Trinisphere restricted

[Oversoul]

I know that it looks small compared to the massive bannings imposed on Standard, but one other change in this last announcement was the restriction of Trinisphere in Vintage (oh, and they also made all four Portal sets legal and banned/retstricted some tutors in Legacy/Vintage).

I am not sure what this will do to the format. It doesn't look good. Trinisphere was good, but not too good. And the Workshop decks it made so great were one of the biggest obstacles for storm combo. This will severely hurt Workshop decks (an important part of the metagame). It will also totally change the matchups that storm combo has to deal with.

Trinisphere was not dominating in tournaments. I didn't think that it was distorting either, and although there were a lot of complaints in this area, the vast majority were from obviously biased players who lost heavily to Workshop decks (this has been happening for a while, but after attacking other cards like Goblin Welder, Workshop, and Crucible, they finally directed their collective voice at Trinisphere).

The distortion that this restriction has the potential to cause is far beyond what Trinisphere could have been responsible for by itself.

There are a lot of ways the format could go at this point. It seems paranoid to think that this is part of a trend that will lead to the restriction of Dark Ritual, but it is really starting to look like that (unrestrict Doomsday and then restrict Trinisphere).

I am worried about the future of my favorite format...

 

[Spiderman]

Do you have any hard data that it was not dominant in tournaments? I'm just wondering...

Presumably Aaron Forsythe will explain it all on Friday.

 

[Oversoul]

I don't have extensive lists of tournaments where it failed to dominate or anything like that (I would suppose that such materials would be easiest to obtain on SCG, except now they have the whole "premium" thing going on, although it would be entirely possible to find extensive results elsewhere, presumably). But who is saying that it did dominate? The arguments for its restriction were almost always ones of distortion, rather than dominance (and of course there were some other reasons given by individuals). Of course, it's difficult (if possible) to measure whether Trinisphere distorted or not. I guess it was close enough for it to get the axe though...

Thinking about it, Mana Drain-based decks will probably get a nice boost out of this, which ought to keep the format relatively stable (not crashing down around our heads or anything). Maybe that was what Wizards wanted...

I am dissapointed that they have dealt such a blow to multiple archetypes (but mainly Stax) with this decision, but, as always, we'll have to make the best of it. I wonder what's in store for Workshop decks.

As long as they don't try to restrict Dark Ritual, I'll be happy.

 

[Spiderman]

But who is saying that it did dominate? The arguments for its restriction were almost always ones of distortion, rather than dominance

Not sure what you mean by "distortion" and it could end up meaning what I'm about to say.

"Dominance" is given as a reason when every deck plays with a card, no matter what kind or color the deck is. Skullclamp is probably best recent example. Now, you could mean it "distorts" the deck scene because everyone plays with it, I don't know.

As for tournament lists, I thought WOTC keeps track of that sort of thing as well. I guess maybe they just do the "major" ones, like Worlds or the ones that lead up to Worlds.

 

[Oversoul]

I see it as...

Dominance: when a card is so good that it is either unbeatable or too impractical to beat. It can be like Skullclamp in Standard or Goblin Welder in Vintage (both had periods in which ridiculous amounts of them appeared in top 8's) or like Tolarian Academy (a single archetype of deck reliant on the card is doing the dominating).

Distortion: Not in a position where it necessarily wins against all of the competition. However, it warps the metagame in some way (like by making a certain set of archetypes inordinately powerful or hosing important decks).

For example...

If Yawgmoth's Bargain were unrestricted, it would dominate (Bargain decks would mop the floor with the weaker decks that had been competing in a previously Bargainless atmosphere).

If Black Vise were unrestricted, it would distort (Vise would punish too severely control decks and prison decks that had previously been in little danger of such effects, and this would have far-reaching, largely unpredictable effects on the stability of the format).

Trinisphere was not known for sweeping top 8's (although it had its wins) to the best of my knowledge. Rather, a number of players were upset by the fact that Workshop + Trinisphere on turn 1 is so good. To be fair, the decks that were able to exploit this (Stax most prominently, but other workshop decks as well, such as 5/3) were simply too good against some decks that had until then been very good. They tended to hurt otherwise excellent Mana Drain decks, because unless the control decks could Force of Will the Trinisphere, they would probably not get a chance to recover.

That does make a good case for restricting Trinisphere (I'm capable of seeing both sides of the argument). However, I still think it was the wrong idea, since some players had learned to play against it well enough and decks were still being modified to be even better against it. Also, more recent control decks like the new Oath of Druids build were able to do quite well even with the threat of first-turn Trinisphere.

