Which Artifact you want to see reprinted?

[Ferret]

Serrated Arrows! I want it back! Recent sets have brought back the importance of critters and the 'Arrows would be great at getting rid of pesky 1/1's that annoy people (like that stupid Elf from Onslaught that gave you a life for every Elf). It's a great card.

The Six of Nine (a lost Borg character?) were nice, but the days of artifacts that produce more mana than their casting cost have ended. Get over it.

-Ferret

"...and stop reprinting Icy Manipulator!"

 

[Oversoul]

Spidey: budget decks that can compete with fully powered Vintage decks are extinct. I don't doubt that some groups use Vintage rules and budget decks are able to compete because none (or very few) of the other players are using fully powered decks, but that's a different animal. Also, it's not just P9 that's the problem here. Mana Drain and Mishra's Workshop are used in all of the best decks besides Dark Ritual-based combo decks (which NEED P9). And then there are dual lands and other powerful cards that can't be had for cheap.

Lythand: 99%? You're exaggerating. And despite not having played Magic in a store for a few years now, I'm pretty sure most of the shops around here offer a few different types of tournaments.

And as far as sets that have been released without being added to the Standard cardpool, I am a little rusty on my knowledge of this. I believe that for quite some time now the Standard cardpool has consisted only of the two most recent blocks (cycles of three sets starting with a large one and following with two more) and the most recent core set (5th edition, 6th edition, etcetera). So aside from Unglued and Unhinged, this would exclude things like Beatdown, Deckmasters, and Anthologies, all of which are and have been legal for Type I and Type 1.5, but not Type II. I don't want to be too definitive about this, because I really don't remember and I could be wrong, but I'm willing to say that I THINK the following sets were never in the Standard cardpool (although cards in them that were ever legal at the time or later could still be used in Standard tournaments just like old versions of cards that had been reprinted in the Standard cardpool)...

Portal
Portal II
Portal: Three Kingdoms
Starter
Starter 2000
Anthologies
Battle Royale
Beatdown
Unglued
Deckmasters
Unhinged
Oh, and also some promo cards, I think...

I'm not sure about Chronicles though. That was a lot older and Type II the same then as it is now...

 

[Lythand]

Spidey: budget decks that can compete with fully powered Vintage decks are extinct. I don't doubt that some groups use Vintage rules and budget decks are able to compete because none (or very few) of the other players are using fully powered decks, but that's a different animal. Also, it's not just P9 that's the problem here. Mana Drain and Mishra's Workshop are used in all of the best decks besides Dark Ritual-based combo decks (which NEED P9). And then there are dual lands and other powerful cards that can't be had for cheap.

Lythand: 99%? You're exagerrating. And despite not having played Magic in a store for a few years now, I'm pretty sure most of the shops around here offer a few different types of tournaments.

And as far as sets that have been released without being added to the Standard cardpool, I am a little rusty on my knowledge of this. I believe that for quite some time now the Standard cardpool has consisted only of the two most recent blocks (cycles of three sets starting with a large one and following with two more) and the most recent core set (5th edition, 6th edition, etcetera). So aside from Unglued and Unhinged, this would exclude things like Beatdown, Deckmasters, and Anthologies, all of which are and have been legal for Type I and Type 1.5, but not Type II. I don't want to be too definitive about this, because I really don't remember and I could be wrong, but I'm willing to say that I THINK the following sets were never in the Standard cardpool (although cards in them that were ever legal at the time or later could still be used in Standard tournaments just like old versions of cards that had been reprinted in the Standard cardpool)...

Portal
Portal II
Portal: Three Kingdoms
Starter
Starter 2000
Anthologies
Battle Royale
Beatdown
Unglued
Deckmasters
Unhinged
Oh, and also some promo cards, I think...

I'm not sure about Chronicles though. That was a lot older and Type II the same then as it is now...

No exagertaion. Its true. Make those calls. See for yourself. If its sanctioned. More then likley is standard. Maybe a few extended, but mostly standard. The key is the sanctioned part. Thats what wizards is more concerned about.

As far as thos sets listed, those are not your standard expansion sets. SO yes they arent Standard legal. I am talking about the xpansion sets that come out every 3 months. But, if there are cards in those sets that are reprinted in the stadard set, then they will be legal. Except for the unhinged, unglued, and gold bordered cards wich were ment for casual play only.

 

[Oversoul]

No exagertaion. Its true. Make those calls. See for yourself. If its sanctioned. More then likley is standard. Maybe a few extended, but mostly standard. The key is the sanctioned part. Thats what wizards is more concerned about.

As far as thos sets listed, those are not your standard expansion sets. SO yes they arent Standard legal. I am talking about the xpansion sets that come out every 3 months. But, if there are cards in those sets that are reprinted in the stadard set, then they will be legal. Except for the unhinged, unglued, and gold bordered cards wich were ment for casual play only.

