Like with any tournament, scouting the field shouldn't be 'against the rules', at least between rounds. Say I'm BFFs with one of your opponents, if i ask how his game went, i feel like he should be able to tell me about the heat your packing. It'd be hard to enforce the rule otherwise. Afterall, the decklists can't be altered between rounds.
And I am making it open to viewership. Yes, this could be at the cost of 'Hidden tech" but its in the name of furthering community, deck testing, and fun.
I'm in. My Cockatrice name is Clay, and my deck code is r4hq8q9i.
I really don't like the idea of messaging a deck list to someone who is going to be playing in the event. I don't really see how it benefits anyone when we use deck tags anyway.
I'm in. My Cockatrice name is Clay, and my deck code is l8m5hkbn.
I really don't like the idea of messaging a deck list to someone who is going to be playing in the event. I don't really see how it benefits anyone when we use deck tags anyway.
I understand you're concern, but in my defense, my deck choice is locked in already. The posting of decklisting is because someone needs to verify a sideboard isnt 19 cards large or anything. People cheating is a more valid concern then me leaking info or anything. So I'm keeping it so that there is only 1 single person who knows any of this. Yes, you could say its not fair and I shouldnt play then, but I did make this event so Everyone could have a chance to play, myself included. There is no cash prizes, or anything, so why not?
If you're too worried about it, don't play. I don't mean that to sound harsh, but I'm putting this together for the love of the game, so its only fair I can play.
Decktags should be sufficient. If anyone changes anything in their deck, the deck tags change. We judges will simply verify decktags before each match is allowed to proceed. There is no reason to message lists to anyone.
However, I do feel that decklists should be available after each tournament.
I understand you're concern, but in my defense, my deck choice is locked in already. The posting of decklisting is because someone needs to verify a sideboard isnt 19 cards large or anything. People cheating is a more valid concern then me leaking info or anything. So I'm keeping it so that there is only 1 single person who knows any of this. Yes, you could say its not fair and I shouldnt play then, but I did make this event so Everyone could have a chance to play, myself included. There is no cash prizes, or anything, so why not?
If you're too worried about it, don't play. I don't mean that to sound harsh, but I'm putting this together for the love of the game, so its only fair I can play.
There are other answers though. I participated in a Legacy tournament a few months back, and we sent messages with deck lists a Legacy moderator who volunteered.
Alternatively, we could just have every player in the top 4 send his decklist to a judge who is out. If his deck has too many cards or doesn't match up, the player could be disqualified and his last round opponent would take his place.
If you don't want to do either of these, you should at least give out your decklist, once everyone has submitted theirs. Knowing the opponent's exact list is a huge advantage in keeping an opening hand and playing out the first few turns.
There are other answers though. I participated in a Legacy tournament a few months back, and we sent messages with deck lists a Legacy moderator who volunteered.
Alternatively, we could just have every player in the top 4 send his decklist to a judge who is out. If his deck has too many cards or doesn't match up, the player could be disqualified and his last round opponent would take his place.
If you don't want to do either of these, you should at least give out your decklist, once everyone has submitted theirs. Knowing the opponent's exact list is a huge advantage in keeping an opening hand and playing out the first few turns.
Alright. I dont mind. Zoo shows it's self off in the first turn anyways. After this tournament, we can try something else. Do note, I am trying to do this event for everyone, not just me.
NOW I KNOW YOUR SUPER SECRET TECH LANTERNN!!!!!! MUAHAHHAAAHAHAHA
Seriously though, I would like to see all the deck lists everyone used after the event for analysis reasons. Lantern is right, this isn't in any way, shape, or form something official, so you can't complain that one person will have seen everyone's deck list beforehand. It will not have any serious effect to the outcome of his matches. If he wins the whole damn thing, it's not solely because he knew what everyone was playing.
I understand you're concern, but in my defense, my deck choice is locked in already. The posting of decklisting is because someone needs to verify a sideboard isnt 19 cards large or anything. People cheating is a more valid concern then me leaking info or anything. So I'm keeping it so that there is only 1 single person who knows any of this. Yes, you could say its not fair and I shouldnt play then, but I did make this event so Everyone could have a chance to play, myself included. There is no cash prizes, or anything, so why not?
If you're too worried about it, don't play. I don't mean that to sound harsh, but I'm putting this together for the love of the game, so its only fair I can play.
I find it ridiculous that you can play, and still know everyone's decklist. Whether you know it or not, that offers you HUGE advantage over the rest of us (EDIT, @Mastodon: I strongly believe you are underestimating the edge one gains from this info; if you want to know why, ask, but otherwise I'll leave it at that). Unfair tournaments in which certain players have more inside information than others aren't real tournaments at all (with exceptions that I don't want to get in to).
