I was thinking about the following:
In wich element category would fit mana generation?
And realized that it should be creation. Because generating mana is the first principle of creating anything in the MtG world. Also, the two colors that manages creation at best (red and green) are also the two colors that generates more mana in the current pie (also, see Manamorphose.)
Even so, I still doubtful about that. What do you think? (if possible, answer this before the 11th day ends. :p)
Something I've considered before, and the Nov. semis reminded me to bring up: Should the elimination rounds (Top 8 and 4) all be judged by poll, like the final already is? It would have to be a fairly short poll (2-3 days) to keep up with the schedule, but that might be faster than waiting on a single player to post critiques. It also lets more players participate, and I often find it interesting to see how people's themes have progressed beyond what I have seen in the first three rounds. There is also the possibility that you might be in the semi-finals with 2 other players who happen to dislike your particular theme or whatever, even though the cards might appeal to a broader audience.
If I could think of any disadvantage, it would be the responsibility of the host to set up and monitor the poll, which we've had slight issues with before. Might limit votes to players who at least signed up for the first round.
Also, in the semis, the last one posting (if wasn't eliminated by the other pool) may practicaly choose his opponent at will. that does not sound cool at all.
If your going to poll the final rounds, the issue is that one person might be well liked and come up with a bad card, while the other person may come with a good card but not well liked. The issue in that alone is pretty bad because then the person, even though unliked, would probably not get a vote because people would vote for the person NOT liking them.
It's hard to say what people will do in that situation, but it's not a majority vote via popularity in such a case, its about who came up with the best card.
I wish it was about the whole series of cards they designed for the competition instead.
I wish it was about the whole series of cards they designed for the competition instead.
This brings up an interesting point. When critiquing (and voting, whenever that starts) how much should the previous rounds' cards affect our opinions?
I mean, I find flavor really important, so to me, someone with good flavor and bad design is on equal ground with someone who has good design and bad flavor. Furthermore, I try to always consider how the card would be useful when played in conjunction with the previously designed cards as opposed to how they look in a vacuum. Basically, in summation, I care a lot about the previous designs.
Others, however, do not.
Should this be standardized in some way? I try to lean more towards flavor, which depending on the judges, can me make fall flat. Furthermore, sometimes you just end up comparing "Core Sets" to "Expansions", and they're so different in what they're trying to accomplish that it gets hard to judge. Has anyone else encountered these issues?
As a counterpoint to Brasil, I try to judge solely on the current Round's submissions and criteria, if possible. The problem is, that doesn't necessarily mean the submissions are relevant to one another throughout the course of the month.
The following is not a critique of ImpulsiveKnowledge's December CCL.
In the Decemeber contest, the Round 0 Signature Spell has had no bearing or interaction with the first two Rounds so far. For the way I prefer to judge, this was fine, as I could examine each Round individually. In the story for Round 3, however, it says:
"Look onto your comrades at your times of crisis. See into their minds and learn their skills, and use those skills to suppress your own creations. Using your very own professions to your own creations will only fuel it... make the maelstrom fear change by targeting your own creations within to counteract it."
However, this is not in the bolded design guidelines for the Round, so I don't know if it should be taken into consideration for the judging or not, though I did consider it for my design. Whether the rest of the participants take this into consideration is also unknown; I haven't really been looking at the others as the submission deadline hasn't yet been reached.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
May your games be chaotic and your decks be Rogue.
PsiJet, I'm not clear exactly what you are suggesting, I think the main idea is that polls are a popularity contest? How is that different from getting critiques from other players (the same people who would vote in a poll)? BlackBull brings up a good point, in that the elimination round people do have an incentive to vote for the worse designer so they can beat them in later rounds, although I don't really suspect anyone of doing so.
On the overall/single round issue, I have always taken the structure of the CCL to mean that "compatibility with previous cards" is a minor area to judge. I know there have been times where, presented with cards that I like equally, I will give the edge in a Top 3 to a card that fits with the previous set. I don't like it when people fail to post their previous cards for that reason. Another thing to note is that compatibility with previous cards is not necessarily a flavor thing, it can be but it can also be mechanical. The best cards are both; I envision the ideal CCL set as a group of cards that would all have a place in the same deck.
