Why not making it simple and demanding computer written decklists for greater events. By now anyone who can play eternal should be able to print some decklist
or provide a pdf of it. Than you donīt have the scanning problem.
Printable View
Why not making it simple and demanding computer written decklists for greater events. By now anyone who can play eternal should be able to print some decklist
or provide a pdf of it. Than you donīt have the scanning problem.
Have you ever SEEN the average hand-written MTG decklist? I know Doctors with better handwriting than most players...Quote:
Originally Posted by H
Considering the prevalence of smart phones and tablets, a digital submission should be easy to enact. give everyone a random code at registration, and they have to email a file with that code as part of the name to a address specifically set up to receive the deck lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teveshszat
Or make an app to key in your deck list, and have it upload the list using your DCI # and a registration code for the event.
You've never seen an architects handwriting then ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellomdian
I don't closely follow this thread so forgive me for talking out of my ass for a moment.
I agree that all this back and forth endless BS BS (Brainstorm BullShit, y'all can have that one for free) can be solved with more accurate metagame data. However, WOTC has actively attempted to squash the acquisition and dissemination of said data. They do not want the format to be solved and the metagame influences of those old TMI Hatfield articles were, I guess, too tangible for WOTC's tastes. If grassroots efforts to collect data were stronger then, yes, we might have a much clearer picture of the actual influences of Blue's dominance. We could also tell whether or not such a phenomenon is real or imagined.
On the other hand, some of the suggestions you guys are spitting out are just downright impractical. It's clear that none of you have experience running a real event, and by "real" I mean 100+ players. SCG events are run very, very well. But even those events are difficult to pull off and require insane amounts of coordination between several teams of judges. You all are discussing a significant overhaul of the status quo in order to facilitate information gathering of a nature that WOTC discourages. It's just a little wishy washy. Judges have plenty on their plates as it is. And players are dumb. Ask any judge how many times they issue game losses for deck reg errors in a single event. That's just pen, paper, and brainpower. Now add in all this digital thumb twiddling and there's no way an event could be run cleanly.
What if a player has a dumb phone? What if a player's phone died? Or they lost it in a bar the night before? What if reception in the venue is spotty? (That's usually the case anyway in my experience). You can't run a large event and expect everybody there to adhere to your NWO method of collecting decklists.
To some degree, WOTC encourages these never-ending BS BS discussions because they don't want the data to be collected. And outside of some schlub at SCG who is paid to transcribe hundreds of decklists in order to post information that WOTC wants hidden, it would take an insane amount of coordination and effort (unpaid in both cases) to get this info in a decipherable state. And even then, keeping up with those efforts in multiple events, spanning different time zones, countries, and nerd circles, is just mind-boggling.
This is asking a ton. But at some point y'all have to just say Fuck It. It is what it is. We just gotta play the cards we are dealt, figuratively and literally. Maybe I'm being a nihilist or whatever. But shouldn't y'all be working or something instead of going back and forth in a pointless struggle between wanting something you can't have (data/bannings) and having something you don't want (a weird amorphous blob of a metagame that will forever be half-solved.)?
Not knowing is half the fun. That applies to the rest of the universe, and Legacy too. You just do the best you can do with the 75 you showed up with.
If you're sporting 2100$ worth of cardboard, at an event that requires travel and/or work leave, it's not that unreasonable of an expectation.Quote:
Originally Posted by danyul
Make it an optional feature, and if 70% of players choose to do electronic submissions than that's 70% less physical lists that would need to be typed into a system. Create an app that you link your DCI number to an account, give TO's event codes for people to register, and the whole process becomes more streamlined and data-collection much easier. Whether Wizards wants that kind of info public is one thing, but it would save a ton of man-hours and create a more streamlined infrastructure. Besides, the metric crap-ton of marketing/customer/trend data that players would be putting directly into a Wizard's system, makes it seem like a no-brainer.
