|
|
| Author |
Message |
Misslehead3
Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 12
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:50 pm Post subject: Whats going on with Vintage and M-L |
 |
|
| For a lot of reasons i feel that Magic-League almost ignores vintage to play standard. Legacy is no different. I don't know why but i think judges should host more Vintage trials. and when they do they don't post up lists. I'm thinkin that if the vintage community here could come together and voice their protest loud enough we might be able to get more Vintage trials and mini's |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
launamleto
Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 112
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:52 pm Post subject: Re: Whats going on with Vintage and M-L |
|
|
| Misslehead3 wrote: | | For a lot of reasons i feel that Magic-League almost ignores vintage to play standard. Legacy is no different. I don't know why but i think judges should host more Vintage trials. and when they do they don't post up lists. I'm thinkin that if the vintage community here could come together and voice their protest loud enough we might be able to get more Vintage trials and mini's |
More people play t2 than t1....its a fact...deal with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NesherHaesh
Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 33
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i say the opposite, in the last 5-6 tourneys i played 4 vintage and1 standard.
i want to test my standard and extended decks and i can't because there are no tournies in thouse formats in europe time.
look at the trial now, it'll be 1 am in my country when it'll begin, if i go very good i'll have to drop before last rounds/top 8 (if i make it) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TD
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 103
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:32 pm Post subject: Re: Whats going on with Vintage and M-L |
|
|
| Misslehead3 wrote: | | For a lot of reasons i feel that Magic-League almost ignores vintage to play standard. Legacy is no different. I don't know why but i think judges should host more Vintage trials. and when they do they don't post up lists. I'm thinkin that if the vintage community here could come together and voice their protest loud enough we might be able to get more Vintage trials and mini's |
There are plenty of Vintage tournaments; there is going to be a Vintage -master- soon, and I've seen vintage trials. Quit complaining; T2 is the most popular format and T2 minis fill up incredibly fast. I think the current distribution of minis, trials, and masters is entirely equitable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karma
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vintage is so much better than the current T2... i'll leave it at that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orgasmatron
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 29
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Karma wrote: | | Vintage is so much better than the current T2... i'll leave it at that. |
I agree entirely. But I'll take it one step further, we don't get enough Legacy minis either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lackeos
Joined: 10 Oct 2004
Posts: 236
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Karma wrote: | | Vintage is so much better than the current T2... i'll leave it at that. |
Whoever reads that is getting lied to. It's like saying pistol duels are better than fights. One has little interaction and is over very quickly; unlike the other, which is sporting. But it's also like saying that blackjack is better than poker. One is completely draw dependent, the other is interactive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sex_monkey
Joined: 23 Oct 2004
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lackeos wrote: | | But it's also like saying that blackjack is better than poker. One is completely draw dependent, the other is interactive. |
Nothing like that. Infact, quite the opposite.
Blackjack you have access to Two cards. (sets?)
Poker, you have access to more.
Its a bad analogy, but I can't help that your example is flawed ASWELL as specious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TD
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 103
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Karma wrote: | | Vintage is so much better than the current T2... i'll leave it at that. |
Not at all. T2 is a very varied format, with a huge variety of cards used. Vintage? Not so much. Most vintage decks run pretty much the same set of powerful cards, with different kill conditions and plans. A few run a few different things; Meandeck Ichorid runs a bunch of stuff no other deck runs, for instance, and Dragon runs some odd stuff as well. But by and large decks are very similar. In T2, the only thing which is really consistant is the lands.
And you can't say its cheaper either; T2 is like $400, but Vintage is like $4000. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RThomas
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To say that most Type 1 decks operate the same is pure hyperbole. Type 1 decks may use a number of cards from the same general template, but no two decks are the same. The only way to really distinguish this distinct difference is to spend some time playing with and investigating the format, which some players are clearly not up to the task of doing.
To say that there is little interaction in Type 1 is also nonsense. Stephen Menendian wrote an article discussing interactivity in Type 1 here that discusses how different decks interact in conjuncture to their own gameplan.