I am more the type to look at first the card in question for the round and then how well it would work with the other cards they've created. True sometimes this is not really plausible or easy, I find that a lot of times that people have made cards that flow with each other.
GM: True that polls and critiques are popularity based. I just wish there was a way to deter that so it becomes more about the card(s) instead of "I like this person, so I'll vote for them" kind of thing, but on the downside I don't think that would be possible.
Right, Shaddock's contest is an interesting take on that where the contestants PM everything to him and he runs the polls anonymously, but I think that is too much to ask of a host for the CCL, and it would make it impossible to build on a theme anyway.
Does anyone else have opinions on running the elimination rounds with polls?
Possibly instead of the single elimination for the semifinals, make it a free-for-all, meaning all contestants in the semifinals give a score of each other contestant, and the two top scorers move on. To balance this, the host could also post his or her score of each entry.
On a completely unrelated note, the November CCL is now officially done. I had fun messing with the rules of the contest to get my theme across, and I have a cool idea on how to do something like that again, only crazier... so if you could put me back on the list, that would be very kind of you. I understand that it's going to be at least six months until I'll get a chance to host, but that actually works well for me.
No time for deep comments, but I think that making the poll anonymous will be healty for the contest. Seriously, it will help some, if not almost the people to focus on the cards, I'm pretty sure. (the only problem will be that the anonymity will be hurted by the interconection between rounds. :/
I did send a PM, haven't seen him around though. I sent one to Doom Lich as next in line. Sorry, traveling today so I'll have to check more thoroughly when I get home.
Update - Doom Lich has agreed to host, hopefully he can get the first round up soon.
The polls for the December CCL are up. This time, we got Gerrard's Mom versus Phyrexian Editor. If you are reading this, and have a few minutes to kill, be sure to check it out and vote for who you think has the better grasp of the elements.
If anyone happens to run across Doom Lich, could you advise him that if we are supposed to judge Round 1 by tomorrow at midnight EST, it would be nice to know which team we're supposed to judge?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
May your games be chaotic and your decks be Rogue.
Zzapper - :symur::symur:
Instant (R)
Destroy target permanent with a Z in its name. I'm the Z zapper. I zap Z's. I really don't like Z's. I just don't. I mean, who needs them? Z's. pfffft.
Yup, I'm online at all hours, I'm an insomniac, what of it?
LOL...the crits this round are funny. It's a friggin' bloodbath. Granted I know pretty much where the whole 'I want to flamebait but can't' started (in other words, which crit started that).
Really? I'm wasn't any more critical than normal. I'm only reading the reviews for Team Murasa, which, (currently) there are only two of seven up. I'll have to take your word regarding a bloodbath. [EDIT: Shinen's review is meant to be humorous. The first card is great, but the second is missing sooo much.]
I think the review deadline might need a 48-hour extension given the delayed start.
I'd like to just say to a couple of people reviewing my cards, thank you for your imput, I really do value it, that Ninjitsu meshes quite well with the ally theme because when you use the Ninjutsu ability, it triggers all the ally abilities. I've seen a couple people either miss this connection, or are confused about how these two things interact, but it does work like this...I think...XP
Zzapper - :symur::symur:
Instant (R)
Destroy target permanent with a Z in its name. I'm the Z zapper. I zap Z's. I really don't like Z's. I just don't. I mean, who needs them? Z's. pfffft.
Yup, I'm online at all hours, I'm an insomniac, what of it?
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
[Clan Flamingo] Tier Archivist
[15:21] <@CC> Remember, if you argue, you are an idiot.
Untrophied Wins:
Perfect MCC Scores: 2
---------------------------------------------------------------
In wich element category would fit mana generation?
And realized that it should be creation. Because generating mana is the first principle of creating anything in the MtG world. Also, the two colors that manages creation at best (red and green) are also the two colors that generates more mana in the current pie (also, see Manamorphose.)
Even so, I still doubtful about that. What do you think? (if possible, answer this before the 11th day ends. :p)
Thanks in advance.
If I could think of any disadvantage, it would be the responsibility of the host to set up and monitor the poll, which we've had slight issues with before. Might limit votes to players who at least signed up for the first round.