That makes a ton of sense and would make life way better for all of us if it was implemented. And that's also why it will never happen. See: MTGO, Wizards Event Reporter. Those products are horrible and continue to be used. From what I've heard, judges have even formulated their own event reporter, presented it to WOTC, and had it turned down in favor of continuing to use WER. The tournament system we have works, but just barely. And that's the WOTC motto. Trying to streamline it is just...a Herculean task.
Also, you would be surprised at how many people at Legacy events are rocking dumb phones, non-functional phones, or just shitty phones that can't run the latest apps. Have you seen Android OS fragmentation charts? App consistency is a nightmare. Developing apps for iOS and Android concurrently is a tech nightmare. And for free? Who will fund that?
Pen and paper will always have to be the backbone of these events.
Wizards' digital department sucks so much at technology that it would almost comical if it wasn't so sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by mlschuma
Even if they did something like this, chances are it would suck so much that it would be infuriating.
I know Jaco goes out of his way to get copies of the decklists at most Vintage events he goes to. I'd bet there's someone who'd be willing to pay the relatively small cost of having those shipped from every big-ish event to post by hand. Being the first person to have those decklists would probably be enough to start your own money-making MTG site.Quote:
Originally Posted by H
I'd almost be willing to do it, but I am really short on time right now, due to real life stuff, plus I really don't have the requisite contacts, as I only know a couple TOs and they mainly run Vintage events in the North East.Quote:
Originally Posted by thecrav
Lay off the haterade, folks. This thread is for discussion, not rants.
Good point about input data - we live in digital world, from my experience of been TO for 4 years (not too big community - about 20+ ppl on each tournament) I waste a lot of time rewriting decklists from sheet of paper to digital data. Few ppl had decklists printed from PC, so I started to ask them to send them on email - that helps me a lot, afterwards I asked other ppl do they can send decklists before tournament to done a lot of work - it was really very helpful. Even if they change something in last minutes (for example SB - they fix just few cards, so I just change some of them by hand).
Normally I'm working as buisness and sysems analytics - gathering data is very important - DCI reporter should have module for decklists conneted with gatherer that would change a lot. Simple data sended even via email could fix all the problems, just poper tag/name with simple content of the mail so you could import data from your mailbox. It's the easiest way to resolve data gathering.
That solution would also bring big data to WotC about the played cards which could be really best way to analysis for R&D team and also B&R. I'm quite suprised that WotC never do it.
I am not sure what they would really gain themselves from the act. The care only about Standard and that format is normally quite limited in its decks and options. When it comes to formats like Legacy and Vintage, they have shown they could care less what really happens and thus the small amount of work needed to do this is not worth their time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal
Honestly, I think they could release the full stats on Legacy events held online without any effort at all, but I know they would not.
This is because WotC is well known for being cheap as hell and paying their employees crap. There's a reason that most people who go there to do game design leave soon after to other companies. You've got to LOVE Magic more than you enjoy getting paid a decent wage to stay there for any significant amount of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
And even then, if you like programming, don't care about money that much and love Magic... do you want to actually work with the POS that's MTGO, that from what I've heard still uses some late 90's era AJAX kludge to work? That's gonna shatter the soul of anyone who cares about doing things well.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkshineKnight
A few months ago, there was a blog entry of some MODO guy who quit Wizards because he tried to be productive, but they wouldn't let him and moved him to DotP instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
It's a miracle how much money Wizard can make despite their horrible, unproductive environment. I'll cheer the day Hasbro decides to finally purge all these useless fucks.
If WotC ignores chances maybe some shops would be more interesting on playable cards with real data - software like:
1 server imap + logical data update each day from mails with proper name/tags
1 function for validaction content via http (to keep data clean)
1 function for results (sum up data and report)
1 function for cards recognize (already written via gatherer and some other bases)
lets sum them up how much costs:
nonfunctional costs:
1 imap server + 1 database (oracle probably would be needed) - that is quite costy also configuration - lets say 10 mandays not more for sure + cost of server + licences + support
functional costs:
1 function for validation - I can't see more then 8 cosmic functional points
1 function for upload data from imap server - 6-7 cfp depends on parametrics (how many of them should be)
1 function for cards recongnize - 4 cfp to use already written
sumed up:
less then 20 cfp + 10 mandays + hardware and licence costs.
