In big Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments, at the upper tables, if you try to "draw in" and a judge finds out, you're liable to get your ass thrown out of the whole thing. It doesn't always (or even usually) happen, but they want you to play out each round in order to even the odds a little and make an "8-round tournament" actually 8 rounds.
Now, I know I just invoked the bane of most Magic players, but I think they've got a superior standpoint here. In my limited tournament experience, I always found the "intentional draw lock" stupid, irritating, and degrading to an otherwise awesome OP setup. If we wanted the tournament to be one less round, we'd make it one less round. Play the damn game.
As far as intentional scoops: I'm not really okay with them on the same grounds. I remember asking for one once, at which my opponent replied, "You need to earn it. Why should I let you prevent someone who's, honestly, probably better from making it?" (This sounds insulting, but I know the guy, and it wasn't in this case.) I think it fits with the argument I used above. Play the damn game.
Mental Misstep Hysteria sweeps the nation! Legacy format to never be the same! Wizards releases new card made of space-age polymers and Tang, infused with the DNA of Ramses II, Alexander the Great, and Joe Montana! Every Legacy deck to begin “4 Mental Misstep and 56 other, less exciting cards” forever more!
In my opinion its not rude to ask for a concession and its not rude to not concede. Go ahead and ask, and I'll either say yes or no; that's the end of that. It is rude, however, to continue to persuade someone to concede to you.
Ok, BweeBwee and lycantivis, you can stop this crap right now and stay on topic without personally attacking each other or you can both start getting Warnings/Infractions. Capisce?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...because without beer, things do not seem to go as well."
Yes that is when rating matters. For the most part I'm going to say that over 90% of the time rating doesn't matter. As for another reason to do the whole scoop thing. When you do scoop to someone who will make t8 not only is there the possibility of packs (generally high but whatever), but it also allows you to network. I mean I assure I remember everyone who has scooped me in to anything and I have definitely helped them with deck critique testing etc. Or recommending other people to scoop to him when in that position because he scooped me in. Not to mention the whole karma thing on if you scoop people in then someone may scoop you in. And as for dreamcrushing if you dreamcrush someone you better hope you are never in the position to draw in. I have definitely seen people dreamcrushed out of t8'es just because they had previously dreamcrushed someone. **** I've done it to a few donks. As for the oh noes what about 9th place well guess what someone has to get it. And if they had won all their matches it wouldn't be them. Then again I've hit 9th at a GP and yet I had to lose 3 matches to do it. If I had deserved to t8 I would have won one of those matches.
In big Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments, at the upper tables, if you try to "draw in" and a judge finds out, you're liable to get your ass thrown out of the whole thing. It doesn't always (or even usually) happen, but they want you to play out each round in order to even the odds a little and make an "8-round tournament" actually 8 rounds.
Now, I know I just invoked the bane of most Magic players, but I think they've got a superior standpoint here. In my limited tournament experience, I always found the "intentional draw lock" stupid, irritating, and degrading to an otherwise awesome OP setup. If we wanted the tournament to be one less round, we'd make it one less round. Play the damn game.
As far as intentional scoops: I'm not really okay with them on the same grounds. I remember asking for one once, at which my opponent replied, "You need to earn it. Why should I let you prevent someone who's, honestly, probably better from making it?" (This sounds insulting, but I know the guy, and it wasn't in this case.) I think it fits with the argument I used above. Play the damn game.
What a lot of people in here and in the Swiss System Flaw thread seem to be missing, is that forcing people to play out rounds doesn't make it any easier for people who are outside of contention to make T8.
Without draws, people could methodically scoop based on tiebreakers, to ensure that even the loser would end up with the highest breakers out of the people with the same record (he after, did just scoop to someone who is now X-0). The end result is the same, people who weren't going to make T8 with IDs, aren't going to make T8 without them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to a_passer_bye for an incredible signature banner!
What a lot of people in here and in the Swiss System Flaw thread seem to be missing, is that forcing people to play out rounds doesn't make it any easier for people who are outside of contention to make T8.