There are ways to fix this, though, while still allowing you to play and making it fair. If you could find a trustworthy person willing to be associated with these tourneys, but who doesn't want to play in them, we could always just give our decklists to that person rather than you. Then that person could tell you/us whether the lists were legal or not. That person could also change as time goes on for different tournaments.
This is just a suggestion, there are other ways to fix it as well.
I would find it very distasteful to play in an unfair "tournament", and I'm quite sure I'm not alone in this. I know the whole thing is just for fun, and I certainly appreciate your work in organizing this, but it doesn't really seem to have a point if it isn't fair. Any of us could easily test on cockatrice without this tournament thing.
-Tom
EDIT: I guess for this tournament, you already know our lists and we know yours, so we can't move past that. I guess what I'm saying is for the future, then. I'd much rather play without decklist knowledge by certain players, including myself, as it adds another element to the game... Inversely, knowing decklists takes away from the game.
I find it ridiculous that you can play, and still know everyone's decklist. Whether you know it or not, that offers you HUGE advantage over the rest of us (EDIT, @Mastodon: I strongly believe you are underestimating the edge one gains from this info; if you want to know why, ask, but otherwise I'll leave it at that). Unfair tournaments in which certain players have more inside information than others aren't real tournaments at all (with exceptions that I don't want to get in to).
There are ways to fix this, though, while still allowing you to play and making it fair. If you could find a trustworthy person willing to be associated with these tourneys, but who doesn't want to play in them, we could always just give our decklists to that person rather than you. Then that person could tell you/us whether the lists were legal or not. That person could also change as time goes on for different tournaments.
This is just a suggestion, there are other ways to fix it as well.
I would find it very distasteful to play in an unfair "tournament", and I'm quite sure I'm not alone in this. I know the whole thing is just for fun, and I certainly appreciate your work in organizing this, but it doesn't really seem to have a point if it isn't fair. Any of us could easily test on cockatrice without this tournament thing.
-Tom
EDIT: I guess for this tournament, you already know our lists and we know yours, so we can't move past that. I guess what I'm saying is for the future, then. I'd much rather play without decklist knowledge by certain players, including myself, as it adds another element to the game... Inversely, knowing decklists takes away from the game.
I'm kinda amazed people are offended about me participating in something I put together because there isn't a lot going on, let alone I'm doing a ton of work so you all can play.
Oh come on guys, let the guy seem em. Its no big deal. Yes he has an advantage, big whoop. We are nto playing super-serious magic here. This isn't a PTQ.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern (I collect the format):
WURDelver
[/MANA]MANA]R[/MANA]GTron WDeath and Taxes WSoul Sisters RWG Pod Combo URSplinter Twin URStorm RBurn
I'm kinda amazed people are offended about me participating in something I put together because there isn't a lot going on, let alone I'm doing a ton of work so you all can play.
I'm by all means not offended, I'm just wondering what the point is in this if it isn't fair. We can easily test on cockatrice without this set-up.
I'm merely suggesting that there are better ways to set it up so that it is fair, and therefore has a point to it. As I said, I do appreciate your work, and if we can make it happen in a fair fashion, that would be awesome. What I'm basically trying to say is: If we can make it more fair, why don't we? This question seems hard to argue with, even if you do disagree with my "won't have a point to it" thought.
I don't mean to sound unappreciative, angry, offended, etc... I'm just giving my feedback.
I personally wouldn't like the idea of getting paired against Lantern only to have him open his log of decklists, look up my name, and know exactly what I'm running, what I'll be boarding (most likely), etc etc..
HOWEVER - I think it's not to be overlooked that Lantern is also the one organizing this, and putting forth quite a bit of effort at that. It seems unlikely that he would do this just so he could play against people on cockatrice while looking at their decklist to gain an advantage. If we're going to keep things this way moving forward, I think Lantern should be required to post his decklist first, before he sees anyone's, that way he can gain no knowledge of the metagame. That sounds perfectly fair to me. I don't even care if we continue to submit our lists to him before each tournament, assuming he follows this golden rule.
But even then, the best option is just to have someone who isn't participating in the tournament keep tabs on the decklists.
I personally wouldn't like the idea of getting paired against Lantern only to have him open his log of decklists, look up my name, and know exactly what I'm running, what I'll be boarding (most likely), etc etc..