Not standard expansion sets? That was precisely my point: sets can be (and have been in the past) printed without being added to the Standard cardpool. You asked which ones besides Unglued and Unhinged, and I listed all the ones I could think of (although I'm not positive about all of them).

And I'm not sure why you're confident you know more about the shops in my area than I do. I may not have visited any of them for three or four years, but I have some idea of what kind of tournaments they hold. Most of those are not sanctioned (which I disagree about being "the key" anyway, since losing all of the non-sanctioned tournaments in the Seattle area would probably do a lot more financial damage to WotC than losing all the sanctioned ones instead). Of the ones that are, you'd see mostly Standard, a lot of block constructed, and also some Extended. But there are not 99 "Standard only" stores for every one store that has block constructed and/or Extended.

 

[Lythand]

What I ment by sets. Are expansion sets. Not the Collectors sets. Those are collectors sets. Tournament sets are the expansion sets. Block sets. They are alsways Type two for 2 years after release.

I do not know what is being held at the shops near you. But again more then likley they are standard. And yes block, which is even more limited then the standard, even further strengthening my point. As far as extended, I am sure there are, but more standard then extended.

As far as sanctioned. Wizards cares more about sanctioned tournaments then non. Simply, they make more money. If you know any of the shop owners who have become sanctioned, they will tell you, wizards does not allow them to run anything other then T2 ,ext or draft tournaments. They make more money. I have a friend who is a judge at a store. Wizards has an agreement that they run specificaly these formats, and in return wizards gives them a kickback for doing so with support and discounts on product.

You may or may not believe me, but at this point I have nothing more to offer to prove my point. I do know though what it is.

 

[Oversoul]

The problem is that you do not have a point in the first place. You said that reprinting old power cards would be ridiculous in Standard, and I claimed that was a moot argument because reprints to not necessarily get added to the Standard cardpool. This has been taken advantage of in the past with some of the boxed (not "collectors") sets containing powerful rares that would have warped the Standard environment. For this reason, I maintain that reprints (however unlikely), would not need to affect the Standard environment at all. Percentages of stores that hold types of tournaments (even if they were right), have nothing to do with this.

And yes, WotC in a sense cares more about sanctioned tournaments, at least partially because they have control over them and problems with sanctioned tournaments reflect on them. That doesn't make sanctioned tournaments "the key" to anything in particular.

And your 99% figure is still absurd. You realize that, right? If not, let me spell it out for you: in order for your figure to be right, there would need to be 99 shops that are as you say (offering sanctioned tournaments, but only Standard ones) for every one counterexample. That was why I said you were exaggerating. If you'd said 90%, that would be much more believable, because then there would only need to be 9 for every counterexample. But the difference between 90% and 99% is huge.

 

[Lythand]

OK man no need to be harsh. We are both brothers in a game we hold passionate feelings for. Whether you or I agree or disagree with each others opinions, it comes down to one thing, we respect each other and the game we enjoy.. You made some valid points and I feel I did as well.

So at this point I will leave no further comment on the topic.

 

[Spiderman]

Spidey: budget decks that can compete with fully powered Vintage decks are extinct. I don't doubt that some groups use Vintage rules and budget decks are able to compete because none (or very few) of the other players are using fully powered decks, but that's a different animal. Also, it's not just P9 that's the problem here. Mana Drain and Mishra's Workshop are used in all of the best decks besides Dark Ritual-based combo decks (which NEED P9). And then there are dual lands and other powerful cards that can't be had for cheap.

But how many people are using fully powered Vintage decks in tournaments? The crux of the argument is how people are competing in Vintage tournaments today. Being fully-powered or not is irrelevant for the most part - I'm sure the guy who I linked to would have stated whether people were using fully powered decks. As it is, none were, so budget decks have a chance, In HIS area. It may be different in your area, but for someone NOT in your area, that info is irrelevent. I want to know what's going on in MY area (if I was interested) and if I know budget decks have a chance, I'd check out my area and see what kind of decks were being played and know whether I have a chance.

And you haven't checked in three or four years? That's like light-years in Magic play terms... players come and go, decks and cards come and go... if your posts are based from that time period, I'd go check it out and update it (not like I can talk, which is why I linked to someone who DOES have current info).

 

[Oversoul]

And you haven't checked in three or four years? That's like light-years in Magic play terms... players come and go, decks and cards come and go... if your posts are based from that time period, I'd go check it out and update it (not like I can talk, which is why I linked to someone who DOES have current info).

My posts themselves are not "based from that time period." The post where I said I haven't been to a store around here in a while was about the types of tournaments the stores around here are holding (which were typically not Vintage). I do know a bit more about Vintage tournaments in my general area (and outside of it, for that matter), none of which have been held in my hometown anyway.

