Posts made by Smmenen

@Islandswamp the end was the most insane part!

Looking for Vintage in the Bay Area? Come to Eudo Memorial Day Weekend!

Edit: looks like the link changed: http://www.eudogames.com/magic/170528-may-vintage-0

People may forget this, but there used to be premier events three times a week. I helped organize and promote the first one that ever fired, but it was tremendous work. Eventually, Wizards cancelled them. When Rich and I wrote the article that eventually led to the P9 series, we requested 1 Premier event a month and a larger quarterly one to concentrate attention. The P9 series, whatever the problems with the program, has been very successful.

This new idea, of having a premier event every weekend, may be good for players who want to compete more regularly, but too much of a good thing can be a bad thing, as past experience has shown.

If these events end up being 25-35 players a weekend, is that really better than a 60+ player event once a month? I'm not sure, but that's the quandary we are now in.

There is also the secondary harm that this may have to stores, where people actually drive to play once a week. With this competing against Saturday paper Vintage, that's going to harm both. In the past, I've tried to steer local events away from the same weekends at P9 challenges. That's now impossible.

I'm cautiously pessimistic about this change.

This is potentially exciting, but I'm concerned that it dilutes prestige & community focus of the monthly event I assume this will replace.

What's happening to the P9 challenge, then?

@Brass-Man said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

I think what we're seeing in tournaments now is the result of a lot of players who are more interested in trying new cards out than they are in winning. This makes sense, trying new cards out is fun.

Pretty much this. The day after the restriction, and in the first daily I could play in, I easily 4-0ed with a largely unreconstructed Jeskai Mentor deck, and then got 5th place in the P9 (and even 3-1ed the daily that same day with 1 Gush PO Mentor). At the same time, alot of other players were durdling around with bad decks and things like Thirst, Fact or Fiction, Gifts and As Fortold. You and I were among the few players to actually play the Dack-Delve draw engine (with restricted Gush) with Mentor and were rewarded with it. It's pretty much everything I said in this podcast and the previous two.

@BazaarOfBaghdad said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

I strongly disagree that there wasn't data.

That's not a fair characterization of what he said. Mark didn't say that there was no data to support this restriction or that no reasonable presentation of the data could support a restriction.

Mark said "The concern I have about is this restriction seems to be more about outcry of people than actual data."

The difference may be a subtle, but it's significant: he's saying that data was not the trigger or primary motivating force for action here. Rather, player feedback (complaining) was.

If Wizards only analyzed Vintage metagame data between their last announcement and this one, there probably would have been no action. If anything, the European Vintage Championship results show a lower level of both Gush and Mentor decks than had been seen in previous metagame cycles.

Instead, it seems fairly evident to well-informed observers that the balance shifted towards these restrictions based upon "player feedback," and likely voices on the VSL complaining, especially the emergent consensus among Randy, Rich, and others. That was the triggering factor and likely the decisive factor. Not data.

Plenty of data suggested that Gush Mentor was the best blue deck by a wide margin,

There is always a best "blue deck," and often by a "wide margin." That's usually, by itself, not a trigger for action. Mentor decks were 20% of the metagame in the European Vintage Champs, and 0% of the Top 4. Not exactly evidence of a dominant deck.

and that the only likable deck that could handle it effectively was Shops.

What about the White Eldrazi deck that won the European Vintage Championship?

I have a problem with what they did as a result of their data (a Mentor restriction alone seemed much more sensible for now), but don't doubt that they used data to confirm the need for change.

Again, Mark didn't say they didn't use data. But even if they did use data, there is a larger question of how. Did they listen to player feedback, glance at some results, and say "yeah, that sounds reasonable"? Or, did they do a systematic analysis of paper and online results? Or something in between?

It's not enough to say "they used data." What matters is how. Policymakers can make slapdash decisions based upon flimsy or anecdotal data. Based upon their explanation, it doesn't seem like they did rigorous data analysis.

@vaughnbros said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

@Smmenen Its extremely aggressive language that dissuades any actual discussion of the topic. That is not civil.
I asked a question, it was not rhetorical. You could have simply answered the question like any normal person would have when posed with one.

You prefaced your question by asserting that my definition was "loose," and your question was framed as critique ("What's the point...?), but you accuse me of employing aggressive language?

There are ways of making your point that would have prompted a less defensive response.

@vaughnbros said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

@Smmenen said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

The premise of your question (that precise definitions can't describe very different phenomena) is flawed and misguided.

Please. Lets try to be civil and not make statements like this. What is the purpose of attacking like this?

There is nothing uncivil in what I said. Your premise was both flawed and misguided. That's not an "attack." You are confusing 'critique' for 'attack.' If anything, I was defending my definition of "engine" from your attack.

@vaughnbros said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

These definitions of engine seem kind of loose to me. Whats the point of a word if its so inexact that it can literally describe two things as far apart as Preordain and Thopter Sword combo?

Why does the word 'mammal' describe things as far apart as bats and whales? Because it does.

'Card advantage' has a precise definition but encompases wildly different phenomena (Balance, Necro, Rack and Ruin to Braingeyser).

The premise of your question (that precise definitions can't describe very different phenomena) is flawed and misguided.

The point is that Flash is much MUCH weaker with Scroll and Brainstorm restricted.

When Flash was last unrestricted, it was abused with 4 Brainstorm, 4 Ponder, and most importantly, 4 Merchant Scroll to tutor it up.