Without draws, people could methodically scoop based on tiebreakers, to ensure that even the loser would end up with the highest breakers out of the people with the same record (he after, did just scoop to someone who is now X-0). The end result is the same, people who weren't going to make T8 with IDs, aren't going to make T8 without them.
^^But that's a lot harder to do, it seems. And if one link gets screwed up, the whole process does, acting as a deterrent.
As I said, I have the same problem with intentional scooping as ID's, but I admit they're harder to enforce if done correctly. I don't really have a solution in that regard except that eliminating ID's makes it significantly harder to lame your way in.
Mental Misstep Hysteria sweeps the nation! Legacy format to never be the same! Wizards releases new card made of space-age polymers and Tang, infused with the DNA of Ramses II, Alexander the Great, and Joe Montana! Every Legacy deck to begin “4 Mental Misstep and 56 other, less exciting cards” forever more!
If I scoop: no benefit to me.
Helps my opponent (+1 moral point), screws someone else (-1). Morally neutral.
If I play: very minimal benefit to me (rating)
Helps someone else (+1), screws my opponent (-1). Morally neutral.
Conclusion: As long as rating is worth anything to you more than *exactly* zero, scooping is for suckers.
Counterpoint:
People bring up the possibility of getting compensated as a potential benefit from scooping. There are two situations:
a) Compensation is reliable/certain. Scooping is beneficial as long as packs is worth more than ratings, which we will assume is true every time. However, this case is called *bribery* and might result in disqualification and ban. No go.
b) Compensation is unreliable, based on a vague implicit/tacit social bribery contract which some posters here suggest is the norm at high level play. This is me relying on the kindness of strangers. I loathe and detest strangers and want them to die at the hands of my cardboard minions. Also, I have a very low opinion of them and do not find it wise to rely on their kindness when the cruel reality of this harsh world is that people are dicks. I do not wish to compromise an actual, if minimal, benefit like ratings for the potentiality of getting something from the hated strangers. Also, if the legalistically minded people here are right that this isn't considered illegal per the DCI, it is still, morally, bribery. Just a tacit, "I won't tell if you won't, just give it back to me in some future tourney", form of bribery.
b) Compensation is unreliable, based on a vague implicit/tacit social bribery contract which some posters here suggest is the norm at high level play. This is me relying on the kindness of strangers. I loathe and detest strangers and want them to die at the hands of my cardboard minions. Also, I have a very low opinion of them and do not find it wise to rely on their kindness when the cruel reality of this harsh world is that people are dicks. I do not wish to compromise an actual, if minimal, benefit like ratings for the potentiality of getting something from the hated strangers. Also, if the legalistically minded people here are right that this isn't considered illegal per the DCI, it is still, morally, bribery. Just a tacit, "I won't tell if you won't, just give it back to me in some future tourney", form of bribery.
Wow. I read and like the writings of Ayn Rand, and people call me anti-social. But you, sir, take the cake.
I have no problem with your viewpoint, but do you really need to call other people immoral? Magic is a game and people derive enjoyment from it in many ways. Calling someone who isn't colluding and merely hopes for some packs immoral just because they don't share your same line of thinking is very close-minded.
I loathe and detest strangers and want them to die at the hands of my cardboard minions.
Now, folks, that is a quote to sig. Well put, man (and for once, I'm not being sarcastic!).
If you break it down logically like that, I have to agree. Granted, I held your view anyway, but I feel yours is of a much different backing than mine, so the two reinforce each other.
Mental Misstep Hysteria sweeps the nation! Legacy format to never be the same! Wizards releases new card made of space-age polymers and Tang, infused with the DNA of Ramses II, Alexander the Great, and Joe Montana! Every Legacy deck to begin “4 Mental Misstep and 56 other, less exciting cards” forever more!
If it was a member of our team, and I literally had no shot to make top 8... then yes, I would scoop to them in order to get them there. That's a standard agreement with our group. However we do not scoop to random people just to get them in to the Top 8. Dreamcrush the crap out of them and let chaos reign.