HOWEVER - I think it's not to be overlooked that Lantern is also the one organizing this, and putting forth quite a bit of effort at that. It seems unlikely that he would do this just so he could play against people on cockatrice while looking at their decklist to gain an advantage. If we're going to keep things this way moving forward, I think Lantern should be required to post his decklist first, before he sees anyone's, that way he can gain no knowledge of the metagame. That sounds perfectly fair to me. I don't even care if we continue to submit our lists to him before each tournament, assuming he follows this golden rule.
I understand this completely, and feel the same way.
My only point is that I think this could be worked out an alternate way, in which no players know each other's decklists; as that takes a lot away from the game.
There are several ways of doing this, I'm just hoping Lantern is open to one.
EDIT: I guess that won't be the case for this first tournament though, but that's OK with me, as long as it's just this one. In my eyes there is no reason why it can't change for the better in the future.
I understand this completely, and feel the same way.
My only point is that I think this could be worked out an alternate way, in which no players know each other's decklists; as that takes a lot away from the game.
There are several ways of doing this, I'm just hoping Lantern is open to one.
EDIT: I guess that won't be the case for this first tournament though, but that's OK with me, as long as it's just this one. In my eyes there is no reason why it can't change for the better in the future.
I think in the future, he should have a 3rd party confirm decklists and sit in on it. Maybe, t_C would agree to doing so. I would also agree to do it provided I had the time / I wouldn't be playing in the event.
But, there's little reason to give him the business for doing it. There's no cash prize or anything. I think this is primarily just to make the community more cohesive and active.
I post my decklists all over the place. I have absolutely no expectation of privacy in that regard. Besides, when I see an Overgrown Tomb followed by a Thoughtseize, I'm pretty sure I know the rest of that deck, anyway. Or a grove of the burnwillows followed by an expedition map. Or a turn 1 delver of secrets off of a Steam Vents. In tomathan's case, probably a turn 1 vial. I don't put too much stock in the element of surprise.
But, there's little reason to give him the business for doing it. There's no cash prize or anything. I think this is primarily just to make the community more cohesive and active.
I honestly think people are incorrectly assuming that I'm overreacting. I don't really care that much... I just gave insight to how this set up could be improved and my opinion on the current set up.
In any case, sign me up for this month's tourney... the fact that you shared your list with us is good enough for me for the time being.
I'll give you my deck ID in a bit; I might make some last minute changes.
Modern Junk Primer
Legacy ANT Primer
L1 Judge
And I am making it open to viewership. Yes, this could be at the cost of 'Hidden tech" but its in the name of furthering community, deck testing, and fun.
Raalic
339665v6
CG
Just let me know mate. Send me the copied and pasted decklist from cockatrice, so I can Orange light you and ready to go!
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
u-579
ken3agc6
CST(I figure we should also add our time zones)
UWRasputin DreamweaverUW
UWBSen TripletsUWB
I really don't like the idea of messaging a deck list to someone who is going to be playing in the event. I don't really see how it benefits anyone when we use deck tags anyway.
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
I understand you're concern, but in my defense, my deck choice is locked in already. The posting of decklisting is because someone needs to verify a sideboard isnt 19 cards large or anything. People cheating is a more valid concern then me leaking info or anything. So I'm keeping it so that there is only 1 single person who knows any of this. Yes, you could say its not fair and I shouldnt play then, but I did make this event so Everyone could have a chance to play, myself included. There is no cash prizes, or anything, so why not?
If you're too worried about it, don't play. I don't mean that to sound harsh, but I'm putting this together for the love of the game, so its only fair I can play.
However, I do feel that decklists should be available after each tournament.
There are other answers though. I participated in a Legacy tournament a few months back, and we sent messages with deck lists a Legacy moderator who volunteered.
Alternatively, we could just have every player in the top 4 send his decklist to a judge who is out. If his deck has too many cards or doesn't match up, the player could be disqualified and his last round opponent would take his place.
If you don't want to do either of these, you should at least give out your decklist, once everyone has submitted theirs. Knowing the opponent's exact list is a huge advantage in keeping an opening hand and playing out the first few turns.
You can find me on MTGO. My username is gereffi.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
Alright. I dont mind. Zoo shows it's self off in the first turn anyways. After this tournament, we can try something else. Do note, I am trying to do this event for everyone, not just me.