Even with all of those cards, Flash was never dominant or more than 10% of top 8s. It's also a 2-card combo that becomes a 3-card combo with Leyline in play.

I'm not saying Flash should be unrestricted, but let's not mythologize it either.

@ssasala said in Yawgmoth's (Bargain Not Will) Unrestrictable?:

I remember reading a @Smmenen article years back about going through hypothetical unrestrictions; maybe from SCG or something. I specifically remember Steve saying Channel is the most dangerous card to unrestrict.

Are you talking about this? http://www.eternalcentral.com/so-many-insane-plays-what-is-the-least-unrestrictable-card-in-vintage/

Time Walk was. Channel wasnt close.

Or this: http://www.starcitygames.com/article/17491_So-Many-Insane-Plays---Exploring-Possible-Unrestrictions--Designing-for-Balance--Channel--and-More-.html?mobile_site_continue=1

I think it's time to start looking at the b&R list much more carefully for possible unrestriction targets. In our podcast, we simply felt that Windfall and Bargain are the two most natural places to start, but there may be others.

@BazaarOfBaghdad said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

@ajfirecracker said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

@evouga That's a pedantic point. Anywhere else in Magic, people use the term 'engine' to mean a repeatable interaction. Jace is a draw engine, Gush into Gush is a draw engine, playing a bunch of entirely distinct effects that do similar things is not an 'engine' in anything but a metaphorical sense.

Gush into Gush into Gush Gush is an engine for you but Gush into Ancestral into Dig into Cruise is not? Also, people can't make valid points using metaphors (even if that's the right word)? A little open-mindedness instead of damned condescension would go a long way with your posts.

What's funny is that on that same page in my book I explained how restricted cards could be used as an "engine."

The fact that you can Delve into another Delve spell and then recur both delve spells with JVP is what makes them an engine. Gush is just part of the webbing. Dack helps find the next Delve spell or Gush, and then JVP replays Gush as well.

I put an absurd amount of effort into the Gush book, and thinking through every concept carefully. I'm glad that it has answers to queries such as this :)

@SylvanLibrarian said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

@Smmenen you and Kevin spent a lot of time this episode discussing Young Pyromancer as a dead archetype - didn't Walking Ballista already cripple it? Or is this the final nail in the coffin?

The combination of both.

That's why I believed that Gush would not need to be restricted if Mentor had been. Pyromancer is such a terrible substitute in this metagame, in part because of Ballista. And cards like Hydra are easily picked off by Plow or bounce.

@desolutionist said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

"engine" is just a romanticized description of cards that draw more cards - even Survival of the Fittest is just drawing more cards. There's nothing saying you have to play 4 Thirst or 4 Gush; you could play 2 and 2. I made a thread about this a while back and everyone laughed at me. 😭

Engines don't only refer to ways to generate card advantage. Take a look at my definition posted from my Gush book in post 50 in this thread.

There are many forms of advantage, such as mana or token production, that can be created through the use of engines. This is also discussed in the Gush book, in fact on the same page:

One thing that I don't think I had fully realized, however, until my post earlier, is that the vast majority of my Gush book is still relevant, thank god.

The only chapter that is really useless now pretty much in it's entirety is the Gushbond Chapter (chapter 3). Even the Appendix, on Doomsday piles, has some utility for whatever Doomsday deck may emerge now.

Yes, I said Yawg Bargain, not Will, was a candidate for unrestriction.

@ajfirecracker said in SMIP # 65: Amokhet Vintage Set Review & B&R Fallout:

@evouga That's a pedantic point. Anywhere else in Magic, people use the term 'engine' to mean a repeatable interaction. Jace is a draw engine, Gush into Gush is a draw engine, playing a bunch of entirely distinct effects that do similar things is not an 'engine' in anything but a metaphorical sense.

First of all, "engine" is entirely a metaphor. So the idea that these cards aren't an engine in anything but the "metaphorical" sense is a completely nonsensical statement.

You started off misrepresenting what was said in this podcast, but if you listened to any of the last three shows, I said over and over again that I think the Dack-Delve-Gush engine, even with Gush restricted, is likely a candidate for the best draw engine in the format. I said that repeatedly in episode 63.

The first page of Chapter 3 in the Gush book goes over the definition of an engine.

I acknowledge that restricted cards generally do not constitute engines, but the Khans cards are different. Because they printed two functionally similar draw spells (Cruise and Dig), even restricted, they form an engine, especially when surrounded by cantrips, tutors and cards like JVP and Dack.

Yes, the Dack-Delve-Gush engine is still an "engine," and it's a quite viable one, as Andy and I established yesterday, even with the main sources of card advantage restricted.

I discuss both the Gushbond and Dack Delve draw engine in the Gush book. The restriction of Gush destroys the Gushbond engine, but not the Dack-Delve draw engine. That can only be destroyed by bannings at this point, I think; or, perhaps, mass restrictions of Preordain and JVP on top of what's already been restricted.

Nice Job Ryan! It would be great to do a comparison of this metagame with the last few months.

Unfortunately, I lost the die roll in the top 8, despite being the higher seed (2nd seed). Really wish MTGO would match paper magic's Top 8 play/draw rule.

Mentor felt as strong as ever. Not having to compete on the Gush axis I think potentially makes Mentor stronger, since now you don't have to have all these bad cards in the Shop matchup.

I ended up going 3-1 in the daily tonight with a completely different Mentor deck (PO Mentor) as well (losing round 4 only on a strategic error).