Probably depends on country but here (Poland) 1 cfp is from 500$-2000$ - depends on size of project and technologies. Those are really very little many compared to some marketing actions or Events and every format would benefit.
Where was this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Although it's always easy for someone to paint themselves as in the right in any given situation, so whenever I see "disgruntled employee" accounts from any company I always wonder exactly how slanted their account is.
I read this. Also, there is some site that I wandered onto where you rate companies you have worked for. (I'm sure someone here knows what this is, and there are probably dozens of such sites.) But on this one, I found lots of former employees from wotc who had essentially the same to say. It is fairly well established in my mind as fact that the company is mismanaged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Seth
Funny thing is, when Hasbro took over in like, '98 I think, we were all nervous that they would ship out all the creative talent that had made the game excellent to that point in favor of stuffy fellows in bowties with management degrees. Now I think I agree with Barook. There are so many things I do not like about the way they are doing things now that I think a complete shake down is called for. Bring in the muthafuggin suits.
On a more pertinent note, I have lost track of this thread again because it has been more than 12 hours and the conversation has gone round and round since then. But seriously, while last month had Elves to fuel the arguments that everything is awesome, you simply can not refute the effect delve horseshit has had on the format now. TCDecks has all blue decks at the top for December. Every one. What do ya know, you bring back Ancestral Recall and you have a variety of blue decks dominating. It's not rocket surgery.
What exactly is the argument against the format terribly out of balance?
The new narrative is that the data is inconclusive and people aren't innovating enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
https://adayintheloucks.wordpress.co...avingthedream/Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Seth
Didn't read like that to me, but it was a while ago, so maybe I just don't remember it well...
Have you noticed that there is no way to counter either of those positions? They are neither provable nor disprovable, as they are backed up by zero evidence for us to evaluate. I wonder if there is a proper label for such an argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by testing32
How much more evidence do we need, really? If it looks like crap, smells like crap, and you are standing in a pasture, you have to really be on good LSD to continue to claim that you are surrounded by chocolate.
The second one is especially odious because it's not even subjective, refuting it would require proving a negative.
Like everything else in the interminable debate surrounding blue and Brainstorm in Legacy, this narrative is literally years old. It just doesn't get trotted out all that often.Quote:
Originally Posted by testing32
I dunno. I just thought it was silly to suggest apps or 3D printing or some other future tech as a solution to these problems. That's all I was trying to say. I think?
What "balance"? We had this a dozen times within weeks and we know it's not about strategic diversity, but about Tier 2 topdeck-depending strategies not making the cut, because certain users even call Elves a "blue" strategy because of it's tutoring and carddraw. It's absurd. The question isn't IF the format is very blue, but IF it hurts the popularity of the format. As long as GPs break records and various archtypes are playable, I wouldn't call it "terrible". I agree that Cruise formed a new aggressive, streamlined and boring linear shell, but we also see that shell being punished by combo decks lately. First signs that the format beings to adapt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
No, your narrative is claiming to have metagame data by browsing top 8 lists. LolQuote:
Originally Posted by testing32
Futrue tech? Apps are very normal and not really new. Donīt know what you want from 3D printing but an app is a very solid solution for the deck list problem. It will reduce the handwriting thing and also can support the R&D lab with design choices and data how often a certain card is played. Furthermore you can make it avaible for T2 too and you can generate income with comercials inside of the app.Quote:
danyul
I dunno. I just thought it was silly to suggest apps or 3D printing or some other future tech as a solution to these problems. That's all I was trying to say. I think?
If you make it mandantory, which is not a big problem concidering how much a smartphones the players have allready. No the argument that some donīt have a decent handy is not
valid because until you made an actual survey on the matter how many would have problems with the app you canīt say anything about the aceptance level.
So I say this would this so called futuree tech is what we need and maybe we should start in making it optional first and see how it works out.