3 Loam Lion
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lightning Helix
4 Path to Exile
4 Arid Mesa
1 Forest
1 Horizon Canopy
4 Marsh Flats
1 Mountain
1 Plains
2 Sacred Foundry
3 Scalding Tarn
2 Stomping Ground
1 Temple Garden
3 Knight of the Reliquary
3 Vexing Devil
4 Steppe Lynx
2 Kird Ape
1 Sejiri Steppe
1 Slayers' Stronghold
Seriously though, I would like to see all the deck lists everyone used after the event for analysis reasons. Lantern is right, this isn't in any way, shape, or form something official, so you can't complain that one person will have seen everyone's deck list beforehand. It will not have any serious effect to the outcome of his matches. If he wins the whole damn thing, it's not solely because he knew what everyone was playing.
Modern Junk Primer
Legacy ANT Primer
L1 Judge
I find it ridiculous that you can play, and still know everyone's decklist. Whether you know it or not, that offers you HUGE advantage over the rest of us (EDIT, @Mastodon: I strongly believe you are underestimating the edge one gains from this info; if you want to know why, ask, but otherwise I'll leave it at that). Unfair tournaments in which certain players have more inside information than others aren't real tournaments at all (with exceptions that I don't want to get in to).
There are ways to fix this, though, while still allowing you to play and making it fair. If you could find a trustworthy person willing to be associated with these tourneys, but who doesn't want to play in them, we could always just give our decklists to that person rather than you. Then that person could tell you/us whether the lists were legal or not. That person could also change as time goes on for different tournaments.
This is just a suggestion, there are other ways to fix it as well.
I would find it very distasteful to play in an unfair "tournament", and I'm quite sure I'm not alone in this. I know the whole thing is just for fun, and I certainly appreciate your work in organizing this, but it doesn't really seem to have a point if it isn't fair. Any of us could easily test on cockatrice without this tournament thing.
-Tom
EDIT: I guess for this tournament, you already know our lists and we know yours, so we can't move past that. I guess what I'm saying is for the future, then. I'd much rather play without decklist knowledge by certain players, including myself, as it adds another element to the game... Inversely, knowing decklists takes away from the game.
I'm kinda amazed people are offended about me participating in something I put together because there isn't a lot going on, let alone I'm doing a ton of work so you all can play.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
WURDelver
[/MANA]MANA]R[/MANA]GTron
WDeath and Taxes
WSoul Sisters
RWG Pod Combo
URSplinter Twin
URStorm
RBurn
I'm by all means not offended, I'm just wondering what the point is in this if it isn't fair. We can easily test on cockatrice without this set-up.
I'm merely suggesting that there are better ways to set it up so that it is fair, and therefore has a point to it. As I said, I do appreciate your work, and if we can make it happen in a fair fashion, that would be awesome. What I'm basically trying to say is: If we can make it more fair, why don't we? This question seems hard to argue with, even if you do disagree with my "won't have a point to it" thought.
I don't mean to sound unappreciative, angry, offended, etc... I'm just giving my feedback.
-Tom
HOWEVER - I think it's not to be overlooked that Lantern is also the one organizing this, and putting forth quite a bit of effort at that. It seems unlikely that he would do this just so he could play against people on cockatrice while looking at their decklist to gain an advantage. If we're going to keep things this way moving forward, I think Lantern should be required to post his decklist first, before he sees anyone's, that way he can gain no knowledge of the metagame. That sounds perfectly fair to me. I don't even care if we continue to submit our lists to him before each tournament, assuming he follows this golden rule.
But even then, the best option is just to have someone who isn't participating in the tournament keep tabs on the decklists.
Draft My Cube!
I understand this completely, and feel the same way.
My only point is that I think this could be worked out an alternate way, in which no players know each other's decklists; as that takes a lot away from the game.
There are several ways of doing this, I'm just hoping Lantern is open to one.
EDIT: I guess that won't be the case for this first tournament though, but that's OK with me, as long as it's just this one. In my eyes there is no reason why it can't change for the better in the future.
I think in the future, he should have a 3rd party confirm decklists and sit in on it. Maybe, t_C would agree to doing so. I would also agree to do it provided I had the time / I wouldn't be playing in the event.
But, there's little reason to give him the business for doing it. There's no cash prize or anything. I think this is primarily just to make the community more cohesive and active.
Sig courtesy of DOLZero
[82/360] Custom Cube
Blog about the Custom Cube
CG
I honestly think people are incorrectly assuming that I'm overreacting. I don't really care that much... I just gave insight to how this set up could be improved and my opinion on the current set up.
In any case, sign me up for this month's tourney... the fact that you shared your list with us is good enough for me for the time being.
I'll give you my deck ID in a bit; I might make some last minute changes.
Duck86- ep7pv394
Is there a fast way to message you the whole decklist or just copy-paste it ?
Rhin -a6eklr74