It seems that there was another reason not to restrict Trinisphere. Since its rise in "Trinistax" and other Workshop decks, storm decks have improved significantly. This is not to say that combo will go unchecked (I have heard that extreme of the issue as well, but to me it is nothing more than paranoia). But I hope that WotC was careful in measuring the consequences of this restriction, as it is an important one. Time will tell...

As far as WotC tracking the tournament results, I am oblivious. I would not think that they would record the results of unsanctioned events like the SCG Power 9 tourneys (and other proxy tournaments) and so that's a huge chunk of data missing right there--although if they do record those results, that would be really cool. Anyway, I too would be interested to know exactly how prolific the Sphere was. I was under the impression that it was doing better until this announcement came and I heard complaints about how it had only been doing moderately well in certain tourneys. In any case, I am sure that it held its own. Stax was an amazing deck, but I guess it won't be the same from now on...

 

[Spiderman]

See, I would use your Black Vise example as also dominating, since the potential to punish any deck, besides control/prison, would be too great. The time when it was available during the Ice Age block (along with Strip Mine) shows that clearly.

I don't think WOTC tracks tourney results, but rather keeps track of the top 8 decks in the tourneys I mentioned. At least I always see such an article title to that effect right after their occurance...

 

[Oversoul]

I don't think WOTC tracks tourney results, but rather keeps track of the top 8 decks in the tourneys I mentioned.

Worlds and the ones leading up to it? I would like a larger sample group, personally...

I have a couple points to make about your other statement, but I want to separate them from each other (simply because they are not related).

-Black Vise doesn't really have the potential to punish "any" deck, at least not in the form of anything resembling current decks. Deathstorm (DeathLong or MeanDeath or whatever they are called these days, but really just Death Wish/Tendrils of Agony) decks will either win early on or be stopped by the controlling deck. In very few games will the presence of a Vise do much, simply because if the combo deck is going to win, there are not going to be very many turns going by. The same goes for any potential reincarnation of two-land Belcher decks. Also, while Vise would punish aggro, it would not hose it out of the game. Even some form of aggro-control would probably survive. I don't think your "any" is accurate here at all.

-Ice Age block is not modern Type I. I don't think that you believe the two are the same, but I must point out that the effects of Vise in that format cannot be expected to predict accurately the effects it will have in a fundamentally different format.

-Your argument is largely semantic (which I am cool with) but for an odd reason. You seem not to be familiar with the whole "dominance/distortion" thing when it comes to restricting/banning cards. The terms are rather common. I've seen them thrown around a lot in the past. I am not sure where they originated (nor do I know how one could find such information). I wonder if Oscar Tan might know, since I think (could be wrong, though) I've seen both terms used in an article of his...

-If you think Black Vise unrestricted would truly be dominant, then that's another issue. I would disagree, but this thread is about Trinisphere. If you need another example of distortion, I would cite another card you mentioned: Strip Mine. Would Strip Mine decks hose everything else? Would Strip Mines start to appear in every deck? I don't think they would, but such a powerful land-destruction card being used on such a wide scale would fundamentally alter the format. Its repercussions would be undesirable, even if the card itself did not dominate to 8's.

So, did Trinisphere distort? Did it dominate? I think the answer to either question is "no." WotC thought differently. Now that it's all said and done. I hope they were right, since an an unrestriction of Trinisphere seems wholly improbable at this point.

You still haven't told me one way or the other, your thoughts on Trinisphere. Did you find the card too powerful in Type I? Are you undecided? Do you not have sufficient information?

 

[orgg]

Key thing: you said decks had adapted.

When decks must adapt because of a single card, that card is warping the format-- something Wizards of the Coast does not like to see.

 

[Spiderman]

Worlds and the ones leading up to it? I would like a larger sample group, personally...

I agree, but WOTC was the first place I thought to start since they offer it free, unlike SCG (if that info is really under the "premium" classification). I don't doubt the info's out there somewhere else for free - I just don't go to other Magic websites enough to know which ones the info might be one.

I have a couple points to make about your other statement, but I want to separate them from each other (simply because they are not related).

-Black Vise doesn't really have the potential to punish "any" deck, at least not in the form of anything resembling current decks. Deathstorm (DeathLong or MeanDeath or whatever they are called these days, but really just Death Wish/Tendrils of Agony) decks will either win early on or be stopped by the controlling deck. In very few games will the presence of a Vise do much, simply because if the combo deck is going to win, there are not going to be very many turns going by. The same goes for any potential reincarnation of two-land Belcher decks. Also, while Vise would punish aggro, it would not hose it out of the game. Even some form of aggro-control would probably survive. I don't think your "any" is accurate here at all.