The reason intentional draws were put into place is that if two people really did want to draw all they have to do is play the entire 50 minutes as draw, consider options, land... take time to consider a play and pass the turn. 50 minutes later you have a board filled with nothing but lands and no winners. A 0-0 draw. That's why intentional draws are allowed, because they would happen anyway.
As for why its not allowed in Magic Online, my best guess, despite what Wizards may try to say, is programming purposes.
Drawing is not the same as conceding. You are not allowing undeserving players to reach the top 8. When you draw, it is because you are X-0 or X-1 or X-0-1, meaning you and your opponent already have enough match wins to guarantee a top 8 slot if you draw. You are drawing because it guarantees YOU a top 8 slot. When you are in a situation where your opponent wants you to concede, they need an additional match win to top 8, and you aren't guaranteed anything except a loss.
Personal things aside...
how are they different? Both conditions end up with a decided match that was not played...And by doing both it keeps other people out of the top 8...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I will play what wins, not what is convenient. Personal preference is nothing, The win is all that matters. I will netdeck at every opportunity, but I will not let that stifle my creativity. Style points do not appear on tournament reports. A good deck with an incompetent pilot is nothing more than a dressed up match win. I will crush my opponent mercilessly, and expect no less from him. Victory is its own reward, The prize is just a bonus.
Legacy is dying
In big Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments, at the upper tables, if you try to "draw in" and a judge finds out, you're liable to get your ass thrown out of the whole thing. It doesn't always (or even usually) happen, but they want you to play out each round in order to even the odds a little and make an "8-round tournament" actually 8 rounds.
Now, I know I just invoked the bane of most Magic players, but I think they've got a superior standpoint here. In my limited tournament experience, I always found the "intentional draw lock" stupid, irritating, and degrading to an otherwise awesome OP setup. If we wanted the tournament to be one less round, we'd make it one less round. Play the damn game.
As far as intentional scoops: I'm not really okay with them on the same grounds. I remember asking for one once, at which my opponent replied, "You need to earn it. Why should I let you prevent someone who's, honestly, probably better from making it?" (This sounds insulting, but I know the guy, and it wasn't in this case.) I think it fits with the argument I used above. Play the damn game.
Was that post meant to contribute, or was it meant to be an advertisement to not play yugioh?
Yes that is when rating matters. For the most part I'm going to say that over 90% of the time rating doesn't matter. As for another reason to do the whole scoop thing. When you do scoop to someone who will make t8 not only is there the possibility of packs (generally high but whatever), but it also allows you to network. I mean I assure I remember everyone who has scooped me in to anything and I have definitely helped them with deck critique testing etc. Or recommending other people to scoop to him when in that position because he scooped me in. Not to mention the whole karma thing on if you scoop people in then someone may scoop you in. And as for dreamcrushing if you dreamcrush someone you better hope you are never in the position to draw in. I have definitely seen people dreamcrushed out of t8'es just because they had previously dreamcrushed someone. **** I've done it to a few donks. As for the oh noes what about 9th place well guess what someone has to get it. And if they had won all their matches it wouldn't be them. Then again I've hit 9th at a GP and yet I had to lose 3 matches to do it. If I had deserved to t8 I would have won one of those matches.
This. This x1000 times over.
Networking in Magic is ridiculously beneficial. There's been times where I've met people standing in line at the table, dicked around with them, and was able to borrow high caliber netdecks for nothing.
Jace on the other hand gives you card advantage for no life cost. On the contrary, Jace can actually take some damage for you. I'd think that makes him better than Arena.
You can't compare YGO tournaments with Magic tournaments. Unlike most of our players, their players are a lot younger. (on average)
At the top tier (the only place that matters in regard to this thread), the tournaments are extremely comparable demographically. Trust me; I've actually been there.
From what I'm reading is that the 'judges' there are actively trying to make the game go /their/ way. I don't know much about the YGO Penalty Guidelines(if they even have them) but if this were true, I'm not going to play in a tournament where the judge is deciding how I play my round.