Anybody have thoughts?
It's hard to say what people will do in that situation, but it's not a majority vote via popularity in such a case, its about who came up with the best card.
I wish it was about the whole series of cards they designed for the competition instead.
This brings up an interesting point. When critiquing (and voting, whenever that starts) how much should the previous rounds' cards affect our opinions?
I mean, I find flavor really important, so to me, someone with good flavor and bad design is on equal ground with someone who has good design and bad flavor. Furthermore, I try to always consider how the card would be useful when played in conjunction with the previously designed cards as opposed to how they look in a vacuum. Basically, in summation, I care a lot about the previous designs.
Others, however, do not.
Should this be standardized in some way? I try to lean more towards flavor, which depending on the judges, can me make fall flat. Furthermore, sometimes you just end up comparing "Core Sets" to "Expansions", and they're so different in what they're trying to accomplish that it gets hard to judge. Has anyone else encountered these issues?
The following is not a critique of ImpulsiveKnowledge's December CCL.
In the Decemeber contest, the Round 0 Signature Spell has had no bearing or interaction with the first two Rounds so far. For the way I prefer to judge, this was fine, as I could examine each Round individually. In the story for Round 3, however, it says:
"Look onto your comrades at your times of crisis. See into their minds and learn their skills, and use those skills to suppress your own creations. Using your very own professions to your own creations will only fuel it... make the maelstrom fear change by targeting your own creations within to counteract it."
However, this is not in the bolded design guidelines for the Round, so I don't know if it should be taken into consideration for the judging or not, though I did consider it for my design. Whether the rest of the participants take this into consideration is also unknown; I haven't really been looking at the others as the submission deadline hasn't yet been reached.
On the overall/single round issue, I have always taken the structure of the CCL to mean that "compatibility with previous cards" is a minor area to judge. I know there have been times where, presented with cards that I like equally, I will give the edge in a Top 3 to a card that fits with the previous set. I don't like it when people fail to post their previous cards for that reason. Another thing to note is that compatibility with previous cards is not necessarily a flavor thing, it can be but it can also be mechanical. The best cards are both; I envision the ideal CCL set as a group of cards that would all have a place in the same deck.
I'm still looking to host a contest, just in case I was taken off a list or something.Just saw I was on for Feb!
Generals meant to be drafted first in a single pack of 6 cards.
And here is the actual cube, meant to be drafted in 4 regular sized packs. (60 card decks)
GM: True that polls and critiques are popularity based. I just wish there was a way to deter that so it becomes more about the card(s) instead of "I like this person, so I'll vote for them" kind of thing, but on the downside I don't think that would be possible.
Does anyone else have opinions on running the elimination rounds with polls?
On a completely unrelated note, the November CCL is now officially done. I had fun messing with the rules of the contest to get my theme across, and I have a cool idea on how to do something like that again, only crazier... so if you could put me back on the list, that would be very kind of you. I understand that it's going to be at least six months until I'll get a chance to host, but that actually works well for me.
Host, December 2015: A Winter Wonderland? - R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL April 2014: A Game of Fate - Signup|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinal|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL December 2012: Spy Games - Signup|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL November 2010: The Perfect Crime - Signup|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
Host, CCL August 2009: A Commander's Journey: Signups|R1|R2|R3|Top 8|Semifinals|Finals|Poll
I've got tons of art from the web. Want art for a render? PM me! Want to create your own collection? Start here!
Also, have you sent a PM to Ohmu? The January thread is conspicuously MIA.
Update - Doom Lich has agreed to host, hopefully he can get the first round up soon.
[Clan Flamingo] Tier Archivist
[15:21] <@CC> Remember, if you argue, you are an idiot.
Untrophied Wins:
Perfect MCC Scores: 2
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/forumdisplay.php?f=66
I think the review deadline might need a 48-hour extension given the delayed start.
And for everyone missing the blue element of Oboro's Exile, well:
Oboro Envoy
Bewilder
Constricting Tendrils
Disorient
Dizzy Spell
Fleeting Distraction
Morphling
To name a few. -X/-0 is a common enough blue theme for this card to be blue.