-Ice Age block is not modern Type I. I don't think that you believe the two are the same, but I must point out that the effects of Vise in that format cannot be expected to predict accurately the effects it will have in a fundamentally different format.

I agree that the Vintage landscape has greatly changed in the past 10 years since Ice Age. However, I disagree about your assertion that decks will not start packing it (if I understand the first paragraph correctly). When you have a 50/50 chance of going first and a 1/15 chance (assuming 4 in a 60 deck) of doing a straight up maybe 3 points of damage right off the bat, I don't think you're gonna pass up the chance. An aggro deck would start dropping cards but then, you would have prepared for that anyways. A slower deck that tends to hold cards would be punished as you already stated. Plus, you have the psychological thing going of having your opponent thinking he needs to get down to 4 cards so he can stop taking damage.

-Your argument is largely semantic (which I am cool with) but for an odd reason. You seem not to be familiar with the whole "dominance/distortion" thing when it comes to restricting/banning cards. The terms are rather common. I've seen them thrown around a lot in the past. I am not sure where they originated (nor do I know how one could find such information). I wonder if Oscar Tan might know, since I think (could be wrong, though) I've seen both terms used in an article of his...

I've already said I was unclear on your use of "distortion", although you are the first one to use such a term when talking about bannings and restrictions.

-If you think Black Vise unrestricted would truly be dominant, then that's another issue. I would disagree, but this thread is about Trinisphere. If you need another example of distortion, I would cite another card you mentioned: Strip Mine. Would Strip Mine decks hose everything else? Would Strip Mines start to appear in every deck? I don't think they would, but such a powerful land-destruction card being used on such a wide scale would fundamentally alter the format. Its repercussions would be undesirable, even if the card itself did not dominate to 8's.

I can pretty much guarantee that Strip Mine would start popping up in every winning deck. Free LD? Honestly, one should be in every Vintage deck right now if they aren't, I think.

You still haven't told me one way or the other, your thoughts on Trinisphere. Did you find the card too powerful in Type I? Are you undecided? Do you not have sufficient information?

Oh yeah, I never did answer the question. I guess it's the last one, I don't have sufficient info on the Vintage scene to make a call whether this was a good idea or bad. I certainly don't play it regularly like you do.

 

[Oversoul]

I can pretty much guarantee that Strip Mine would start popping up in every winning deck. Free LD? Honestly, one should be in every Vintage deck right now if they aren't, I think.

Only the controlling decks, Spidey. Although, in the case of Strip Mine, since it is so useful, it would fit into pretty much any of them, but then again, the decks that already run Strip Mine also run Wasteland (with some odd exception somewhere probably, but not one I know of). Is Wasteland a dominant card because it sees so much use? Strip Mine would do the same thing, but would be able to go after basic lands. If you define dominance by large numbers of top 8 appearances, then Wasteland could already be considered dominant (although no one is clamoring for its restriction).

I would call what a card like Black Vise or Strip Mine would do distortion, not dominance. The same archetype might not be winning every tournament, but the unrestricted use of the individual card would throw the thoroughly alter the balance of the tournament environment.

In my earlier post, the assertion I made was not that players would not put Vise into decks at all. It was that Vise would drive certain decks out of the game, while leaving others mostly unscathed. Combo decks might have to make small alterations, but they would become better instead of worse, as the control decks that work best against them cannot handle the power of Vise. Aggro decks would be able to outrace Vise (as you pointed out yourself) and might pack Vise themselves. Prison decks would of course love such a powerful card. Control decks as they are now would be unable to compete. However, Vise could also give rise to a new breed of control decks that utilize its power.

Strip Mine, being so easy to throw into any deck, would probably have similar, and possibly even more dramatic effects, especially now that we have Crucible of Worlds.

If a card like Yawgmoth's Bargain were unrestricted, it would allow Bargain-based combo decks, which don't even exist right now, to dominate tournaments (or to totally demolish all other decks trying to compete, if you prefer). The only decks capable of fighting back would probably be decks specifically designed to do so. Top 8's would be filled with Bargain decks and probably some anti-Bargain decks.

If Lion's Eye Diamond were unrestricted, decks similar to existing ones (Death Wish Tendrils, most likely) would use it to do something similar (if possibly not as much).

So, if a card allows a specific archetype to do too well in tournament, that's what I know as dominance.

If a card is heavily affects the environment in a negative way, but without allowing a specific archetype to do too well, that's what I know as distortion.