I decided even better! :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Realizing how this magical "entertainment" restrains me, how the dull metagame with its robotic belt conveyor decks tires me, how the omnipresent masonic art and concepts bother me, and how the whole community disgusts me, I finally sold even the last 300 cards.
Feel free to waste your life in unending battles on stack and whatnot. My three children deserve better father then an "I wanna feel the power through my veins" junkie that has a boner over a piece of cardboard designed by some obese Rosenwasser "game designer".
Wizard's focus has always been Standard and Limited, those formats are their cash cows. Yes, they pretend they care about Commander, but eternal formats are mostly loosely managed, if any. I would recommend you to lower your expectation on Magic and on life in general. You should know what I mean by that. You'll live your life happier that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bed Decks Palyer
My life is not build around the game and I neither have a family I have to leave alone every Saturday for playing the game (Praise the mid week Afterwork Legacy!, so it's not that I look back at the past years and feel I missed out on life, meeting people, see new places or take career options.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bed Decks Palyer
You've set three wonderful reasons into this world to not waste your spare time and energy as a nightshift-worker (afaik at least; sorry if I took you wrong reading about it in another thread) in this forum or, god forbid, on a stranger like me, rather than your family.
Yes, that doesnt show what is top 8ing often! Why would anyone compile that data and form opinions from what decks top 8 consistently?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Because these top 8s are mainly from local events with 8-30 players if you look at his source?Quote:
Originally Posted by menace13
Edit: Don't you think we have differ between local events, the SCG circus which credit free Byes to their "stars" and multi-format grinders and multi-national events like BoM, GPs and Co. when looking at T8s alone? Seriously, if N. Kronberger wins at BoM 9 with Loam its counts less for the statistic than three people top 8ing local events with less than 20 Players.
Right. Wouldnt those players in a local be some part of the bigger events? And if they were wouldnt they pilot what they have familiarity with or a liking to? To be clearer, as an example. If a certain part of the world is known for playing combo. Does it not seem likely that they would play elves and storm in their locals and then also at bom/gp/scg? Take Julian. We all know he will play elves everywhere. Are his top 8s at a local to be discredited? Why would then another local top 8 not be taken into the data pool as a portion of a larger average of top 8 decks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
When lets stay with Julian here: he tops local events, BoM side events, wins one and T16s a GP. This does have weight. Why should players, which top 8 their local event with 9 Players (like some tournaments the data was taken from) but have absolutely no impact on a bigger tournament, outshine Julians results and statistical impact just because their event fires more often and they ergo Top8 frequently?Quote:
Originally Posted by menace13
Heck, WotC even banned several players, because they abused the old Reward & Rating system with such mini-tournaments.
So now it's an attack on methodology and data. Hint: no data or methodology will ever look good enough to you if you could justify old bans like Survival or MM but not Brainstorm right now. Faith can't be shaken by proof.
As for me, i stopped playing this game. Standard is horrid with total focus on creatures, Modern has no duals nor waste and as such no appeal to me, and Legacy is now enslaved in a circle of stagnation where everything is blue and will always be because blue has the best shell and WotC can't ban cards if they're blue but hey, we can ban fucking SotF because it's green (and i'd add even Skullclamp at this point be less degenerate than the blue shell). So have fun gentlemen, i'll continue doing some booster drafts and limited because at least there i can have fun deckbulding and it doesn't cost thousands of dollars.