 

[Spiderman]

So from your statement, am I to infer that that "knowing a bit more" means you ARE current and up-to-date on the Vintage scene? As current and up-to-date as the other poster who I linked to at least?

 

[Oversoul]

So from your statement, am I to infer that that "knowing a bit more" means you ARE current and up-to-date on the Vintage scene? As current and up-to-date as the other poster who I linked to at least?

I don't know about any comparisons between myself and the other poster (I forget who that even was), but yeah, I have been following Vintage somewhat. Last year I was even playtesting decks (a lot) with a friend, but I haven't been doing that anymore. The Vintage I know, though, isn't budget at all (and hasn't been for a few years). Perhaps there's a sizeable budget tournament scene, but if people tried to hold Vintage tournaments around here with prizes that are worth anything (and those are usually the only ones I hear about), they'd probably have to contend with an invasion of fully powered decks.

 

[Spiderman]

What I was getting at was the other poster has been playing or paying attention to his local Vintage scene, perhaps even actively participating or hanging out at the tourneys (I believe, now I'll have to go back and re-read to make sure) up to the time he posted, so he had current and up to date info on what he was saying.

From what I understand from you, you've been slightly keeping up, but you're maybe a year behind? And your knowledge is from playtesting... in a tourney environment or hanging out at the scene? Or in your house? But a year ago, everyone was playing fully powered Vintage decks if there was a Vintage tourney.

 

[Oversoul]

From what I understand from you, you've been slightly keeping up, but you're maybe a year behind?

No. Last year, if you'd put any first or second tier (I don't really have a good definition for that, but whatever) Vintage deck in front of me and told me to play it, I'd have been able to do so and would stand as much of a chance of winning with it as the average Vintage tournament player. I wouldn't be able to do that any more, but I still know what the best decks are NOW and have some idea of how they work and what they're strong/weak against.

The trend seems to me (and did then), that large Vintage tournaments are only becoming more competitive and less friendly toward decks that are not fully powered or fast.

 

[Spiderman]

So when you say

I still know what the best decks are NOW and have some idea of how they work and what they're strong/weak against.

Is that "in general" or "in theory" or actually applies to tournaments in your area? For example, let's say you know Zoo is the one of the top three decks in Vintage. Is that overall, it consistently beats most other Vintage decks if you play them in Apprentice or something, or people in your area actually play Zoo to top 3 finishes?

Do you understand what I'm trying to say or get at?

 

[Oversoul]

So when you say

Is that "in general" or "in theory" or actually applies to tournaments in your area? For example, let's say you know Zoo is the one of the top three decks in Vintage. Is that overall, it consistently beats most other Vintage decks if you play them in Apprentice or something, or people in your area actually play Zoo to top 3 finishes?

Do you understand what I'm trying to say or get at?

The latter. There was a deck or two that, while absent from the Vintage metagame to the best of my knowledge (or very rarely played), I was able to find a build that held its own (and might have played it if I'd had all the cards in real life). I think all that counts for is really that I paid extra attention to some rogue decks (but if I'd actually taken them to tournaments, maybe it would have been a different story--or maybe I'd simply have been slaughtered and decided the decks sucked).

 

[Spiderman]

Dude, that was confusing. You say "latter" which I took to mean you had actual tourney experience, but then you go on to say you hadn't.

So let's get down to it: have you been in, or attended, any recent Vintage tournaments in your area where you've seen the decks being played?

 

[Oversoul]

Dude, that was confusing. You say "latter" which I took to mean you had actual tourney experience, but then you go on to say you hadn't.

So let's get down to it: have you been in, or attended, any recent Vintage tournaments in your area where you've seen the decks being played?

You listed two things. The first was that, if I hypothetically claimed Zoo were a dominant deck, I would be saying this based off my experiences with it in Apprentice. The second was that I would be basing it off performances in actual tournaments. Neither of those has anything to do with my physically having been at Vintage tournaments recently. I don't see anything confusing about this.

And no, I haven't been to a Vintage tournament recently (I'm not sure when the last time was--I certainly haven't been to any this year). But the ones I've heard or read about have been ones with prizes that attracted people with competitive decks. And when the competitive decks show up, the budget decks tend to lose badly.

This happened in my case last time I was actually playing in a Vintage tournament (which was probably a while ago, and maybe you believe this invalidates it, but my perception is that the environment has only become more competitive and unforgiving toward budget decks, not less). It wasn't a big tournament or anything, just one some friends decided to run for fun. I thought I had a pretty good deck, but my opponent gave me the most ridiculous beating, even though his deck wasn't fully powered.

 

[Spiderman]

You listed two things. The first was that, if I hypothetically claimed Zoo were a dominant deck, I would be saying this based off my experiences with it in Apprentice. The second was that I would be basing it off performances in actual tournaments. Neither of those has anything to do with my physically having been at Vintage tournaments recently. I don't see anything confusing about this.

