-Man tweeted this article, which has several implications concerning this discussion.

I remember Chapin's article when it first came out. It got alot of acclaim, but it has very rarely (at least from my observation) been used to explain metagame dynamics since. That's because, I believe, there is more faith in market/metagame dynamics to work themselves out - to discover what's good and what's not - than information theory as a primary explanatory theory would suggest. Metagames, like markets, involve so many people trying to figure things out and get advantages, that even if the great mass of people follow recent trends, market pioneers/innovators will usually find and exploit new niches, if they can.

It only takes 1 player to innovate a new deck and win a tournament. If that player does so consistently, then I think other people would see the signal and move into that product line, to mix metaphors. The failure to do so signals to me deeper structural problems with the metagame.

I will keep saying this, it's far too early to bury any type of chestnut. Vintage moves at a glacial pace. I'm not sure if we are seeing evidence of Shops' dominance of the format in these recent metagame numbers or if we are seeing the natural evolution of skilled pilots to the formats best deck while others become tuned.

This is a gross simplification on my part, but my summary of your explanation boils down to something like this:

Shops was the major player left standing by the last restriction, and Vintage moves so slow that it will take along time for people to finally reach a new equilibrium, and find the new decks that can compete. So people are playing with what is doing well, so Shops performance feeds on itself.

And you've also made it clear that you believe the restriction of Gush would/has weakened Shops. You even repeated that in a recent thread.

I think there is an alternative, more persuasive, and more straightforward explanation for the current metagame:

Shops is kicking ass right now because 1) it's got lots of great new printings in recent years (Ballista, Vehicles, etc.) that make a resuable black lotus land even better, and 2) the restrictions weakened the competition.

That said, while I think my hypothesis or theory is clearly the operative explanation right now, and is supported by all of the available data, I admit that it is provisional, in the sense that incoming data could, over time, eventually lend more support to yours. In other words, I suppose it is possible that we could see a longer term decline of Shops as a consequence of the Gush/Probe restriction.

But I seriously doubt it. And, at some point this debate has to be put to bed.

So, I guess rather than debate this every once in a while, the question I have for you is: how much data/time do you think is required to rule out/discredit your current belief (and the belief of others, Rich, Thomas, the DCI, etc.) that restricting Gush has/would weaken Shops?

I think this is a fair question, and an important one. 2 more months of data? 3 more months of data? 6 more? At some point, if Shops continues to perform above it's pre-April 24th level, the theory that 'Gush propped up Shops' needs to be put to bed. I'm ready to put it to bed, but I'm also willing to accept that, like all theories, it's susceptible to counterfactual evidence. It just seems, at this point, like that evidence isn't ever going to arrive.

Gush put up similar numbers immediately after Lodestone's restriction. The first large event featured 6 Gush decks in the top 8 with Jeskai JVP Mentor splitting with Sylvan Mentor in the finals.

IIRC, in the first month after Lodestone's restriction, Gush was like 60% of the metagame, but settled down fairly quickly to half those numbers. So, if that pattern is going to be used to explain Shops performance right now, the Shop bump should have faded by late May. Instead, Shops numbers seem to be marginally improving since late May.

At least not during the summer, when there are much better things to do on a nice Saturday.

^ I think this is the key point. Most Vintage players are casual and if they feel a metagame is stagnant, they will avoid it, especially on a summer weekend.

I can only speak for myself, but except for popping on MTGO to prep for EW, I probably won't play Vintage Challenges much this Fall, either.

As my disagreement about DCI management of late suggest, my complaints extend into paper magic as well. In the last two major paper Vintage tournaments I've played in, Vintage Champs at EW and the NYSE, I played Thorn decks all but 4 matches, IIRC. I faced Thorns 8 out of 9 matches at Vintage Champs, and 7 out of 10 matches at NYSE (8 out of 11 if you count my ID). Unless something is done to improve the diversity of the format, this is not a Vintage experience that I would describe as optimal.

@Khahan said in SMIP # 68: Hour of Devastation Vintage Set Review:

@Smmenen said in SMIP # 68: Hour of Devastation Vintage Set Review:

Would folks find it useful if we published a table with each podcast that included our final predictions? Or would it be a disincentive to listen? Just curious.

I think a table like that would be a way to engage players like myself. I can post from work and jump online a bit here and there. But I don't have 1 1/2 to 2 hours to listen. I'm very interested in what you guys have to say and follow these threads when they are posted, but don't have any real meaningful way to engage in the content.