Like I said above, many Type 1 decks use a general template of the most powerful cards, then use the remaining cards to determine how it wins the game. I have written more about this here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr_Moo
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
Posts: 950
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Vintage decks are extremely distinct. Two Vintage decks seperated by 5 cards play far differently than say, WW/r and Gruul, even though those decks share few if any cards.
Vintage is cheaper in the long run. If you want to really keep up with Standard and be able to build several good decks (especially right now with duals), you're going to be paying a lot of money. You do that over a decade, that's quite a bit of cash. In Vintage, there is a small pool of cards you need to own, especially with the popularity of proxy tournaments.
Having said that, I find standard to be far more enjoyable. In Vintage, a lot of games are determined sheerly by draws. I do like the fact that the better play wins more often in Vintage then Standard in games where there is actual interaction, but I hate the feeling of helplessness that comes with playing Vintage. Sometimes your opponent just has the Tinker/Will/etc and that's that. In standard, there aren't many (if any) single cards that just swing a game like that, and I feel that I can win from virtually any hole.
It isn't fair to say that Standard is better, though. Sometimes Standard is downright awful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sgtpepper87
Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 113
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
whoever says that t1 is better right now than t2 really has to specify that. i think most people who say this don't like the current standard because there is no deck that can win against the whole format (unlike in the affinity, TnN, RDW season last year).
but lets see this from another point: the current standard is probably the best format we've ever had. There is no format with so many playable archetypes (that can actually win sth). for a proof of that, just look at all the results from regionals/nationals/trials/masters. wizards has done a good job here on balancing all the cards.
And well in vintage there are probably not more than 10-15 playable archetypes that can win tournaments.
so this question is basically what you want to play. if you wanna play a format with not many archetypes, play t1. if you wanna play in a format where you can meet a lot more decks, play standard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr_Moo
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
Posts: 950
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sgtpepper87 wrote: | whoever says that t1 is better right now than t2 really has to specify that. i think most people who say this don't like the current standard because there is no deck that can win against the whole format (unlike in the affinity, TnN, RDW season last year).
but lets see this from another point: the current standard is probably the best format we've ever had. There is no format with so many playable archetypes (that can actually win sth). for a proof of that, just look at all the results from regionals/nationals/trials/masters. wizards has done a good job here on balancing all the cards.
And well in vintage there are probably not more than 10-15 playable archetypes that can win tournaments.
so this question is basically what you want to play. if you wanna play a format with not many archetypes, play t1. if you wanna play in a format where you can meet a lot more decks, play standard. |
I disagree with basically everything you wrote. When Tooth and Nail was the best deck in standard, that was probably the lowest point of Magic history. I think most people prefer open or rock-paper-scissors environments to ones with a dominant deck.
Current standard is not only not the best format we've ever seen, it isn't even very good. I'd take current extended over it, extended before any rotations, extended right after the big rotation, extended right after the second rotation, t2 when masques and invasion were legal, t2 when invasion odyssey were legal, t2 when odyssey and onslaught were legal, and t2 when onslaught and mirrodin were legal over current t2. And those are just one's that I've played.
Vintage has a ton of decks. I would expect to see more distinct archetypes in a Vintage tournament than a Standard tournament. Current standard is less wide open then it was pre-Honolulu and several other times. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat77
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ignorant players should not say that Vintage is a "few turns with no player interaction". That is the fundamental flaw of newer magic thinking. If anything T2 is the one with 3 or four decks (Solar Flare, Anything GLare, UW Control, Gay GRuul/Zoo, and maybe a rogue deck but mostly not.) that all have the same crap cards in them. Vintage gives people the chance to make an extreme amount of diverse decks. Yes I agree that every one uses the power nine. Everyone in type 2 plays with Flagstones, Signets, and Remand.
Belief in the old gaurd thinking that type one is a johnny filled turn one kill format is so biased. I say more tourneys makes more chance to stop people from making ignorant comments.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
soundwave123
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 32
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I love vintage more than type 2 because type 2 is just trying to be like type 1 except its very restricted. Type 1 is fun because you either win quickly or lose quickly. Very rarely do I ever play a game of vintage where the game lasts longer than oh I don't know say turn 4.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