For instance: My opponent has a face-down card. I'm not attacking until the end of the round, only out of fear of that card being something that wrecks me. I also have a facedown card. We draw. So I get kicked out of the tournament for not making the 'right' play? Sorry, but that kind of rubs me the wrong way, and is yet another reason for me not to play YGO tournaments.
Umm... what? I'm very confused by what you're asserting here. If you screw up, then of course you'll lose. If you go to time, you'll enter a tiebreaker. You wouldn't get DQ'd for not making the "right" play; you'd just lose the match. Unless I'm misinterpreting.
And yes, believe it or not, YGO does have Penalty Guidelines. This is the kind of elitism many people invoke when they say they don't want to get involved in MTG. Just because it's the oldest and (IMO) best established card games doesn't mean it's the only legitimate one.
Also, I point you to the other thread where I have shown that those who ID were already locked for top 8 on tiebreakers alone. IDing is the same as the highest tiebreaked player conceding. It's not gonig to get you in, it never would.
Okay. But at least you could "screw up" the intentional scoop easier, which could act as a deterrent. Plus (and I don't know if I addressed this), IDing strikes me as very rude to all the other players in the tournament. "Oh, we don't have to actually play this round out and possibly put ourselves at risk unlike all of you; we're better than that."
I'm going to repeat myself: If you don't make top 8 at 5-2... that's usual. The system is made such that after X rounds, all players at X-1 are in top 8. (Where X is dependant on the amount of players. See premier event round total for X) Nothing more, nothing less. If you didn't make it, you're not good enough and try next time. It won't change if people stop IDing.
Alright, but I'd really rather have an X-round tournament be X rounds, not [(X-1) + ID] rounds.
Please take your IDs to the other thread, concessions should remain here.
I have talked about concessions and merely explained my reasoning behind my position in the context of ID's. I don't think I've been that off-topic, but I'll try not to create anymore confusion in this regard.
ISing and IDing strike me as eerily similar, and thus I take issue with both. Once again: If you're in a tournament, play the damn game. It's the only way to get truly accurate results and not hose other people selfishly. And sometimes, you'll be on the receiving end of such accuracy.
EDIT:
Quote from Jules »
Was that post meant to contribute, or was it meant to be an advertisement to not play yugioh?
It was meant to have you read the thing before you responded. I suggest you do so.
Mental Misstep Hysteria sweeps the nation! Legacy format to never be the same! Wizards releases new card made of space-age polymers and Tang, infused with the DNA of Ramses II, Alexander the Great, and Joe Montana! Every Legacy deck to begin “4 Mental Misstep and 56 other, less exciting cards” forever more!
Networking in Magic is ridiculously beneficial. There's been times where I've met people standing in line at the table, dicked around with them, and was able to borrow high caliber netdecks for nothing.
I can borrow high caliber netdecks from my team members. And all you're demonstrating is that people with the right connections can bully other people into giving them wins they shouldn't have.
Yeah I can borrow decks from my team members too. Just I get to have more teams, and a higher knowledge of the metagame due to being in more teams. Due to networking. Also what is more important since everything is morally equal. Your rating points going down a few when they don't matter for byes (because if they did that's a valid reason for not scooping and acceptable) Or the potential for packs + networking + future scoops etc. Like yeah your opponent may be a jerk. But he may also have knowledge on stuff you don't or cards to borrow or people he knows that will borrow you cards and maybe you get packs or w/e. I mean you people fighting against it have 0 idea just how powerful scooping to someone can be for your future at magic. Or barning the right people but that's a whole nother topic.
I can borrow high caliber netdecks from my team members. And all you're demonstrating is that people with the right connections can bully other people into giving them wins they shouldn't have.
Lol? That may be true, but when your team is set up like mine i s, when 4 of you all want to play the same deck, the cards just aren't there. Having the ability to equip all your players with what they are most comfortable with, and being able to change a deck right before the start is pretty handy.
And lol again, on the bullying part. I have never seen a forced concession, nonetheless a request that was asked in a hostile manner.
Jace on the other hand gives you card advantage for no life cost. On the contrary, Jace can actually take some damage for you. I'd think that makes him better than Arena.