Of course, there are grey areas with either category because why a card "should" be restricted is subjective. How well is "too well" and what counts as negatively affecting the environment? Such grey areas are almost always a source of debate whenever a card is restricted/banned in a format (like when Skullclamp was banned in Standard).

Judging by its tournament success (based on what I know, which might not be quite imperfect here), I would say that Trinisphere wasn't making Stax or Stacker do too well (the most successful decks that used it). I also don't believe that it was too distorting. I could be wrong on either count, and if that is the case I would like to know about it. Like I already said in one of my posts, I had not previously considered what effects the restriction of Trinisphere might have on Mana Drain decks, making me lean more toward the idea that its restriction could have been good (although I'm still not convinced).

However, I did not invent using the term "distortion" in reference to restricting cards. I've heard it numerous times and was surprised that you had not.

 

[Oversoul]

Okay, I'm trying to find some tournament results (top 8's).

From SCG P9 Richmond...

The Riddler (a Mask deck)
Stax
D4GRON (Dragon)
Oath
Food Chain Goblins
EBA
Control Slaver
Stax

Decks with Trinispheres: Three. The Stax builds and the Mask use them.

From SCG P9 Syracuse

Stax
Landstill
Bird Sh*t (a bizzare control deck)
3-color Control
Control Slaver
Sensei, Sensei (it uses Sensei's Divining Top)
Dragon
Stax

Decks with Trinispheres: Two--both Stax decks.

From "Ontario Vintage Championships in a store called Dueling Grounds"

Dragon
Mask
TnT
Keeper
Sligh
Food Chain Goblins
Fish
Goblin Sligh

Decks with Trinispheres: None. Looking at the t8, I wouldn't say that the competition here was totally optimal either. The lack of Trinispheres might be attributed to a lack of Workshops in Ontario (although the sole Workshop deck, the Mask deck, didn't use Trinispheres).

From GenCon 2004

Control Slaver
5/3 – Workshop Beatdown
2-Land Belcher Combo
Aggro-Workshop
Mono Blue Ophidian
Workshop Smokestack (TriniStax)
Tools And Tubbies
U/R Fish

Decks with Trinispheres: 3 (I assume that the Stacker decks all had Trinispheres, but I did not hunt down the decklists, so I could be wrong).

From: Dülmen 11.01.2004...

Madness
Monoblue
Madness
Keeper
Food Chain Goblins
??? (It looks like RG Beatdown of a sort I've never encountered)
Keeper
Keeper

Decks with Trinispheres: 0. There is a lot of redundancy in this top 8.

Some tournament on Magic-League (no title as far as I can tell)...

4c MaskNought
U/W Fish
The Perfect Storm
5/3
4c MaskNought
Meandeck Tendrils
Stax
Forbidden Oath

Decks with Trinispheres: 4 (in three different archetypes, which is pretty cool)

East Coast Vintage Championships (April 2004)

Fish
Tog
Dragon
Welder MUD (Trinispheres in the sideboard)
Tog
Landstill
Tog
Fish

Decks with Trinispheres: 1 (none maindecked).

From a tournament at Myriad Games...

3cControl
Digging for Treasure (Trinket Mage deck)
From the Stars (a strange UR deck)
Sligh
Meandeck Tendrils
Auriok Oath
DeathLong
Oath

Decks with Trinispheres: 0.

Anyway, I'd like to see more (and more that are recent).

Trinisphere is showing up about as much as I thought it would, a bit less, but older tournaments before Crucible of Worlds set in had an effect on that.

My predictions for the effects of this restriction (now that I've calmed down) are that it will deal a huge blow to decks like 5/3, while still allowing Stax to compete (but probably not as a first tier deck). It will probably increase the presence of decks that gain absurd amounts of mana through Mana Drain, and decrease the number of decks that do so with Workshop. I don't believe it will hurt the format. It might even be a positive thing.

That said, the card itself hasn't been all that degenerate. It is reasonably good. I suspect that the real reason for restricting it was they were getting a lot of complaints. The official reason will of course be that if Trinisphere hits first turn with Workshop, it gives the Workshop deck an unfair advantage (or something along those lines). But, because losing by Trinisphere/Smokestack locking you down right from the start is quite annoying to most players, the card received more requests for restriction than it probably deserved. There has been some speculation that Wizards would have the card restricted in order to maintain interest in the format (they were scared people would quit Magic or not start playing in Vintage tournaments with Trinisphere unrestricted). I would call that a bit cynical.

Speaking of all this, how will Stax do now, anyway? I don't know if anyone on this site plays a Stax-ish deck or has played one recently. It is certainly going to suffer from the loss of Trinisphere, but how much?