Oops, sorry, then I was unclear. I meant the second to be personal experiences with playing Zoo in a tourny, either playing it yourself or seeing it played (but either way, you actually being at a tourney and getting the data). In my mind, playing it yourself via Apprentice and reading about its performances in tourneys are almost the same thing: it doesn't involve real-life data in your area (unless you were reading about its performances in your area, but you didn't mention that).

So I think the crux is your statement

But the ones I've heard or read about have been ones with prizes that attracted people with competitive decks. And when the competitive decks show up, the budget decks tend to lose badly.

So a) you're "limited" to knowing/reading about only tournaments with "prizes" and b) the particular subset of such tourneys that "attract" competitive decks and c) such a subset may not be in your particular area, so you're not sure what your local game is and whether a "budget" deck can compete.

Again, I have to re-read my link to see whether the poster was a) competing and b) what prize was offered and c) if it attracted competitive decks, but the gist was in his local area, budget decks could compete with decks with the Power 9 in them (not sure if that meant ALL of the power nine or a subset, but either way, it's irrelevant for his particular area).

 

[Lythand]

Spidey..You should of been a lawyer

 

[Oversoul]

Oops, sorry, then I was unclear. I meant the second to be personal experiences with playing Zoo in a tourny, either playing it yourself or seeing it played (but either way, you actually being at a tourney and getting the data). In my mind, playing it yourself via Apprentice and reading about its performances in tourneys are almost the same thing: it doesn't involve real-life data in your area (unless you were reading about its performances in your area, but you didn't mention that).

So I think the crux is your statement

So a) you're "limited" to knowing/reading about only tournaments with "prizes" and b) the particular subset of such tourneys that "attract" competitive decks and c) such a subset may not be in your particular area, so you're not sure what your local game is and whether a "budget" deck can compete.

Again, I have to re-read my link to see whether the poster was a) competing and b) what prize was offered and c) if it attracted competitive decks, but the gist was in his local area, budget decks could compete with decks with the Power 9 in them (not sure if that meant ALL of the power nine or a subset, but either way, it's irrelevant for his particular area).

Oh, I think I get what you're saying. But I was under the impression that the issue was the prevalence of tournies where there are no fully powered decks or where the fully powered decks are rare enough not to matter much. And I understand that such tournies exist, or did exist in 2004. But they attracted few players due to a lack of decent prizes and they were becoming more rare because proxy tournaments were becoming more popular at the time.

As far as tournies where fully powered decks are prevalent and budget decks can still compete with them: I very much doubt that these would be commonplace. My reasoning for this is as follows.

-Past experience, although limited, suggests that such tournaments would be rare, if extant at all.
-Also based on my experience, people that own p9, Mana Drain, Workshop, etc. and bring them to tournies tend to be experienced and skilled players. They'd (on average) be more likely to win any sort of Magic tournament than would the budget players. I don't mean to slam budget players--I am one. But this has generally been the trend as I've seen it.
-I probably wouldn't even be able to win a Legacy tournament with a true budget deck. The top decks may not be as expensive as the ones in Vintage, but if you don't already have the cards for them, they certainly aren't cheap. Some of the red decks might be rather affordable, but a lot of decks in Legacy need Force of Will, dual lands, or expensive rares. Even if you're a very good player, this problem will only become magnified with the moxes and the Workshops and all that.
-I'm not sure what all can count as a "budget" deck, but most people I've met who either didn't play the game or didn't play in tournaments thought paying $20 for a piece of cardboard was entirely ridiculous (whenever the issue came up). There should also be another limit in some way, because even if dual lands are $20 each, having sixteen of them in the same deck with a bunch of other cards that also cost more than $10 doesn't seem very "budget" either. But whatever. Even building the best deck you can with cards that cost $20 or less, it will lose most of its games against Control Slaver. Or maybe you'd build a budget deck that capitalizes on all of the weaknesses of Mana Drain decks and Goblin Welder decks. But then what happens when your first round opponent is using Intuition Tendrils? The odds would be against you too much.

Also, the decks that would stand the best chance against a fully powered Vintage deck would be boring AND would lose anyway. A budget version of Food Chain Goblins? It's repetitive, you won't make it to the final round of the tournament if the other players are seriously any good, and with my luck, I'd go up against a powered version of FCG in the first round and watch as my opponent beats me with a superior deck. Burn? You can only get lucky so many times. Stompy or other aggro? Even if your deck is very good, more than 50% of the field will probably be bad matchups like Workshop decks, Belcher, Tendrils, etc. Worldgorger Dragon? Too unreliable without Bazaar of Baghdad (definitely not a budget card) and you'll lose the second/third game against any deck with a decent sideboard.

Anyway, I'm going off on a tangent. I'll have to go back and look at the link...