I can borrow high caliber netdecks from my team members. And all you're demonstrating is that people with the right connections can bully other people into giving them wins they shouldn't have.
Why are you throwing bully in there? If you're bullying someone into conceding you probably don't deserve it in the first place. I can borrow from friends too, but like GP said, if 5 people in a network need the same deck, it's hard to get 20 copies of X card. This is where having more connections comes into play. It's not about borrowing decks specifically, but rather about having more connections for everything as a whole.
From your posts so far you are acting completely irrational and you're pretty much braindead from my view regardless.
In big Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments, at the upper tables, if you try to "draw in" and a judge finds out, you're liable to get your ass thrown out of the whole thing. It doesn't always (or even usually) happen, but they want you to play out each round in order to even the odds a little and make an "8-round tournament" actually 8 rounds.
Now, I know I just invoked the bane of most Magic players, but I think they've got a superior standpoint here. In my limited tournament experience, I always found the "intentional draw lock" stupid, irritating, and degrading to an otherwise awesome OP setup. If we wanted the tournament to be one less round, we'd make it one less round. Play the damn game.
As far as intentional scoops: I'm not really okay with them on the same grounds. I remember asking for one once, at which my opponent replied, "You need to earn it. Why should I let you prevent someone who's, honestly, probably better from making it?" (This sounds insulting, but I know the guy, and it wasn't in this case.) I think it fits with the argument I used above. Play the damn game.
^^Thanks dantcg!
What a lot of people in here and in the Swiss System Flaw thread seem to be missing, is that forcing people to play out rounds doesn't make it any easier for people who are outside of contention to make T8.
Without draws, people could methodically scoop based on tiebreakers, to ensure that even the loser would end up with the highest breakers out of the people with the same record (he after, did just scoop to someone who is now X-0). The end result is the same, people who weren't going to make T8 with IDs, aren't going to make T8 without them.
Thanks to a_passer_bye for an incredible signature banner!
Trade with me!
^^But that's a lot harder to do, it seems. And if one link gets screwed up, the whole process does, acting as a deterrent.
As I said, I have the same problem with intentional scooping as ID's, but I admit they're harder to enforce if done correctly. I don't really have a solution in that regard except that eliminating ID's makes it significantly harder to lame your way in.
^^Thanks dantcg!
If I scoop: no benefit to me.
Helps my opponent (+1 moral point), screws someone else (-1). Morally neutral.
If I play: very minimal benefit to me (rating)
Helps someone else (+1), screws my opponent (-1). Morally neutral.
Conclusion: As long as rating is worth anything to you more than *exactly* zero, scooping is for suckers.
Counterpoint:
People bring up the possibility of getting compensated as a potential benefit from scooping. There are two situations:
a) Compensation is reliable/certain. Scooping is beneficial as long as packs is worth more than ratings, which we will assume is true every time. However, this case is called *bribery* and might result in disqualification and ban. No go.
b) Compensation is unreliable, based on a vague implicit/tacit social bribery contract which some posters here suggest is the norm at high level play. This is me relying on the kindness of strangers. I loathe and detest strangers and want them to die at the hands of my cardboard minions. Also, I have a very low opinion of them and do not find it wise to rely on their kindness when the cruel reality of this harsh world is that people are dicks. I do not wish to compromise an actual, if minimal, benefit like ratings for the potentiality of getting something from the hated strangers. Also, if the legalistically minded people here are right that this isn't considered illegal per the DCI, it is still, morally, bribery. Just a tacit, "I won't tell if you won't, just give it back to me in some future tourney", form of bribery.
Netdecking is Rightdecking
My latest data-driven Magic the Gathering strategy article
(TLDR: Analysis of the Valakut matchups. UB rising in the rankings. Aggro correspondingly taking a dive.)
Wow. I read and like the writings of Ayn Rand, and people call me anti-social. But you, sir, take the cake.
I have no problem with your viewpoint, but do you really need to call other people immoral? Magic is a game and people derive enjoyment from it in many ways. Calling someone who isn't colluding and merely hopes for some packs immoral just because they don't share your same line of thinking is very close-minded.