Yeah, I recommend listening to the podcast, like any other podcast, when you are doing other things, like driving/commuting, working out, cleaning up, cooking, etc.

The logic behind unrestricting Flash isn't that difficult to understand.

• Doing so would create a new deck & increases diversity in metagame that is now mostly just Shops, Mentor, and a bit of PO/Oath/Dredge

The reasons not to unrestrict Flash are equally easy to understand:

• Makes a deck that can potentially kill on Turn 1 with little set up or protection, making Vintage less fun or interactive.

I can understanding someone opposing the unrestriction of Gush on the latter grounds, but I can't understand how someone can't understand the former grounds. That doesn't mean we should unrestrict Flash, but it's not hard to understand "the logical reason."

A few observations about the challenge results.

Have we ever seen a Vintage challenge where Shops was more than 35% of the metagame? Because, if so, I don't remember it. I do recall however, people saying that 35% of the field is the level where people start to get concerned about a deck.

Also, at just 35% of the metagame (http://imgur.com/AfGdeWs), it was 5 of the Top 8 decks, and 9 of the Top 16. In terms of conversion, it put far more of itself at the top than the field. That's pretty insane.

I do think it's hilarious tho that so many people argued that restricting Gush would reduce the presence of Shops in the metagame. Rich Shay said that in a VSL inteview, and many others parroted it. Example: https://twitter.com/DazedYouBro/status/856521674761666563

There can be no doubt that the restriction of Gush and Probe, contrary to the claims of the pro-restriction crowd, and the DCI's expectations, has INCREASED the presence of Shops in the metagame, not reduced it. That proves, irrefutably, that Shops prevalence in Vintage had nothing to do with "Gush propping it up."

That old chestnut can be buried, forever.

As regards the attendance numbers, I expect the number of people to play in these challenges to continue to stagnate. As I feared a few months ago, having them every week dilutes the focus and reduces the marquee value of the event. Add to that a really awful Vintage metagame, it's understandable why people don't want to play Vintage right now. You'll notice I haven't played in one since I got 2nd place in the 6/17 event, and I have no plans to play in any of these for the foreseeable future. At least not during the summer, when there are much better things to do on a nice Saturday.

@JACO said in Cards to unrestrict:

Anybody who wants to unrestrict Flash, I will offer to play you for $10/game at Eternal Weekend this year if I get to play 4 copies of Flash vs. your current deck. You will regret it. The deck should not be using the kill conditions mentioned above. It should be based on the article I wrote last year, with Show and Tell. You do not rely on the graveyard, but utilize it better than anyone else. Serenity + Hurkyl's Recall makes the Workshop matchup a joke.

Having access to both Omniscience and Bargain totally changes the calculus as compared to previous iterations of Flash. Giving the best color an even faster (effective) game ending 2 mana spell at instant speed is a very, very poor idea. I'm not sure how unrestricting Flash does anything to change the power and effectiveness of unrestricted Mentor decks (and the corresponding metagame), which have 4 copies of arguably the best kill condition ever printed.

This article: http://www.eternalcentral.com/giftsweek-gifts-rector-omniscience/ ?

Here is your deck:

[Business] (36)
4 Force of Will
2 Thoughtseize
3 Cabal Therapy
1 Rebuild
1 Sensei’s Divining Top
1 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Flash
1 Tinker
3 Show and Tell
3 Academy Rector
4 Gifts Ungiven
1 Omniscience
1 Yawgmoth’s Bargain
1 Blightsteel Colossus
1 Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

[/Business] (0)

[Mana Sources] (24)
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mana Crypt
1 Sol Ring
1 Tolarian Academy
2 Ancient Tomb
4 Polluted Delta
1 Flooded Strand
1 Scalding Tarn
3 Underground Sea
2 Tundra
1 Island
1 Swamp

[/Mana Sources] (0)
[Sideboard] (15)
1 Rebuild
1 Hurkyl’s Recall
1 Energy Flux
1 Serenity
1 Rest in Peace
4 Leyline of the Void
1 Helm of Obedience
2 Mental Misstep
2 Defense Grid
1 Toxic Deluge[/Side

What nice about the deck, as you say, is that it doesn't rely on the graveyard, because you can just use Show and Tell. But it certainly wants to be able to use it's graveyard. Rector can't trigger with Leyline in play, nor can you flashback Therapy. Gifts/Will is pretty awkward as wlel.