 

[Spiderman]

I think Strip Mine, because it can handle any lands, would be more used than Wasteland. But do decks pack 4 Wastelands? And what's the percentage of non-basics in Vintage decks generally?

So, if a card allows a specific archetype to do too well in tournament, that's what I know as dominance.

If a card is heavily affects the environment in a negative way, but without allowing a specific archetype to do too well, that's what I know as distortion.

That's the clarification I was looking for, although I was starting to get it in the past posts. Thing is, I've always heard "dominance" used in terms of a particular card, not distortion. Even by WOTC. Unless they started changing how they used it "recently" (meaning the last couple years of banning/restrictions).

You went to SCG for those results, right? You didn't have to pay for them, did you?

 

[TheCasualOblivion]

I think the problem with Strip Mine was that it was broken in combination with Wasteland. In Vintage, nearly all decks packed Dual Lands and other nonbasics, so Wasteland was essentially no different than Strip Mine. As I remember it, Strip Mine was not restricted in Vintage until Wasteland was printed.

 

[Spiderman]

Man, this is when I wish there was a history of when and why cards got banned and unbanned...

 

[Oversoul]

You went to SCG for those results, right? You didn't have to pay for them, did you?

I mostly Googled terms that I thought would come up with stuff. The problem is that things have changed since Fifth Dawn (Crucible of Worlds) was released, and many tournaments I found were held while Fifth Dawn was quite new, and hadn't made its influence fully known. SCG doesn't charge for you to see the top 8's of their tournaments, it would seem, but the most recent article by Phil Stanton (who gives comprehensive statistics of major tournaments) is unfortunately premium.

I think the problem with Strip Mine was that it was broken in combination with Wasteland. In Vintage, nearly all decks packed Dual Lands and other nonbasics, so Wasteland was essentially no different than Strip Mine. As I remember it, Strip Mine was not restricted in Vintage until Wasteland was printed.

This was quite important in 2003 or so (probably much of last year too). Since then, a few things have changed that.

-People started packing basics along with their nonbasics in order to be more resilient to Wasteland.
-People started using the Onslaught fetchlands to fetch basics, in order to fight Wasteland (Back to Basics and Blood Moon, to a lesser extent).
-Crucible of Worlds was printed.

With Crucible of Worlds and Wasteland combined, decks with no basics were in more danger. Strip Mine, however, became even more powerful. If one could get Strip Mine in the graveyard or in play, Crucible of Worlds would provide an endless supply of land destruction, even against basics.

On the issue of decks running four copies of Wasteland: Control, Prison, and Aggro-Control seem to almost always do so. Even Aggro (which hasn't been doing very well for itself recently, with the exception of Stacker--and that used Trinisphere) decks like Wasteland. Combo doesn't use it, but I don't see Combo running Strip Mines either, even if it could run four.

Man, this is when I wish there was a history of when and why cards got banned and unbanned...

That would be a nice tool. Of course, it would not always reflect why cards remain banned. For example, in another recent thread, I mentioned that the deck Dark Ritual was originally banned to slow down was Necro-Donate, which is true. But, and I believe someone else did point this out for me, Dark Ritual remains banned for entirely different reasons.

The most obvious Vintage example would have to be Channel. Channel was restricted (and eventually banned) in Type I because of its combo with Fireball (or Kaervek's Torch, after Mirage came out). Channel is currently restricted, but because of the boost it could give to modern combo decks, and not any interaction with Kaervek's Torch.

Well, I guess we'll hear WHY they restricted Trinisphere tomorrow, although I suspect most of the announcement will be dedicated to the Standard bannings, which is only fair, since they banned like eight cards.

As far as I can remember, that's the biggest banning in Standard ever (eight cards). And since Skullclamp was already banned, we currently have nine cards banned in Standard, which is the most I can think of since Urza's Destiny (where ten cards were banned in Standard).

 

[Spiderman]

Actually, I thought Dark Ritual was banned because of Necro-Donate AND the reasons Gizmo gave. It just all came to a head at that particular time.

Of course cards probably need to be re-evaluated as the environment changes - that's why the list was updated last time. But it's easier to say why a card was banned in the first place than speculate if it should remain on the list x years later... at least the former gives a starting point to determine (among the players, since it's unlikely they'll have any input anyway) whether a card should remain on the list, if the players want to engage in such an exercise.

 

[Oversoul]

But it's easier to say why a card was banned in the first place than speculate if it should remain on the list x years later...

I agree that it is certainly easier, although both should be done...