Now, folks, that is a quote to sig. Well put, man (and for once, I'm not being sarcastic!).
If you break it down logically like that, I have to agree. Granted, I held your view anyway, but I feel yours is of a much different backing than mine, so the two reinforce each other.
^^Thanks dantcg!
The reason intentional draws were put into place is that if two people really did want to draw all they have to do is play the entire 50 minutes as draw, consider options, land... take time to consider a play and pass the turn. 50 minutes later you have a board filled with nothing but lands and no winners. A 0-0 draw. That's why intentional draws are allowed, because they would happen anyway.
As for why its not allowed in Magic Online, my best guess, despite what Wizards may try to say, is programming purposes.
Personal things aside...
how are they different? Both conditions end up with a decided match that was not played...And by doing both it keeps other people out of the top 8...
Personal preference is nothing, The win is all that matters.
I will netdeck at every opportunity, but I will not let that stifle my creativity.
Style points do not appear on tournament reports.
A good deck with an incompetent pilot is nothing more than a dressed up match win.
I will crush my opponent mercilessly, and expect no less from him.
Victory is its own reward, The prize is just a bonus.
Legacy is dying
Was that post meant to contribute, or was it meant to be an advertisement to not play yugioh?
This. This x1000 times over.
Networking in Magic is ridiculously beneficial. There's been times where I've met people standing in line at the table, dicked around with them, and was able to borrow high caliber netdecks for nothing.
At the top tier (the only place that matters in regard to this thread), the tournaments are extremely comparable demographically. Trust me; I've actually been there.
Umm... what? I'm very confused by what you're asserting here. If you screw up, then of course you'll lose. If you go to time, you'll enter a tiebreaker. You wouldn't get DQ'd for not making the "right" play; you'd just lose the match. Unless I'm misinterpreting.
And yes, believe it or not, YGO does have Penalty Guidelines. This is the kind of elitism many people invoke when they say they don't want to get involved in MTG. Just because it's the oldest and (IMO) best established card games doesn't mean it's the only legitimate one.
Okay. But at least you could "screw up" the intentional scoop easier, which could act as a deterrent. Plus (and I don't know if I addressed this), IDing strikes me as very rude to all the other players in the tournament. "Oh, we don't have to actually play this round out and possibly put ourselves at risk unlike all of you; we're better than that."
Alright, but I'd really rather have an X-round tournament be X rounds, not [(X-1) + ID] rounds.
I have talked about concessions and merely explained my reasoning behind my position in the context of ID's. I don't think I've been that off-topic, but I'll try not to create anymore confusion in this regard.
ISing and IDing strike me as eerily similar, and thus I take issue with both. Once again: If you're in a tournament, play the damn game. It's the only way to get truly accurate results and not hose other people selfishly. And sometimes, you'll be on the receiving end of such accuracy.
EDIT:
It was meant to have you read the thing before you responded. I suggest you do so.
^^Thanks dantcg!
I can borrow high caliber netdecks from my team members. And all you're demonstrating is that people with the right connections can bully other people into giving them wins they shouldn't have.
Netdecking is Rightdecking
My latest data-driven Magic the Gathering strategy article
(TLDR: Analysis of the Valakut matchups. UB rising in the rankings. Aggro correspondingly taking a dive.)
Lol? That may be true, but when your team is set up like mine i s, when 4 of you all want to play the same deck, the cards just aren't there. Having the ability to equip all your players with what they are most comfortable with, and being able to change a deck right before the start is pretty handy.
And lol again, on the bullying part. I have never seen a forced concession, nonetheless a request that was asked in a hostile manner.
Lets be real here.
Why are you throwing bully in there? If you're bullying someone into conceding you probably don't deserve it in the first place. I can borrow from friends too, but like GP said, if 5 people in a network need the same deck, it's hard to get 20 copies of X card. This is where having more connections comes into play. It's not about borrowing decks specifically, but rather about having more connections for everything as a whole.
From your posts so far you are acting completely irrational and you're pretty much braindead from my view regardless.