This deck is definitely more difficult to hate out then the Flash decks I was brewing above, but it's also definitely alot less consistent in terms of being able to assemble the Flash combo. With Leyline in play, all you have to do is counter Show and Tell and your deck is largely dead in the water.

It's probably just as viable to do what Dredge often does, and bounce the hate rather than try to play around it like you do.

I'm not saying this isn't a good deck, I just don't think it would be dominant. Vintage has so many tools for combating these types of decks these days.

I'm not sure how unrestricting Flash does anything to change the power and effectiveness of unrestricted Mentor decks (and the corresponding metagame),

The idea of unrestricting Flash is an alternative way to deal with a metagame that is strangled by Shops/Mentor. It doesn't do anything about Mentor directly, except create a deck that could compete with it.

Unrestricting Flash either creates new decks or strengthens an existing, marginal strategy. I don't think anyone can dispute that from a purely logical perspective. The issue isn't whether unrestricting Flash would do that, the question is whether the costs of having that kind of deck outweigh the benefits. Specifically, whether having a new deck or improved Flash strategy in the metagame to improve the diversity in the metagame is worth the cost or risk of having a deck that can do really broken things and be generally unfun.

I did not see this article until the above post, but WOW, this article is full of unsubstantiated and factually incorrect claims.

For example:

"For Steve, Trinisphere was an acceptable restriction, as was Chalice of the Void, as was Lodestone Golem, but not Gush."

Wow, is this an inaccurate and false statement.

Just a few days before the restriction of Trinisphere, I was on record asserting that Trinisphere should not be restricted at that time:

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/9021-What-should-Wizards-Restrict.html

What do you think should be restricted and what do you think will be restricted?
Stephen Menendian (Smmenen)
Should: Goblin Welder
Will: Nothing

Then, if you go back and listen to the podcast or read the old mana drain boards, I repeatedly and vocally opposed the restriction of Chalice of the Void.

Here's just one post example of that: http://www.archive.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=48138.msg667573#msg667573

If Chalice was actually the problem, then why was it allowed to exist for 12 years? It clearly was not the problem, to the extent that there was one, or it would not have been unrestricted all this time. Except the last 12 months and the first few months of its existence, there were few calls to restrict Chalice.

I suppose publishers will publish anything these days, but there are so many unsubstantiated and factually incorrect claims in this article, it's actually shocking.

Hey y'all. This is a very useful and helpful report. Are you still planning to publish the June version?

@tsoatt

Interesting. Based on your experience, what would you say to people who are afraid that just unrestricting Flash might create problems for the format?

Would folks find it useful if we published a table with each podcast that included our final predictions? Or would it be a disincentive to listen? Just curious.

@mourningpalace said in Cards to unrestrict:

@hierarchnoble ah poop. Seemed to cool to be true

Ah, that explains why we need V Seer & Karmic Guide. Still, that's much better than the Reveillark combo, I think.

But the combo is vulnerable to pretty much everything, from Sudden Shock to Pithing Needle.

@desolutionist said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Smmenen

So you could just hulk in Mikeaus and Ballista

Yeah, makes sense. I can't think of a reason you wouldn't just do that unless you wanted to scry through your whole deck with V Seer & Guide as well. But that does seem superfluous.

It does appear we've found the most compact Hulk kill ever! Just two damn cards!

EDIT, so here is a revised list:

Theoretical Vintage Flash, 7/13/17
Stephen Menendian

40 Spells:

The combo:
4 Flash
4 Protean Hulk
2 Summoner's Pact
1 Mikaeus
1 Walking Ballista
1 V. Seer
1 Karmic Guide

Restricted Cards:
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Ponder
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Gitaxian Probe
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Brainstorm
1 Dig Through Time

Countermagic:
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Pact of Negation

Bounce:
1 Chain of Vapor

Search:
3 Preordain

20 Mana:

13 Lands
5 Moxen
Lotus
Lotus Petal

Seems awesome! I want to play this deck!

@desolutionist said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Hydra

Form of the Dragon...

I mentioned FoD in post 50, and the deck I linked to from 2007 had it in it.

@walking.dude said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Smmenen

Creature suite for combo should consider
Karmic guide
V seer
Mikesus the unhallowed
Walking ballista

Interesting.

So, after Flashing in Hulk, the combo is:

Step 1: Put Karmic Guide and Viscera Seer in play.

Step 2: Karmic Guide trigger puts Protean Hulk back into play.

Step 3: Sac Hulk to Viscera Seer to put Mikaeus and Ballista (x=0) into play.