It does not outshine. It serves as a data point for what players are playing and winning with. That BoM Loam guy is an outlier when taken as a whole. Obviously even at these small 9 player events Loam isnt showing up. I can draw from the collective data that more players choose to play blue decks. And it's not for any of the random reasons like they lack innovation, or theyre scared to play something else. Basically it comes down to anyone with access to the internet knows what the majority of the player base is sleeving up often. Why should I not play what is generally agreed upon as the best cards to win an event. Whether that is 9 man events or 4,000 players. Why then would the data of top8s taken as a whole not show what I have to prepare for? Are all of those 9 player events piloting fringe niche decks like illusions or slivers? Or are they close enough to resemble what decks top 8 larger events?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
As presented as an example before, you can push fringe decks like NicFit mainly via a 3 local showings to appear on 24# Place. This shows clearly the weighing of these events on the statistic and the effect is even stronger if you look at the relation of UR Delver showings on the same source. You can draw that players choose to play blue, but you can't say that it isn't rooted on the downward spiral that "Players see blue decks in a top 8 -> pick it up because it appears to be the best -> more blue decks in the Format -> higher chance that blue decks top 8 -> more players pick up blue -> repeat" and because of the internet and forum hive Mind thinking that UR Delver is the best (for the moment). Every time those decks run into a natural predator like Storm, Maverick, Pyro-Jund or Punishing Fire-Loam and loose miserably, people call it "outliner". I call it metagame development.Quote:
Originally Posted by menace13
You can pick Top 8 data to see what to prepare for, sure. But does this mean you have to join the hype train and that there are no decks what can beat those decks? No. That's just lazy.
For your question: no, those small Top8 do not necessarily look like the ones of the bigger tournaments: here, here and here
Another "shot at the dark" at a possible format 'fix.'
Ban Ponder and Vengevine: Yes I know Preordain will simply replace Ponder, and Serum Visions to take the place of the former. But this change would lessen incentives to play blue. GY strategies are at an all time low, I'd like the return of Survival. Necrotic Ooze combo is bearable compared to LED > quad Vines. For this reason, Vengevine has to hit the dirt.
Unban Survival of the fittest and Hermit Druid: As I said before, Survival is one of those decks that doesn't need blue. Hermit Druid is a full turn faster than Undercity Informer and Balustrade Spy, he also gives the opponent a turn to deal with him. In Lightning Bolt, Swords to Plowshares and Abrupt Decay territory Druid seems terrible, in theory. These two green cards would detract attention from blue.
Keep Mind Twist and Black Vise banned: These cards are easily splashable by the blue color that I fear introducing them into the current environment could bring more harm than good. They can be unbanned sure, but right now these two offer no significant contribution to a healthier format.
How about Earthcraft? It's an enchantment that can be abused with another enchantment, Squirrel Nest is legal, both tutorable by a single spell (Enlightened Tutor). The reason to ban Mystical Tutor was to limit access of Reanimator and Ad Nauseam to their combo spells. Reason why Show and Tell decks aren't overperforming is that no cheap tutor allows access to either half of their combo.
Do I now have to link back to 3 random small events that share deck types of bigger events? I can comprehend your links and tell from total lists that UR Delver, Storm, Patriot, and Lands are what I should see most of if a fraction of those players came to a larger event.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
If all those small events added enough to skewer top 8s then that will reflect in the total standings. Those 3 events do not resemble last month where totals were different for the top 15 decks. Are you saying your links do not show what decks appear in multiples that also appear as top placings in larger events? Or that the smaller events may have some fringe decks but when accounted for as a total the outlier decks dont break the top 15?
Yes, clearly shows me that Nic Fit is fringe with 3 placings in locals for December and that I shouldn't plan for it ? Am I wrong? Why are we worried that 3 small events pushed Nic Fit to 24th when we can see that the top decks are what should be planned for since they have 15-30 placings? Are you saying that people will push fringe decks into top spots and that will give wrong impression of what the most winning decks are?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Cool. I call it outlier. A thing different from all other members of a particular set. Storm isnt outlier. The rest of that junk you listed doesnt even brainstorm, bro. They will remain outlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I'm not Sherlock Holmes, but i see a connection. People that argue for a Ponder ban are also kind of really smart people and would make perfect designers at Wotc because of their deep understanding of the game. I would also like to unban Oath of Druids, because well you know it can be easily destroyed by Abrupt Decay and there is already Storm in the format which can kill you on turn 1, Oath can't do that so i think it's fine. Also nonblue decks have more ways to interact with Oath than with Show and Tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by death