Step 4: The Ballista will die as a statebased effect, but come back into play via Mikaeus as 1/1

Step 5: Sac Ballista as many times as needed to kill an opponent.

Bonus: you can also loop Karmic Guide with Seer to Scry through your entire deck, I believe!

Is that what you had in mind? Nicely done. That is certainly one card smaller than the Reveillark combo, if I understand that correctly.

Also, if I'm understanding this correctly, does this make Micakeus and Ballista a 2 card, 6 mana instant kill in any format?

EDIT: after 2 seconds of web searching, it does appear this is the case:

http://tappedout.net/mtg-combos/mikaeus-the-unhallowed+walking-ballista/

Insane!

Let's actually build the Flash deck.

Here's a stab:

The combo:
4 Flash
4 Protean Hulk
1 Reveillark
1 Body Double
1 Carrion Feeder
1 Mogg Fanatic
1 Body Snatcher

Restricted Cards:
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Ponder
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Gitaxian Probe
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Brainstorm
1 Treasure Cruise
1 Dig Through Time

Countermagic:
4 Force of Will
4 Mental Misstep
4 Pact of Negation

Bounce:
1 Chain of Vapor

Other:
2 Summoner's Pact

1 Other card - maybe Preordain? Or Misdirection?

20 Mana:

13 Lands
5 Moxen
Lotus
Lotus Petal

One key weakness is that if you've drawn Flash combo cards, you'll need to put them back into your deck. Maybe the last card needs to be See Beyond.

So, one question is whether this is better than Rector Flash? And, another question is whether a deck like this is actually that good in an era of Sudden Shock, etc. This combo could be easily broken up by all kinds of hate.

@DeaTh-ShiNoBi said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Smmenen You might be right about Rector Flash being more suitable to the current format than classic Hulk Flash. Grafdigger's Cage and Walking Ballista don't have anything to say about Rector. However, Bargain would still be vulnerable to Revoker.

Agreed. I left this implicit, too, but there are ways to deal with that tactically as well. If Revoker is down proactively, and names Bargain, maybe you Rector for Necro, or Form of the Dragon, or something else, like Future Sight, that is optimal in that moment. I think Jaco or someone thereabouts had a 1 Flash Rector deck they played not terribly long ago. We might look at that, or the 2008 Flash Rector decks, to get a better sense of how they were built. This guy, from 2007, even had a Null Profusion!

Chapin even suggested, at one point, 4 Phryrexian Dreadnaught and a Bob! He was most fond, however, of the Sliver kill.

This conversation is reminding me how much worse Flash is with Brainstorm restricted. You really want a lot of these cards in your deck.

But, as you suggested, there may be new kills that are in the card pool since 2008 that can be used with Protean Hulk that aren't vulnerable to Ballista/Revoker. That's a good question!

@desolutionist said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Smmenen

What do you think about Imperial Seal?

And if you go down the rabbit hole of unrestricting Imperial Seal, can you also unrestrict Vampiric and Mystical Tutor?

My thought is that Imperial Seal doesn't see play and I don't think it's because you cannot play 4. If you were to unrestrict all the topdeck tutors, how many would you really want to play?

Those are good questions, that have complicated answers I can't begin to fully unpack here.

I will say, however that two key variables are whether Probe stays restricted and whether Misstep is eventually restricted. The topdeck tutors are much more dangerous if Probe is unrestricted, but less dangerous if Misstep is unrestricted.

The upkeep Vamp play is sufficiently insane that I don't think it can ever be safely unrestricted.

@DeaTh-ShiNoBi said in Cards to unrestrict:

@Smmenen I'm not terribly convinced that Flash would have a good matchup against Workshops if it were unrestricted. Phyrexian Revoker and Walking Ballista are both creatures that were not printed before Flash was restricted and both of them can stop the Reveillark kill. I have a hard time imagining that Disciple of the Vault is good enough to avoid this weakness (too much deck space), but maybe? Is there perhaps other viable Flash kills enabled by newer printings that haven't been explored?

Yeah - I should have been more explicit about this earlier, but I think we'd have more Rector Flash or other novel/different combos than we had in the past in addition to the ones used in the past. Since no one has really worked on Flash since the banning/restriction, there is a good chance that superior kills exist than were used in 2008. And certainly ways to overcome the normal obstacles in the format.

And, if your suspicions are right that Flash would have a bad Shop matchup, then all the more reason that Flash shouldn't be restricted at all.